UNC: Government needs real plan for Venezuelan migrants

NAPARIMA MP Rodney Charles accused the Government of making up a Venezuelan migrant policy as it goes along, and in such a way as to cause long-term resentment all around.

His statement on Friday was in reaction to the Prime Minister’s remarks at Thursday’s post-Cabinet briefing that his policy was to put TT first, even as he promised tough new laws for those who encourage illegal immigration, while giving a further six-month extension to registered migrants.

Charles charged, “PM Rowley, in his angry and incoherent rant yesterday demonstrated that TT's foreign policy towards Venezuela remains ad hoc, reactive, angry and devoid of long-term implications of how future generations of Venezuelans will judge us.”

He asked if the further six months represented a TT policy of repeated extensions in the absence of a well-thought-out policy.

“What happens when this extension is finished – another year's extension? How many extensions will be granted? What happens if the situation in Venezuela lasts decades?"

He asked what will happen when registered Venezuelans have children born in TT as TT citizens who cannot legally be deported.

“Will these children remain but their parents (be) repatriated, leading to family separations?”

Charles later told Newsday that recently in Parliament he had tried to ask if the Government keeps a register of the births of babies of Venezuelan migrants, but had not received a clear reply.

“The existing policy is a non-policy,” he told Newsday. “It can’t tell you the future, including when the extensions end.”

After Rowley called for reporters to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees from persecution in Venezuela, Charles in his statement asked if the PM was truly clear on this issue in his own mind.

“A recent UN report indicted (Venezuelan president Nicolas) Maduro for not holding free and fair elections, accusing (his government) of ‘torture, extra-judicial murder, rape, and other forms of sexual violence and enforced disappearance of Venezuelans.’

“So if we do not recognise them as refugees in order to not offend Rowley's friend Maduro, are we out of sync with the UN and other multilateral agencies?”

On the other hand, asked Charles, if TT treats the Venezuelans as migrants, do they then get all the rights under the relevant UN Convention, including education of their children?

He then said Rowley speaks sanctimoniously of TT’s non-interference in a sovereign state, namely Venezuela, but all his actions suggest unambiguous support for Maduro.

“These include meeting with Venezuelan VP Delcy Rodriguez, sanctioned by both the US and the EU; possible facilitation of oil shipments; positions taken at the OAS which may or may not be valid, including a disputed interpretation of the Rio Treaty; and not acknowledging the UN report.”

Charles said the UNC has repeatedly called for the securing of TT’s borders, while Rowley has incorrectly claimed these were closed.

“The UNC has also called in vain for a comprehensive migrant/refugee policy that is humane, consensually developed, recognises our international treaty obligations (and) is consistent with our security needs and more so our absorptive capacity.

“This we will never see.”

He claimed the Rowley Government was hell-bent on developing such a policy on the fly, but was unmindful of how future generations of Venezuelans will judge how TT treated their citizens in their hour of need.

“We are better than this.”

Charles said US policy on Venezuela enjoys bipartisan support in the US political system.

“Given the importance of Cuban/Venezuelan immigrants to the outcome of elections in Florida, we may see a change only in tone but not substance under a Biden presidency.

“We better have a long-term plan in place, or future generations of our diplomats will face nightmares with a military powerful neighbour who thinks that we treated them inhumanely.”