----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "'niem.migr' NIEM.migr@xxxxxxxxx [niem_rj]" <niem_rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: niem_rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 4:09 PM
Subject: [NIEM] Reino Unido
http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2015/mar/03/construction-industry-plea-retain-migrant-workers
Construction industry in plea to retain migrant workers Chartered Institute of
Building enters immigration debate, urging politicians to protect the long
tradition of migrant work in UK construction The 1980s TV show Auf
Wiedersehen Pet captured the story of British construction workers moving to
Germany for jobs. Photograph: ITV/Rex Features Katie AllenTuesday 3 March 2015
06.00 GMT From ancient Egypt to Germany in the 1980s and beyond, the
construction industry has always relied on migrant workers. So says a leading
trade body as it enters the immigration debate with a plea to politicians to
resist any rash changes to Britain’s borders.The Chartered Institute of
Building (CIOB) is warning that tight regulation of migration would damage
construction activity in the UK. However, it also acknowledges a longstanding
industry failure to train UK workers, particularly young people.The group’s
report into migration comes after official figures last week showed net
migration to Britain is now at almost 300,000, its highest level since 2005.
The number was a blow to the prime minister, David Cameron, after his vow to
reduce it to just “tens of thousands” by the time of the general election.The
CIOB says that while immigration is a highly charged subject, the building
sector cannot afford to keep quiet in the runup to May’s election given that
construction is likely to continue to need migrant workers. Chris Blythe, chief
executive of the CIOB, believes it is essential that the construction industry
makes its voice heard in the migration debate to “help shape a sensible policy
that meets both its needs and those of the wider community”. He continues:
Globally, construction has always relied on migration to fill in gaps in the
labour market – simply cutting off the supply of migrant workers risks
seriously damaging the UK’s economic prospects both at home and abroad.But of
more importance is the need to address the fact that the industry simply does
not train its own people in sufficient numbers. There can be no excuses for
construction not to provide more training opportunities for young UK nationals.
The CIOB, a trade body for construction management, draws three main
conclusions from its analysis of migration in the sector.
1. Immigration must not be a substitute for homegrown talent
The CIOB says: ‘Construction remains an industry that simply does not train
its own people in sufficient numbers.’ Photograph: CITB Training Numbers Survey
The CIOB report says its most important conclusion is that migration should not
become a substitute for training UK citizens in sufficient numbers to “provide
a sensible base of workers”. That reflects the widely reported skills shortage
in the sector, that most has led construction firms to repeatedly bemoan the
trouble getting qualified workers such as bricklayers. It also urges the
industry to find ways to retain older workers.Construction, which represents
around 6% of the UK economy, was badly hit by the most recent recession and is
still trying to recover from 400,000 job losses while replacing increasing
numbers of people in an ageing workforce . The report adds:
A typical UK construction worker is now aged between 40 and 50. History
suggests retirement from construction rises rapidly among 50-year-olds.
Age profile of those employed in construction in 2004 and 2014 (%). The CIOB
says the constuction industry needs to do more to replace retiring older
workers. Photograph: ONS Labour Force Survey via CITB
2. A crude immigration clampdown would hurt construction
Facebook Twitter Pinterest The Pyramids of Giza. The construction trade body
says its industry has links with migrant work going back millennia. Photograph:
Adam Jones/Adam Jones/Corbis The report underlines that as “a volatile
industry, construction benefits from the two-way migration with foreign workers
finding jobs in the UK and British workers finding jobs abroad.”It describes
the long history of migration in construction.
Ancient Egyptian pyramid builders were migrants (not slaves) from towns
throughout Egypt. Thriving today, Boulder City in Nevada, US, was born in the
1930s as migrant workers arrived to build the Hoover Dam. When in the past
Britain has struggled to find construction workers, it turned to Ireland. The
Irish duly became an integral part of this nation’s industry.Importantly,
Britain has a history exporting construction talent and the industry has long
attracted those with wanderlust. Foreign shores have offered a lifeline to UK
workers facing recession at home, as captured in the sitcom Auf Wiedersehen
Pet. During the 1980s recession, unemployed British construction workers took
flight to Germany and again in the 1990s when German reunification fuelled a
building boom as UK construction slumped.
And also the particular characteristics of the industry make it “prone to gluts
and shortages in labour”, in turn breeding a tradition of relying on a migrant
workforce.
Local labour markets can provide a fairly steady level of underlying
construction activity within reasonable travel-to-work distances for many
workers. But the workforce needed for major or highly specialised projects is
seldom met by the local labour market. This means the industry needs a highly
flexible, in part itinerant, workforce to call on. This local volatility is
exacerbated by the boom and bust nature of construction activity, caused in
part by what economists would describe as the accelerator effect, whereby
fluctuations in the broad economy tend to be amplified in the construction
sector ... Data shows that construction is highly sensitive to changes in GDP.
3. The UK must build more
Facebook Twitter Pinterest The Crossrail project. The CIOB report says more
investment in infrastructure and other construction projects would ‘reduce the
stresses on the community created by migration’. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA
Many of the stresses on communities linked to immigration could be alleviated
by delivering more construction, the CIOB analysis suggests. The authors admit
“coming from the industry, [this] may seem self-interested.”More investment
would help make up the UK’s shortfall in housing supply and improve
infrastructure. That in turn would improve well-being for people in the UK and
raise productivity, the CIOB says, echoing a report on the UK economy by the
OECD thinktank last week.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/17/uk-tied-visa-system-turning-domestic-workers-into-modern-day-slaves
UK tied visa system 'turning domestic workers into modern-day slaves'
- Kafala-style rule means foreign staff must leave if they change employer
- Charity says 400 employees have approached it for help after being abused
- Government fighting peer’s attempt to overturn controversial measure
-
- The system of kafala – which ties the legal visa status of foreign workers
to their employer in many Gulf states. Two domestic workers who have been
victims of this system in London speak anonymously about the practice
Alastair SloanTuesday 17 March 2015 06.00 GMT The UK government has “recreated
kafala” with its introduction of tied visas for foreign domestic workers some
of whom have faced abusive labour practices imported from the Middle East,
according to a university study.As the Commons on Tuesday afternoon debates the
modern slavery bill, including an amendment opposed by the government that
would ban the tied visa practice, a charity has revealed it has been approached
by more than 400 foreign domestic workers in Britain seeking help. They say the
visa change has made their position worse.The tied visas were controversially
introduced by the coalition in 2012 and mean employees, typically from poorer
countries such as the Philippines or Indonesia, cannot legally remain in the UK
if they change employers, most often wealthy families who have brought them
over from the Gulf.
The Gulf kafala system has been linked to abuses of construction workers on
building projects in Qatar, which will host the 2022 World Cup finals, as well
as abuse of domestic workers in the UAE , as documented by Human Rights
Watch.Twenty-four domestic workers brought to the UK on tied visas spoke to
researchers at University College London (UCL) and the majority said they had
faced some kind of abuse by employers. This ranged, they said, from economic
abuse – no days off, long hours and extreme low pay – to physical and sexual
abuse against mainly female workers.
One interviewee told researchers she was fed on scraps of food. “When they ate,
they treated me like an animal. They sat at the table but I stayed on the other
side. They gave me food just like you give food to animals,” she said.Another
told researchers that if she “did something wrong, or if the baby kept crying
and I could not handle it, my employer would hit me”.
If they escape their exploitative employers, they become undocumented. These
are modern-day slavesDr Virginia Mantouvalou
Separately, the Guardian spoke to two Filipino women who had come to the UK
with wealthy Gulf families and claimed they had been treated badly. Nicole (not
her real name), a domestic worker from the Philippines, told the Guardian she
had worked in Saudi Arabia for five years without a day off, before her
employer brought her to the UK. “I had to come, but I thought it would be
better here as it is not my employer’s own country. In fact, it was worse.”At
one point she thought her employer was going to stab her, until another family
member stepped in, she said.Marie, another domestic worker, fled after two
years of being paid just £100 a month, frequently shouted at and hit by her
employer. “I didn’t understand my visa was tied to my employer until after I
had left,” she said.“We are recreating kafala,” said Virginia Mantouvalou,
co-director at UCL’s Institute for Human Rights, which has shown the Guardian
its study on the impact of tied visas before its publication later this year.
“Even if they escape their exploitative or abusive employers,” she said, “they
become undocumented and are caught in ongoing cycles of exploitation. These are
our modern-day slaves.”
UCL researchers worked with the charity Kalayaan, which is calling for the
legislation to be repealed. Kalayaan conducted short interviews over two years
with more than 400 domestic workers who had approached them for help in dealing
with abuse. Of these, 120 had arrived since the legislation came into place,
allowing some comparison with those before the visa changes.
Kalayaan found that 16% of workers tied to their employers under the new
legislation reported physical abuse, compared with 8% under the previous
regime. Almost three-quarters of those under tied visas said they were never
allowed to leave the house, compared with just under half under the original
visa. A total of 53% of tied visa workers were forced to work more than 16
hours a day, the charity said, compared with 32% of those who had the right to
change their employers. About 60% of those on tied visas reported pay of less
than £50 a week, against 36% on the original visa.
Lord Hylton, an independent peer, who tabled an amendment to the modern slavery
bill designed to repeal the “tied visa” part of the legislation, said: “We are
importing the kind of mentality they have in the Gulf states, the same kind of
conditions you see in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or the United Arab Emirates. The
government argues that changing the law will attract too many foreign domestic
workers wanting to emigrate to the UK …[but] domestic workers don’t choose to
come here, they are brought here with their Middle Eastern employers.”The bill
returns to the Commons after the Lords voted in favour of Hylton’s amendment by
183 votes to 176. It would allow overseas domestic workers to change their
employer while in the UK, in effect ending the system of tied visas. If MPs
reject the amendment, the bill will return to be debated in the Lords again – a
process known as “ping pong” because bills can go back and forth multiple
times. The amendment needs to be passed by both houses before it passes into
law. The amendment would also give people who had been victims of modern
slavery a right to a three-month temporary visa.UCL researchers also uncovered
evidence of sexual abuse. One of the interviewees said she had tried to kill
herself because of the harassment she suffered.
The government has voted against including an amendment to the modern slavery
bill since it was introduced to parliament by the home secretary, Theresa May,
in June 2014, arguing the numbers being abused did not warrant an intervention.
“At the same time as the government vows to end modern slavery through the
modern slavery bill, their new visa system is trapping domestic workers,” said
Mantouvalou.
The UCL report notes that almost all interviewees arrived from Gulf countries.
The UAE was criticised by HRW last year for what it said was tolerating
widespread abuse against foreign domestic workers. HRW’s 79-page report, I
Already Bought You, detailed physical, sexual and wage abuse.Kate Roberts, of
Kalayaan, said: “For employers who consider that they in effect own the worker
they employ, it is certainly convenient that the UK law now prevents their
employee challenging any exploitation or even escaping from a situation where
they have been trafficked for domestic servitude.”
In response to the criticism, Karen Bradley, the minister for modern slavery
and organised crime, announced a separate independent review into tied visas,
due to be completed in the summer. The review will be carried out by James
Ewins, a specialist adviser to the pre-legislative scrutiny committee for the
modern slavery bill and a member of the steering committee for the modern
slavery bill evidence review panel. Critics say this is an attempt to kick the
issue into the long grass. “We don’t need another review to tell us the tied
visa system facilitates abuse, both in the UK and abroad,” said Izza Leghtas,
western Europe researcher at HRW. “The solution is to amend the bill so these
vulnerable people can escape abuse.”
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “The tied visa system should be
reversed so women have no fear about finding alternative domestic work or
reporting their employer to the police if there are grounds for criminal
proceedings.
The government has made it difficult for women to leave traumatic situations as
they fear being deportedYvette Cooper
“The government has made it incredibly difficult for women to leave these
traumatic situations as they fear being deported. Their changes are trapping
some women into horrific and abusive situations.”
The Home Office said: “The government is concerned about reports of overseas
domestic workers becoming victims of slavery. We are strengthening protections
in the visa application process and raising awareness about the comprehensive
package of support offered to all victims of modern slavery.
“We have commissioned an independent review of the visa route, which will
include looking at the impact of the restriction on changing employer.
“[James] Ewins will examine whether the arrangements for these visas are
effective in protecting potential victims from abuse and if there is evidence
that the terms of the visa have led to the trafficking or slavery of domestic
workers.”
Gulf nationals ‘are prime beneficiaries’
Critics of tied visas say the coalition government may have introduced the
rules to encourage wealthy individuals from the Gulf to set up second
households in the UK.
Since April 2012, foreign domestic workers have had their visa status “tied” to
their employers, meaning that even if their employer becomes abusive, they are
unable to leave.
The government has gone to special lengths to welcome immigration from the Gulf
states.In December 2013, David Cameron made fast-track visa applications
available to citizens of the UAE, Oman and Qatar, offering six-month visas,
which could be applied for and approved in less than 24 hours. Since the scheme
began, the Home Office has stopped including migration figures from these
countries in the official immigration statistics.The tied visa legislation was
implemented by Tory MP Damian Green while he was immigration minister, despite
opposition from human rights groups and Labour MPs.Charities claim the process
by which the government chose to introduce the tied visa was unusual and have
questioned the level of support it received in a consultation. Men in
traditional dress in the Gulf. The UCL report notes that almost all
interviewees arrived from Gulf countries Photograph: Alamy In 2009 the home
affairs select committee, meeting under a Labour government, concluded that
allowing foreign domestic workers to change their employers was “the most
important factor in preventing forced labour and trafficking of domestic
workers”.
During a formal consultation conducted in 2011 by Green and his then
parliamentary private secretary, David Rutley, in which the government asked
British companies , civil society organisations and members of the public
whether the tied visa should be introduced, half of those surveyed supported
them.The findings were then used by the government as a strong argument for
introducing them.
“The government’s consultation didn’t mention the home affairs select committee
findings at all,” Roberts said. The government received responses from
organisations who appeared to have little connection to domestic workers,
including HSBC, Deloitte and EDF Energy. “We were uncomfortable with it – it
wasn’t the way to decide policy for a group of extremely vulnerable people,”
she said.
In 2012, Green told parliament the foreign domestic worker tied visa was being
introduced to prevent abuse taking place against domestic workers, a position
civil society organisations disputed.
The UAE was singled out last year for criticism by HRW for allowing the kafala
regime to continue.
“The UAE’s sponsorship system chains domestic workers to their employers and
then leaves them isolated and at risk of abuse behind the closed doors of
private homes,” said Rothna Begum, Middle East women’s rights researcher at H
RW.
Nick McGeehan, Middle East researcher at HRW, said: “It’s clear that the prime
beneficiaries of the change to the law in 2012 are Gulf nationals who are now
able to use the exploitative potential of the kafala system while they’re on
holiday in London.“We know that this government has been more than willing to
bend to the Emiratis and the Saudis, both of whom lobby very aggressively in
the UK.”• This article was amended on 17 March 2015. An earlier version said
Malcolm Morton was private parliamentary secretary to Damian Green in 2011.
David Rutley held that post; Malcolm Morton did not work for Damian Green. The
article was further amended on 18 March 2015. An earlier version, and a picture
caption, said the UCL report noted that much of the abuse came from households
linked to the UAE. The report does not make that claim, or single out the UAE.
It does say that almost all of the 24 domestic workers interviewed for the
report arrived from Gulf countries.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/19/the-migration-fuelling-george-osbornes-comeback-country?CMP=fb_gu
The migration fuelling George Osborne's 'comeback country' Political parties
lobbying for curbs on immigration may be missing the bigger picture – Britain
needs foreign workers to avoid deeper cuts and higher taxes Net migration
will not burden Britain but will instead add an estimated 0.6% to the potential
output of the UK economy, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, as
most migrants are of working age. Photograph: Gareth Fuller/PA Alan Travis Home
affairs editorThursday 19 March 2015 13.43 GMT George Osborne’s sunny economic
forecast and much of his claim that Britain is a “comeback country” have more
to do with higher than expected levels of net inward migration than his
stewardship as chancellor or the falling oil price.That is not a verdict that
you are likely to hear from the Conservatives or from Labour for that matter,
both of which like to appear as parties opposed to mass migration, but the
Office for Budget Responsibility makes clear that it is one key factor fuelling
Britain’s economic recovery.The OBR says the unexpected rise in net migration
to 298,000 in the last year – three times higher than the Conservatives’
100,000 target – has been a factor in its decision to upgrade its forecasts for
Britain’s economic growth. In fact, it calculates that net migration will add
0.6% to the potential output of the British economy and increase net tax
receipts rather than be a burden, as most migrants are of working age rather
than retired or children. That means that, without continuing high levels of
net migration, even deeper spending cuts and higher taxes would be needed
before Britain reaches Osborne’s sunshine-filled economic pastures.As the OBR
put it in the economic and fiscal outlook published alongside the budget: “Our
previous forecasts have been underpinned by the assumption in the Office for
National Statistics’ low migration population projections that net migration
will move towards 105,000 a year by mid-2019.“A reduction over time seems
consistent with the international environment and with the government’s
declared efforts to reduce it. But in light of recent evidence, it no longer
seems central to assume it will decline so steeply. So we now assume that net
migration flows will tend towards 165,000 in the long term, consistent with the
ONS principal population projections. Relative to our December forecast, this
raises potential output growth by 0.5% over the forecast period via 16+
population growth.”The official economic watchdog says that the age structure
of the latest waves of mass migration is skewed to those of working age – they
are mostly coming to Britain to work or study. It says this implies that they
are just as likely to be employed as those already here and that adds a further
0.1% to the growth in the economy, outweighing potential falls in productivity
in the existing UK labour force.It is all very well, some argue, pointing out
that net inward migration fuels the growth in the economy at the national
level, but what matters is the impact on the ordinary voter. But the OBR adds
that the “GDP per capita” rate – how much it costs or benefits the individual –
is also positive due to the higher employment rate.On top of this, the latest
labour market survey figures show that the latest rise in net inward migration
does not appear to have led to widespread displacement of existing workers.
They show while an extra 239,000 non-UK nationals are in jobs in Britain
compared with a year ago, the number of UK nationals in work rose by even more
– 375,000. As a recent University College London study showed, the average
profile of a recent migrant is more likely to be a young graduate from western
or eastern Europe working in the financial, tech or creative services than our
more traditional image of an unskilled migrant labourer.Neither Conservatives
nor Labour, going into a highly charged general election campaign, want to make
the link between Britain’s economic recovery and the higher levels of mass
migration, but it nevertheless remains a major factor.After nearly 20 years of
continuous mass inward migration to Britain, it is time the politicians stopped
pretending that you can have a flourishing modern economy and deep cuts in mass
migration. Perhaps it is time they faced up to this new reality and started
tackling rather more quickly some of the social problems, including increased
pressures on public services, that are also here to stay.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/11/muslim-population-england-wales-nearly-doubles-10-years
Muslim population in England and Wales nearly doubles in 10 years More
children and fewer elderly people help Muslim population grow faster than
population overall, analysis of latest census data shows Visitors read
information boards about Muslims in Britain during an open day at Finsbury Park
mosque in London. Photograph: Ben Stansall/AFP/Getty Images Aisha Gani
@aishagani Wednesday 11 February 2015 18.01 GMT
The Muslim population of England and Wales is growing faster than the overall
population, with a higher proportion of children and a lower ratio of elderly
people, according to an analysis of official data.One in three Muslims is under
15, compared with fewer than one in five overall. There are also fewer elderly
Muslims, with 4% aged over 65, compared with 16% of the overall population.In
2011, 2.71 million Muslims lived in England and Wales, compared with 1.55
million in 2001. There were also 77,000 Muslims in Scotland and 3,800 in
Northern Ireland. The Muslim Council of Britain’s (MCB) study of data from the
2011 census found that Muslims are still a small minority of the overall
population – one in 20. This contrasts with popular perceptions held by
Britons, who overstate the proportion of Muslims in the country by a factor of
four, according to a recent survey by Ipsos Mori.
Half the Muslims in England and Wales were born there and almost three-quarters
(73%) identify themselves as British. Two-thirds of Muslims are ethnically
Asian and 8% are white.The analysis, which aims to provide a comprehensive
picture of Muslim demographics in England and Wales, is the first of its kind.
It was made possible because 92% of respondents completed a voluntary question
on religion in the 2011 census.
The MCB, which is affiliated with 500 institutions, said: “The report is the
first comprehensive and detailed report of its kind looking at Muslims from a
data perspective.”The organisation said that there were a number of issues in
the report for government and policymakers to consider.
The report stresses Muslim civil society needs to better appreciate “social
realities” and provide good advice on health as well as tackling social issues
such as homelessness, higher divorce rates and social inequality.Responding to
the report, the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, said: “I believe that every
person, whatever their background and circumstances, should have an equal
chance to thrive. “What’s not in doubt is that British Muslims can be proud of
the contribution they make to our country.” Clegg added: “Drawing on analysis
like this, together we can help create jobs, drive growth and enable more
people to get on – building the stronger economy and fairer society we want for
Britain’s future.”
The figures show that Muslims make up 20% or more of the electorate in 26
constituencies and live in all local authority areas in England and Wales.
“There has been a spreading-out effect and this has accelerated in the past 10
years,” said Sundas Ali, a sociologist at Oxford University. Yet 80% of
Muslims live in inner-city areas of Greater London, the West Midlands, the
north-west and Yorkshire and the Humber.
AdvertisementThe study’s findings reflect “fast-changing immigration
communities”, with a younger and better educated Muslim population, said Maria
Sobolewska, a politics lecturer at the University of Manchester.
But, she added, Muslims still faced discrimination and disadvantage. “We see
this with the number of people who are homeless and live in deprived
neighbourhoods. This is where you grow up, go to school.”Eight per cent of all
school-age children (five to 15) are from Muslim households. Some schools have
a high proportion of Muslim pupils, such as those in Washwood Heath in
Birmingham, where 86% of school-age children are Muslim.The report says issues
such as underachievement, low teacher expectations, high rates of student
exclusions, racism and Islamophobia need to be tackled. “Events such as the
Trojan horse affair have unfortunately only served to dishearten Muslim
educationalists and community organisers seeking the best for local children.”
The proportion of Muslim adults with degree level and above qualifications is
similar to the general population, at 24% compared with 27%. In the last
census, there were 329,694 Muslim full-time students, of which 43% were
women.However, just 5.5% of Muslims have jobs defined as a “higher professional
occupation”, compared with 7.6% of the overall population.Economic activity
among Muslims is lower than the overall population as a whole. In 2011, 19.8%
of Muslims were in full-time employment, compared with 34.9% of the overall
population.Despite high numbers of Muslim women in full-time education, the
findings show that within the 16 to 74 age band, 18% of Muslim women are
“looking after home and family”, compared with 6% in the overall population.
Half of all Muslims live in the most deprived local authority districts in
England – an increase since 2001, when the figure was one in three. A higher
proportion of Muslims live in social housing than the overall population, 28%
compared with 17%. The report points to a low takeup of the help-to-buy scheme
among Muslims, adding that the reasons should be investigated “to see whether
the avoidance of conventional mortgage-based house purchase[s] is an
issue”.Fifteen per cent of Muslim households own their property, compared with
the overall population, in which 31% are homeowners. Thirty per cent of Muslim
households live in privately rented accommodation, compared with 18% of the
population as a whole.James Nazroo, a professor of sociology at Manchester
University, said: “I think there are a large number of myths around the ethnic
minority and religious minority populations in the UK and so it’s important
that these myths have light shone on them.”
He added: “This is where the policy engagement can happen and we can work on
the basis of good information rather than the basis of myths and look at
inequalities that sections of our society face.”
- The photo on this article was replaced with a more appropriate one on 12
February 2015.
http://www.informeraxen.es/inglaterra-crecio-un-35-el-antisemitismo-y-discriminacion-en-eventos-deportivos/
Inglaterra: Creció un 35% el antisemitismo y discriminación en eventos
deportivos
Antisemitismo, Ultras Fútbol | 6 marzo, 2015 ITON GADOL.- Esta vez el
fútbol inglés da la nota pero por un aspecto sumamente negativo: hubo 48 actos
de tipo discriminatorios, racistas y antisemitas más tanto en el campo de juego
como fuera de él en los últimos seis meses.En los últimos meses, desde que
inició la temporada de la liga inglesa los actos antisemitas y racista
denunciaron fueron de 184 respecto de los 136 reportados en la campaña 2013-14.
Es decir 48 casos más en poco menos de medio año.Según manifestaron desde la
Asociación de Fútbol inglesa, no es que haya más antisemitismo, sino que las
personas “están más dispuestas y confiadas a denunciarlo”.De todos modos,
consideraron que estos datos son claves para “tomar una posición contra los
comportamientos discriminatorios dentro de los estadios2.“Tenemos la esperanza
de que el aumento del 35% demuestra un mayor conocimiento y la fe de nuestro
trabajo en esta área, los sistemas en el lugar, y la probabilidad de que los
casos de discriminación que llegan a un resultado positivo.”, destacaron.Y
destacaron que es muy importante capacitar a los partidarios, jugadores,
dirigentes, entrenadores y todo aque que participa en un evento deportivo para
hacer frente a este problema.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/06/fewer-foreign-nationals-awarded-british-citizenship
New British citizens are a cause for celebration, not concern There is little
more moving than watching people declare that this country is where they want
to be and where they belong A citizenship ceremony at City Hall, London.
Photograph: Carl de Souza/AFP/Getty Images Hugh Muir
The media are always getting it in the neck for being gloomy. Where’s the good
news, critics ask. In its own way, the Telegraph responds. “Foreign nationals
awarded British citizenship declined by 40% last year as coalition policies
took effect,” says the paper. “Analysis of official data by Oxford University
showed just under 126,000 foreign nationals were awarded citizenship – thus
entitling them to a British passport – in 2014, a fall of 40% year-on-year.”
Enter stage right, Lord Green of MigrationWatch. He seems pretty chipper. “This
fall in the numbers granted nationality reflects the impact of more effective
controls on non-EU immigration.”But is this good news? Not necessarily. Having
been to a couple of the citizenship ceremonies, I think there is little more
moving than watching people make the formal declaration that this is where they
want to be and where they belong. The best bit is talking to them immediately
afterwards. Many are too excited to voice coherent thoughts, but when they
compose, they reach for the big picture. To the question: “Why do you want to
be a British citizen?” they’ll say: “because you can be free here”, “because
there is opportunity” and “because a British passport gives you respect and
protection all over the world”.
I've been reading Bring Home the Revolution: The Case for a British Republic,
the brilliant 1998 book by my colleague Jonathan Freedland, and during his
detailed comparison of the differences between the US and the UK, he describes
a citizenship ceremony across the Atlantic. He immediately spots one big
difference. The American registrar tells new citizens that they are more than
welcome, that they have joined a great historic project and that America is
lucky to have them. In the UK, the process is more welcoming than it used to
be. Previously applicants would merely be informed by letter whether or not
they had been successful. But, even now, the mindset is different. Well done,
you’ve snuck in. Count yourself lucky. Now sing the national anthem. Happily,
many don’t.I’m not saying that everyone who wants to can be a citizen. I recall
the desperation of one woman who was told to stand aside when it became clear
her English was lacking. But migrants will come; the economy needs them. And
when they choose to show commitment, that really is good news.
http://politike.cartacapital.com.br/?p=900
“Eles são animais enjaulados. Leve uma vara e espanque-os”
Por Gabriel Bonis em 6 de abril de 2015 Direitos Humanos
Imagem: Home Office / Creative Commons / Flickr
A frase de um gestor de uma detenção ilustra os problemas dos centros de
remoção de imigrantes no Reino Unido Em um centro de remoção de imigrantes
próximo a Oxford, no Reino Unido, N.S.* senta-se em uma sala de visitas
projetada de forma acolhedora, com trabalhos artísticos feitos pelos detentos
expostos em prateleiras. As pessoas encarceradas no prédio não cometeram nenhum
crime. Grande parte delas são solicitantes de asilo que tiveram seus casos
recusados e aguardam uma posição final do governo britânico sobre sua
deportação. A aparente hospitalidade do local, no entanto, esconde uma série de
contradições.N.S. deixou o Afeganistão ainda adolescente fugindo do Talibã. Ele
temia o mesmo destino do pai, que desapareceu após ser forçado a ser juntar ao
grupo. N.S. percorreu à pé a maior parte do caminho para a Europa, onde
conseguiu o status de refugiado na Itália, em 2014. Detido na Inglaterra desde
janeiro deste ano, o tempo é seu maior inimigo. No centro, ele não recebe
tratamento para um tumor no cérebro.Segundo N.S., os médicos do local
informaram que não poderiam ajuda-lo. Fornecem-lhe apenas remédios para dormir
e comprimidos para as fortes dores que sente. N.S. é um exemplo, entre centenas
de imigrantes em situação irregular no Reino Unido, de indivíduos que não
deveriam (ou precisariam) estar detidos. É também um entre os inúmeros casos
polêmicos registrados em centros de remoção.Em Yarl’s Wood, o principal centro
de remoção de imigrantes para mulheres e famílias do Reino Unido, um cenário
assustador foi revelado recentemente pela emissora de televisão britânica
Channel 4. Imagens captadas com uma câmera escondida mostram a rotina de abusos
no centro (localizado a 80 km de Londres) e flagram um membro da administração
expressando sua opinião sobre os detentos: “Eles são animais, insetos. São
animais enjaulados. Leve uma vara com você e os espanque”. Em outro momento, um
guarda é filmado dizendo que daria “cabeçadas” em uma detenta. Outro oficial
confessa ter entrado no quarto de uma detenta sem anunciar apenas para vê-la
nua. “O que eu posso fazer se gosto de peitos?”, disse sem saber que era
gravado.Casos de auto-mutilação em Yarl’s Wood são comuns, embora o governo
alegue não ter havido nenhum incidente grave deste tipo no últimos dois anos.
Entretanto, o Channel 4 obteve um dado chocante por meio da lei de acesso à
informação: em 2011 apenas um caso de auto-mutilação foi registrado, contra 74
em 2014. “Estão todos cortando os pulsos. Deixem elas cortarem os pulsos. Eles
querem atenção”, uma funcionaria do centro é flagrada afirmando.A reportagem
ainda registra o caso de uma detenta grávida que procura ajuda no centro médico
de Yarl’s Wood. Enquanto sangrava, os médicos do local se recusam a chamar uma
ambulância.Três horas depois, o socorro é chamado, mas a mulher já havia
sofrido um aborto. Embora chocantes, as revelações não são novas. Há oito anos,
uma jovem de 13 anos tentou cometer suicídio no local e acabou algemada à sua
cama no hospital que a socorreu. Houve ainda inúmeros relatos de organizações
de caridade e monitores independentes sobre abuso sexual, auto-mutilação e
casos de problemas mentais deixados sem tratamento. Ainda assim, a empresa
privada que gerencia Yarl’s Wood (Serco) teve seu contrato de £70 milhões (o
equivalente a R$ 325 milhões) renovado por oito anos em novembro de
2014.Campsfield é um dos centro de remoção de imigrantes do Reino Unido. Foto:
Scott Billings / Creative Commons / FlickrConvocada às pressas pelo Parlamento
para prestar esclarecimentos sobre as revelações, a Secretária de Estado,
Theresa May, não compareceu à sabatina na House of Commons (o equivalente à
Câmara dos Deputados). Coube à sub-secretária de Estado, Karen Bradley, afirmar
que o Reino Unido presa pelos direitos humanos e que “estava em cima” da
empresa que administra o local. O governo, porém, não anunciou nenhuma
investigação própria sobre o caso ou explicou a renovação do contrato da
Serco.Após os episódios recentes, voltou ao debate o questionamento sobre a
eficácia dos centros de remoção de imigrantes no país. As imagens do Channel 4
mostram um idoso de cerca de 85 anos detido em Yarl’s Wood. Dúvidas sobre a
necessidade de tal detenção são inúmeras. Qual o risco representado por aquele
detento à sociedade? Em 2012, entre as 1,8 mil mulheres que solicitaram asilo
no Reino Unido e foram detidas, apenas 36% acabaram removidas do país. Sendo
assim, organizações como a Women for Refugee Women questionam a necessidade de
deter mulheres vulneráveis.O que diz a legislação? Legalmente, o Ato de
Imigração de 1971 (emendado como ‘IA 1971’) define a maioria dos poderes
estatutários para a detenção de indivíduos sujeitos a controles de imigração. A
legislação foi completada pelo Ato de Nacionalidade, Imigração e Asilo de 2002,
que extende à Secretaria de Estado (Home Office) o mesmo poder de oficiais de
imigração para deter pessoas que caiam em algumas categorias. Podem ser detidos
aqueles que entrarem no país de forma ilegal ou que sejam suspeitos de entrada
irregular; indivíduos que aguardam decisões sobre suas remoções do país; quando
há motivo para acreditar que o indivíduo vai falhar em cumprir as condições
impostas na autorização temporária de admissão ou liberação; pessoas que
permaneceram no país após o vencimento dos vistos; e aqueles que violaram as
condições do visto. Migrantes também podem ser detidos até que o Home Office
decida se eles podem ou não entrar no Reino Unido. Em 2013, por exemplo, 49%
das pessoas detidas eram solicitantes de asilo.Há, no entanto, restrições para
a detenção de pessoas que se enquadrem em categorias excepcionais. Entre elas
estão indivíduos que sofram de condições médicas graves ou problemas mentais;
que tenham evidências de tortura; mulheres grávidas (a não ser que haja um
claro prospecto de remoção antecipada); menores desacompanhados; idosos e
pessoas com deficiência.As detenções para imigrantes no Reino Unido Atualmente,
existem 11 centros de remoção de imigrantes no Reino Unido. Normalmente, a
detenção é utilizada para estabelecer a identidade do detento ou a base para o
seu pedido de asilo, entre outros motivos. Por outro lado, não há tempo limite
para que os imigrantes possam ficar detidos. Um ponto fortemente criticado em
um relatório publicado no início de março por uma comissão de parlamentares de
grupos de migração e refugiados da House o Commons.O inquérito, que avaliou
evidências apresentadas por mais de 200 indivíduos e organizações, incluindo
ex-detentos, o ministro para Imigração, acadêmicos e caridades, concluiu que o
governo britânico têm feito uso excessivo de detenções. Segundo o relatório, o
governo ignora a normativa do Home Office que aconselha o uso da detenção de
imigrantes de forma “moderada e pelo menor prazo possível”.O Reino Unido é um
dos poucos países no Conselho Europeu a não ter um limite de tempo para a
detenção de imigrantes. Na Irlanda, o tempo máximo é de 21 dias, enquanto a
França adota 45 dias, por exemplo. O relatório sugere que o governo adote um
prazo de 28 dias e que a detenção seja usada como “último recurso”, dando
preferencia a medidas“alternativas”. As medidas mais populares consistem em
obrigar imigrantes em situação irregular a se reportarem às autoridades a
dentro de um determinado período de tempo ou no uso de monitoramento
eletrônico. Segundo o ministro para Imigração, cerca de 60 mil pessoas precisam
se reportar no Reino Unido, com um custo de £8,6 milhões por ano (cerca de R$
40 milhões). Em uma escala semanal, cerca de 95% deles comparecem aos seus
postos de reportagem. Existem ainda 500 pessoas com monitoramento eletrônico a
um custo mensal de £515 cada (R$ 2,4 mil). Os valores ainda são
consideravelmente menores comparados ao custo de manter um detento.Ainda assim,
nas últimas duas décadas, a capacidade dos centros de detenção no Reino Unido
aumentou exponencialmente. Em 1993, havia 250 vagas disponíveis, contra as 2,6
mil ao final de 2009. Em 2015, há capacidade para deter 3,9 mil pessoas, além
de planos para mais expansões.Neste cenário, o relatório dos parlamentares
destaca a falta de acesso adequado à saúde nos centros de detenção. Um
agravante, aponta o inquérito, é a detenção elevada de pessoas com problemas
mentais sem levar em consideração que muitos destes detentos passaram por
experiências traumáticas no passado. Logo, a detenção não seria a opção mais
adequada. O mesmo vale para vítimas de tráfico de internacional de pessoas e de
tortura, que acabam detidos quando há outros mecanismos mais adequados para o
seu monitoramento.Os parlamentares ainda se mostraram preocupados com a falta
de preparo dos profissionais de saúde das unidades médicas dos centros de
remoção, que “não aparentam ter os recursos ou treinamento para identificar e
tratar problemas mentais na detenção”. Um problema que pode ter grande impacto
na vida dos detentos, uma vez que a legislação determina que as detenções tenha
um centro médico responsável pela saúde mental e física dos detentos. Além
disso, os integrantes da equipe “devem prestar atenção especial à necessidade
de reconhecer condições médicas que podem ser encontradas” entre os indivíduos
detidos e “reportar ao gerente” problemas graves para a saúde de algum detento
que possam ser causados “pela detenção contínua ou pelas condições da
detenção”. Logo, com profissionais não qualificados para identificar casos de
potencial risco à vida dos detentos, a legislação tende a não ser cumprida,
deixando os detentos expostos a riscos desnecessários.N.S. é um exemplo de como
os detentos têm enfrentado problemas para acessar um nível adequado de
tratamento de saúde. Ele não é o único. Em 2012, a equipe médica de centro de
remoção em Londres foi considerada parcialmente responsável pela morte de
paquistanês detido no local por um inquérito de juri. O detento sofreu um
ataque cardíaco, mas o centro falhou em chamar uma ambulância à tempo de
prestar socorro, em realizar massagem cardíaca e em ter um desfibrilador em
funcionamento no local. O companheiro de quarto do paquistanês soou o alarme de
emergência do quarto dez vezes em quase duas horas antes de receber
ajuda.Embora sejam uma ferramenta útil para garantir a checagem da identidade
de indivíduos suspeitos de representarem risco à sociedade, é preciso evitar a
banalização do uso da detenção e sua transformação em um mero procedimento
administrativo. A utilização moderada e com prazo limitado destes centros pode
satisfazer as preocupações de segurança do governo ao mesmo tempo que garante a
integridade física e mental de indivíduos que não cometeram crimes, mas
encontram-se em situação de imigração considerada irregular pelas autoridades
britânicas. Além disso, é preciso coibir os abusos cometidos pelos agentes e
administradores de centros de detenção, considerando acima de tudo se há de
fato benefícios em privar indivíduos de sua liberdade enquanto há alternativas
mais eficientes e baratas de monitoramento.Este artigo é o primeiro de um
especial sobre os centros de remoção de imigrantes no Reino Unido. O próximo
texto discutirá os casos de abuso sexual, auto-mutilação e detenção de vítimas
de tortura e tráfico internacional de pessoas nestes centros.*O nome do
refugiado foi preservado por motivos éticos.
[mensagem organizada por Helion Póvoa Neto]
__._,_.___ Enviado por: "niem.migr" <NIEM.migr@xxxxxxxxx>
| Responder através da web | • | | • | através de email | • |
Adicionar um novo tópico | • | Mensagens neste tópico (48) |
[As opiniões veiculadas não expressam (necessariamente) a opinião dos
organizadores da lista do NIEM]
Para cancelar sua assinatura desse grupo, favor enviar um e-mail para:
niem_rj-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To cancel your subscription to this group, please send an e-mail to:
niem_rj-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
para enviar mensagens / to send messages: niem_rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Visite
seu Grupo
- Novos usuários 1
• Privacidade • Sair do grupo • Termos de uso
.
__,_._,___#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637 -- #yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp {border:1px
solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp #yiv0494749637hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp #yiv0494749637ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp .yiv0494749637ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp .yiv0494749637ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mkp .yiv0494749637ad a
{color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor
#yiv0494749637ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor #yiv0494749637ygrp-lc #yiv0494749637hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor #yiv0494749637ygrp-lc .yiv0494749637ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637activity span
.yiv0494749637underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0494749637
.yiv0494749637attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637
.yiv0494749637bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 dd.yiv0494749637last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637 dd.yiv0494749637last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637
dd.yiv0494749637last p span.yiv0494749637yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637file-title a, #yiv0494749637
div.yiv0494749637file-title a:active, #yiv0494749637
div.yiv0494749637file-title a:hover, #yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637photo-title a,
#yiv0494749637 div.yiv0494749637photo-title a:active, #yiv0494749637
div.yiv0494749637photo-title a:hover, #yiv0494749637
div.yiv0494749637photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637
div#yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0494749637ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv0494749637yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv0494749637
.yiv0494749637green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv0494749637 o {font-size:0;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637photos div div {border:1px solid
#666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637photos div label
{color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv0494749637 .yiv0494749637replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-actbar div a:first-child
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv0494749637 input, #yiv0494749637 textarea
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv0494749637 code {font:115%
monospace;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg *
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0494749637logo
{padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-msg p a
{font-family:Verdana;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-msg
p#yiv0494749637attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-reco #yiv0494749637reco-head
{color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-reco
{margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor
#yiv0494749637ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor #yiv0494749637ov li
{font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-sponsor #yiv0494749637ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0
8px;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-text
{font-family:Georgia;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em
0;}#yiv0494749637 #yiv0494749637ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv0494749637
#yiv0494749637ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none
!important;}#yiv0494749637
