Venezuelan children’s future is in school

THE first effort by the government to accommodate Venezuelan migrant children into the school system netted a paltry 23 students. The process has since been resumed at seven locations.

Even this tentative beginning was only enabled by the passage of the Immigration (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2024, formalising a process for admittance.

Four of the 23 children will be placed at government schools, 18 at denominational schools, and one at a private school.

A total of 111 Venezuelan migrant children have been approved for acceptance into schools out of 187 applications. The other 76 were rejected because of expired documents, low rates of literacy, and a lack of translators.

Far more haven’t even had a chance to consider the process.

Yolenny Moya showed up on September 10 at the Education Ministry’s Victoria district office in San Fernando, hoping to register her two children for a chance at a local education. She believes that if the process were more open, there would have been long lines at the seven Education Ministry offices that accept registration documents on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

Hundreds of migrant children are excluded from consideration because of their legal status or because their parents remain unaware of the opportunity.

There are far too many obstacles to applications.

One requirement, a certified translation of a child’s birth certificate, costs $1,200 until the Pan American Development Foundation stepped up to offer the service for free.

The entire system may be "lawful," as the Education Minister insists. This is hardly humanitarian, an approach that has characterised the government's handling of every aspect of integrating Venezuelan migrants into TT communities.

The state continues its heavy-handed approach to the migrant issue, preferring to threaten crackdowns and deportation instead of pursuing a mutually beneficial integration of migrants into TT society.

Threats guarantee that illegal migrants will become less visible, making them more vulnerable to mistreatment, abuse, and exploitation.

The overwhelming message of the UNHCR’s appeal to countries hosting migrants is to offer asylum seekers the same consideration and concern that would be extended to nationals.

Choosing grudging tolerance over active integration misses the opportunity to turn burden into an asset, actively encouraging self-sufficiency, beginning with education.

In Sweden and Norway, integration is tied intimately to migration to turn refugees into contributors to their societies.

Successful integration reverses brain drain, improves the workforce and productivity, reduces the costs of marginalisation, and encourages positive local participation by these new residents, who are potential taxpayers.

It’s unclear what dividend the state hopes to realise by so determinedly refusing education to thousands of migrant children in this country. It can’t hope for a positive return on its stubborn insistence on refusal over acceptance.

It’s time to put some schoolbags in their future.