Back in 2006, when the first expatriates were just
beginning to near their seven-year term limit, there were dire warnings from
the community, particularly business owners, about the potential effects it
would have on the country.
The problem for Cayman was – and still is – to figure out a
way of dealing with long-term expatriate workers. The United Kingdom does not
want Cayman to allow foreign nationals to stay here more than 10 years without
any security of tenure or citizenship rights because it is against human rights
conventions. On the other hand, our government does not want to allow everyone
to remain here long enough to get security of tenure because Caymanians will
soon become a minority citizenship group in their own country.
The seven-year term limit seemed like the best option in
that it was supposed to prevent the majority of foreigners from gaining
security of tenure, while still putting a manageable number of them on the path
to citizenship.
Although the rollover has succeeded in reducing the number
of people who can get citizenship, it has done so at an enormous social and
economic cost. In the end, most of the warnings in 2006 about the potential
effects of the rollover policy have come true. Businesses have suffered.
There’s more unemployed Caymanians now than ever. Many expats don’t even try to
assimilate or get involved in the community anymore, leading to an increasingly
polarised society.
Back in 2006, then Chairman of the Work Permit Board David
Ritch admitted the rollover policy was just a “best guess approach” to the
expatriate dilemma. He said that if the policy turned out to be too harsh on
the economy, the government could revisit the issue in the future.
Well, the future is now and suspending the seven-year term
limit while an extensive review of the rollover policy is carried out is a good
decision. There are thousands of post-Hurricane Ivan expatriate immigrants
facing rollover in the next year and our economy simply can’t afford to lose
them, especially because getting replacements for those that leave is not going
to be as easy as it once was.
Related Videos
As a potential expat coming to Cayman this winter from Canada, this seems to be good news! I understand the reasoning behind the roll over policy, and in no way wish to impede Caymanian Nationals, or contribute to Caymanians becoming a minority in the country.
However, my husband and I wish to be part of the Cayman culture and community and to contribute professionally and socially to the island. We want to invest in Cayman. We hope to raise our young family in Cayman. We don’t want citizenship rights. That isn’t our priority. But we also don’t want to be asked to leave after a 7 year term has expired and uproot our family; especially the children, who 7 years from now will really only know Cayman as their home.
It was a sticking point for me, when my husband and I were making our decision to relocate to the Caribbean. I wasn’t sure I wanted to take the risk of having to relocate again in 7 years. But after visiting the island, we fell in love! Hopefully my decision works out in the end and we can stay and become completely immersed in Cayman. I chose Cayman for the diversity in people and culture and want to be part of that.
Being of a Caribbean family background, but born Canadian, I was completely attracted to the idealism of Cayman and the people that live there. Smaller population with over 100 different nationalities represented? Sounds wonderful! Not something that could ever be achieved harmoniously in Canada. I am not interested in solely associating with an expat community. We want to be part of Cayman, without taking anything from Caymanians.
Am I perhaps naive? Maybe. We will see.
Can someone explain the perceived benefit of just suspending the rolllover period for two years. I can’t see that this action will make expats any more inclined to spend their money in the local economy if they think that they are just getting a two year extension in which to organize their inevitable departure.