Net migration to Britain remains at record levels

Government's hopes of reducing migration suffer blow with figures showing net influx of 250,000 in the year to June 2011

Foreign students in London. Studying remains the most common reason to come to live in Britain, with an estimated 242,000 students arriving in the year to June 2011. Photograph: Frank Baron/The Guardian


The government's hopes of reducing net migration into Britain to below 100,000 have suffered a fresh blow, with the latest figures showing that it remained at the record level of 250,000 in the year to June 2011.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that figures published on Thursday showed long-term immigration remained steady, with 593,000 coming to live in Britain in the year to June 2011.

Long-term emigration over the same period was also stable, with 343,000 people going to live abroad, giving a net migration figure of 250,000.

The figures for the first year of the coalition government showed that net migration actually rose from 235,000 to 250,000 in its first 12 months in office.

This increase was driven by falls in the emigration side of the equation, with the number of people going to live abroad at its lowest level since 1998.

The latest quarterly ONS migration statistics report confirms that studying remains the most common reason to come to live in Britain, with an estimated 242,000 students arriving in the year to June 2011.

The figures also show that long-term immigration of new Commonwealth citizens, mainly from the Asian subcontinent, hit a record level of 170,000 – two-thirds of them students – over the same period.

A separate set of Home Office immigration statistics, giving annual figures for 2011 which do not include an estimate for the politically sensitive figure of net migration, shows that study, work or family visa applications to Britain fell by 6% last year. The latest visa data shows a fall in the number of overseas students since a peak in June 2010.

The immigration minister, Damian Green, insisted there were signs of progress. "Our reforms are starting to take effect. Home Office figures from the second half of last year show a significant decrease in the number of student and work visas issued, an early indicator for the long-term direction of net migration.

"Net migration remains too high, but is now steady, having fallen from a recent peak in the year to September 2010," he said. "This government remains committed to bringing net migration down from the hundreds of thousands to the tens of thousands over the course of the parliament."

The latest net migration figure is only 5,000 below the September 2010 peak of 255,000.

The number of people granted settlement, which is to be the subject of fresh curbs to be announced next week, fell by 32% last year to 163,477. But it is thought this drop represents a backlog of long-term asylum "legacy" cases moving out of the system. There were 177,000 new British citizens – 9% fewer than in 2010.

The Home Office figures show a sharp rise in asylum cases in the last three months of 2011 to 5,261 – the highest quarterly total since 2009, with rises in applications from Pakistan, Libya and Iran.

The number of people detained for immigration reasons in Britain, already the highest in Europe, rose by 11% to 6,681 in the final quarter of 2011. The figure includes 41 children, the majority of whom were detained in the new "pre-departure" family accommodation run in association with Barnardo's.

Ministers will also be concerned to see that removals and deportations fell again during 2011 from 60,244 in the previous year to 52,526. The last three months of the year saw some recovery in the number of removals.

Matt Cavanagh of the Institute of Public Policy Research said: "Today's figures show that in the first full year entirely under the coalition government (from July 2010 to June 2011) net migration remained at a record high level of 250,000. In other words, the government made no progress on its pledge of reducing net migration to the tens of thousands by the end of the parliament.

"Reducing immigration is a legitimate goal – but politicians should be wary of promising what they can't deliver. There is also a risk that ministers will be tempted to take more extreme measures in pursuit of their elusive target, including on those areas of immigration which are most important to our economy, and which surveys show the public are less bothered about, including skilled workers and overseas students."

Donna Covey, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: "Following the political unrest and atrocities we saw, and are still seeing, across North Africa and the Middle East, it is no surprise that there was an increase in numbers of people seeking safety here last year from countries including Syria and Libya. For those fleeing persecution it is crucial is that [the UK Border Agency] makes the right decision on their case first time – but the figures for refusals later overturned at appeal suggest that this is often not the case, and more so for women seeking asylum.

"It is also shocking that 99 children were held in detention last year, when the government pledged to put an end to this abhorrent practice almost two years ago. We know that conditions have improved under the new family removals process, but we still strongly maintain that children should not be detained as part of the asylum process."

Read more »

Stories of immigration, cleverly told by teens

Gissela Gualoto (left) and Jacqueline Ovalle play feisty 80-year old nuns in one of the scenes of “Home/Land.”

Politicians of every stripe in this country seem to lack the will, creativity and sheer guts to deal in some practical and humane way with the complicated issue of immigration. But where they have failed, the Albany Park Theatre Project — the prodigiously gifted, exquisitely directed youth theater ensemble rooted in a classic “gateway for the world” Chicago neighborhood — has triumphed.

In its latest production, “Home/Land,” now playing to consistently sold-out houses and extended through April 28, the company has transformed an often virulent and intensely partisan subject into the highest art. Even those with attitudes other than those expressed here might find themselves profoundly moved by the nearly two dozen fervent young performers who magically unspool a series of stories in this knockout of a show — a work that should be mandatory viewing for every current and/or wannabe government official.

As you enter the theater, you see two small stages at either side of the space, each piled high with great towers of suitcases, and linked by an alley-style performance area (think of it as the Rio Grande, with the audience seated on its banks). The set (designed by Scott C. Neale) continually morphs. So do the teenage actors here (who could easily vie with adult professionals) as they move through dozens of scenes, all animated by the marvelous techniques of a team of six directors and choreographers (Colby Beserra, David Feiner, Mikhail Fiksel, Stephanie Paul, Maggi Popadiak and Rossana Rofriguez Sanchez).

The initial story — all are based on interviews and research done by the young performers and their advisers, and then shaped into dramatic form — is a classic. It follows the perilous journey of a young father determined to make a better living for his wife and child. He sets out from Ecuador to the United States, with stops in Costa Rica, Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatamala and Mexico, where he is turned back after a harrowing (and magnificently rendered) voyage in a tiny, overcrowded boat on rough seas.

A couple that does get in, also hoping to give their kids a better opportunity in life, ends up being torn apart, with the father arrested, put in a monitoring device and then threatened with deportation. Meanwhile, another immigrant woman works tirelessly at a church mission in Chicago where those threatened with deportation find a temporary haven and legal help, as well as a beguiling young priest (Jose Mata).

In one sharply satirical sequence (devised by guest writer James Anthony Zoccoli), we are treated to a glitzy game show, “Do You Want To Be An American?” Hosted by Bob Whiteman, his Mexican assistant and Lady Liberty, we watch as a hapless young Latino contestant (the winning Osbaldo Antunez) — a topnotch, taxpaying student and worker — is continually thwarted.

While both the cast and stories are predominantly Latino, there also is the tale of a young Palestinian girl (the enchanting and funny Paloma Reyes), who grew up wealthy in Kuwait but whose family ends up penniless after the 1990 Iraqi invasion drives them to flee to Jordan and then the United States. Years later, as a headscarf-wearing architecture school graduate in post-Sept. 11 America, she finds her opportunities limited and becomes radicalized.

Also surprisingly radicalized are two supremely feisty, 80-year-old Catholic nuns, played with great verve and wit by Jacqueline Ovalle and Gissela Gualoto.

Space prevents the naming of the full cast (whose splendid ensemble work is enhanced by songs sung in English and Spanish, with the actors often playing instruments, too). But be assured they abound in talent, confidence, emotional heat and technique. Truly astonishing.

Read more »

Villawood asylum seeker dies

An asylum seeker from Sydney's Villawood detention centre has died in hospital, the Immigration Department says.

The 44-year-old man was transferred to hospital with chest pains on Saturday but died early on Monday, the department said.

Refugee activist Ian Rintoul said the man was Iranian and had fled his home country in 2010 after being arrested and jailed for participating in pro-democracy protests.

He arrived in Australia by plane in April 2010 and had been in detention since then.

Mr Rintoul said the man had a wife and two children in Iran and a cousin in Australia.

He said he had been living in Villawood's housing section for four weeks before being taken to hospital.

The man is the ninth immigration centre detainee to die in the last five years, a spokesman told AAP.

Counsellors were supporting staff and detainees at the centre, the department said.

Read more »

Romney’s Arizona law ‘model’ would hurt all immigrants

By Andres Oppenheimer
aoppenheimer@MiamiHerald.com

If Mitt Romney becomes the next president of the United States and honors his latest vow to turn the Arizona immigration law into a “model” for the entire country, life in America could become quite unpleasant for many of us who look like immigrants, or speak English with a foreign accent.

In the Feb. 22 Republican debate in Arizona, where Romney and his main rival Rick Santorum were competing for the state’s anti-illegal immigration vote, Romney praised Arizona’s E-Verify system to check employees’ immigration status and said, “I think we see a model here in Arizona.” He added that, if elected, he would stop current federal lawsuits against Arizona-style laws “from day one.”

“Dios Mío!” I said to myself when I heard that. Judging from what we have seen in states that have passed Arizona-styled laws, that would lead to arbitrary arrests and interrogations not only of undocumented immigrants, but of legal residents and U.S. citizens as well.

The 2010 Arizona law requires, among other things, that local police demand immigration papers when they have a reasonable suspicion that a person is in the country illegally. It was suspended after a federal lawsuit questioning its constitutionality and is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Supporters of the law deny it would lead to a wild goose chase of foreign-looking people, and to widespread harassment of immigrants. They say the law does not allow police officers to stop people at random, because it specifically requires that they demand immigration papers only when they carry out a “lawful stop, detention or arrest.”

But those are vague terms, critics say. A police officer wanting to make overtime could legally stop people to ask whether they saw something suspicious around the corner, then arrest them for not having proper immigration papers.

In addition, the Arizona law requires that local police act as immigration inspectors not only when they legally stop somebody for a crime, but also when they do it for a violation of a city ordinance.

If somebody calls the police to complain that a neighbor is playing music too loud at a party next door, an officer could show up at the party and detain anybody there who can’t prove their legal status, opponents of the law say.

“The central problem is that it opens the door to widespread racial profiling based on what individuals look like or sound like,” Karen Tumlin, an attorney with the National Immigration Law Center in Los Angeles, told me last week. “The ‘reasonable suspicion’ wording would force cops to make judgments based on what people look like.”

It has already happened, and not just with Latin American or Asia-born people. In Alabama, one of several states that has passed Arizona-styled laws, a German executive with Mercedes Benz was recently arrested under the state’s new immigration law near his company’s manufacturing plant for not carrying documents proving his legal immigration status, the Associated Press reported Nov. 19.

The 46-year-old German visitor’s rental car was stopped by a police officer and the man was arrested when he could not prove his legal immigration status, Tuscaloosa Police Chief Steven Anderson told the wire agency. The visitor was released when an associate retrieved his passport from his hotel room.

Two weeks later, a Japanese employee from a nearby Honda plant was arrested and jailed for three days under Alabama’s immigration law after he was stopped during a checkpoint used by police to detect unlicensed drivers, even after he showed his international driver’s license, a valid passport and a U.S. work permit. There have been dozens of similar cases since Alabama’s anti-immigrations law was enacted.

A recent study by Alabama’s Center for Business and Economic Research economist Sam Addy concluded that the Alabama law could cost the state as much as $10.8 billion a year. Another study says Arizona’s immigration law has cost that state’s tourism industry $490 million.

Can you imagine what would happen in tourism and foreign trade-dependent states such as Florida if Arizona-like laws became the law of the land? Or what it would do to the real estate and convention industries in cities like Miami or New York?

My opinion: By almost any measure, Arizona-style laws are morally questionable and economically disastrous, and increasingly unnecessary at a time when illegal immigration has dropped dramatically after the 2008 U.S. economic downturn.

If Romney — and, to be fair, Santorum as well — stopped federal lawsuits against these xenophobic laws and allowed them to become a “model” for the entire nation, America would cease to be the country it has always been.

Read more »

Guest commentary: Immigration debate is about economics, not politics

What do Jeremy Lin of the Knicks and Nicklas Lidstrom of the Red Wings have in common? Both owe their success to immigration – and both are creating jobs and strengthening our economy.

Lin, whose parents came from Taiwan, and Lidstrom, who was born in Sweden, are helping their teams sell tickets and merchandise, while also helping tavern owners sell burgers and beers. But they are also helping the NBA and NHL to expand in overseas markets – something every major corporation in America is trying to do. The more a company expands its overseas exports, the more jobs it can create here in the U.S. – and the more tax revenue it produces for local, state, and federal governments.

In a presidential election in which both sides are debating economic growth and immigration separately, all parties should emphasize the relationship between them. The fact is the link between legal immigration and job creation couldn’t be stronger.

Immigrants, especially those with advanced degrees, play a vital role in helping U.S. companies create jobs, as a recent study by the conservative American Enterprise Institute and the bipartisan Partnership for a New American Economy has shown. The study found that each foreign graduate with an advanced degree from a U.S. university who stays and works in the innovation-rich fields of science, technology, engineering, and math ("STEM" fields) creates on average 2.62 jobs for American workers.

Yet right now, even though many of the world’s brightest STEM students train in our universities, the federal government forces many of them to leave as soon as they are handed a diploma. When these graduates return to their home countries, they go to work for foreign companies that compete against us – or they found companies that will create jobs overseas, rather than here in the U.S. This is the federal government at its most frustrating. And it is doing real damage to our economy.

Immigrants also drive new business creation. More than 40% of our Fortune 500 companies were founded by an immigrant or a child of an immigrant – companies like Google, Yahoo, and Intel. In Michigan, major companies like Dow, Masco and Meijer were founded by immigrants, as were major New York City companies like Pfizer, Foursquare and Nathan’s Famous. Yet the longer we wait to fix our broken immigration laws, the more these innovative companies will be founded overseas. If that is allowed to happen, we will do enormous damage to America’s future and our standing as the world’s economic superpower.

Economists are in agreement that our broken immigration policies hurt our economy and make it harder for our companies to compete. And interestingly, so are the candidates for president. All the major candidates in both parties have come out in support of reforming our immigration laws to attract the world's brightest minds. (Learn more at www.NoDebate.org).

The trouble is that the debate around immigration is too often focused on politics, not economics. If both parties would pass legislation based on their points of agreement, rather than engage in endless debates over their points of disagreement, we could create thousands of jobs all across the country at a time when so many out-of-work Americans need them.

America needs more superstars like Jeremy Lin and Nicklas Lidstrom – in every industry. And we need our leaders in Washington to stop blocking sensible legislation and start scoring some points for the American worker.

Michael Bloomberg is mayor of New York City. Rick Snyder is governor of Michigan.

Read more »

Across Arizona, Illegal Immigration Is on Back Burner

CHANDLER, Ariz. — The angry protests over Arizona’s tough policies focused on illegal immigrants are mostly gone. The sponsor of the state’s touchstone immigration bill has been recalled, while two sheriffs who championed the crackdown are enmeshed in legal difficulties. And there has been a notable decline in police activity aimed at illegal immigrants, easing a long period of anxiety among Mexican communities.
Two years after Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, signed legislation that required all immigrants to carry documentation or face arrest — a law that set off protests here and stirred a national boycott of the state — concern about illegal immigration is no longer the all-consuming issue it had been for so long.

The fading of the issue, at least for now, was most recently on display in the Republican presidential primary. At a debate here last week, it took an hour before the issue that has shaken Arizona for five years was raised.

“There’s no doubt that in Arizona, there is immigration fatigue,” said Scott Smith, the mayor of Mesa and a Republican. “People want to talk about things that impact them every day. And the reality is that in Arizona, illegal immigration does not affect you as much as not having a job.”

“It’s still important,” Mr. Smith said. “It’s just not as controversial here as it once was.”

The change has prompted worry among some of the leading advocates of tough immigration policies, even as they predict that the tide will change again — perhaps when the employment situation improves here and the flow of illegal immigrants slipping across the border picks up, or when the Supreme Court rules on a challenge to the Arizona law, SB 1070, later this year.

“It is not a front-burner issue now, because it’s been displaced largely by our dismal economy,” said State Representative John Kavanagh, a Republican. “It worries me, but I understand why it happens. And I just always remind people that the illegal immigration issue hasn’t gone away. It’s just been overshadowed and temporarily shifted to the back burner.”

Ms. Brewer — who announced on Sunday that she was endorsing Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, in this state’s primary on Tuesday — said in an interview that she had been disappointed by the limited discussion of policy on immigration and Mexico in last week’s Republican presidential debate and during the campaign.

“I would have liked to see a candidate come forward who understands the terrible disarray the state of Mexico is in. It’s a fractured, inoperable state right now,” Ms. Brewer said. “Everybody says they all have different ideas, but they all are basically saying pretty much the same thing.”

The economic problems here — joblessness, home foreclosures — have contributed to this shift in attention, along with the fact that there have been no recent crimes or arrests involving illegal immigrants. But not incidentally, this has taken place as some of the best-known players in the fight against illegal immigration here have run into legal and political troubles.

The sponsor of the original bill, Russell Pearce, the former head of the State Senate, was recalled from office in November in a display of the backlash that has caused alarm among Republican leaders. Joseph M. Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County who has become one of the leading advocates of tough immigration policy, has been accused by the Justice Department of anti-Latino bias and abuses of authority.

Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County was forced to step down as a co-chairman of Mr. Romney’s Arizona campaign last week amid accusations that he had threatened to deport a former lover — who was from Mexico — after he threatened to publicize their relationship. Mr. Babeu, who is now running for Congress, had appeared with Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, in a particularly tough immigration ad that Mr. McCain had used in his 2008 presidential run.

“The media coverage hasn’t been so great because Joe Arpaio is facing indictment, so he is laying pretty low,” said Bruce Merrill, an Arizona pollster and political analyst. “We have not had any arrests. When the media covers it, it causes the attention to go up. There’s a feeling here that it’s not as important as it once was.”

None of which is to say that immigration is not a major concern for most people in this border state, or that the passions could not arise again. “Around the country, jobs and the economy are on people’s minds,” said Representative Ben Quayle, Republican of Arizona. “You can talk about the economy and you can talk about how we are going to secure our borders.”

Mr. Merrill said his own polls had found that immigration continued to be listed as a top concern of voters here; the difference was that it had been joined by the economy and joblessness.

Chip Scutari, a political consultant, said attitudes among Arizona voters from both parties were more nuanced than was reflected in the actions of the Republican-controlled Legislature. “Many of the voters who support 1070 also support an earned path to citizenship,” he said of the immigration law. “I think border issues are in the mix. But because there’s been such a quagmire, it’s lost some of its sex appeal.”

Whatever the case, the waning interest may be something of a gift to the Republican presidential candidates, sparing them from being drawn into a “who can be tougher on illegal immigrants” fight that might hurt their appeal to Latino voters.

“They all kind of danced with the same rhetoric, but none of them wanted to embrace it as a central issue,” said Representative Raul M. Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat. “I think there was a calculated issue to minimize talking about something where they could lose voters.”

Whatever the short-term benefit for Republicans, Democrats and some Latino leaders argue that the party has suffered long-lasting damage. The spate of legislation has helped Democrats register more Latino voters and increase turnout in local elections, similar to what happened in California after Republicans supported tough immigration measures, including Proposition 187, the 1994 initiative that would have cut off public services to illegal immigrants.

“There has been a tangible, palpable momentum shift in the state, which is essentially saying, ‘Well that was a disaster, and what should we do about it?’ ” said James E. Garcia of the Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. “But the damage that the Republican Party did to itself in this state is absolutely comparable to what the Republican Party in California did to itself.”

Jeff Zeleny contributed reporting from Washington.

Read more »

Immigration is the Issue with Sheriff Paul Babeu

COMMENTARY | Something is rotten in Denmark, and it's not the fact Republican Pinal County, Ariz., sheriff Paul Babeu came out as gay. The issues in Arizona go much deeper. Babeu's former lover Jose Orozco's Internet abuses are problematic, says the Los Angeles Times. The coup de grace is immigration violation charges with subsequent deportation threats against Orozco, a Mexican national. The homosexuality, even the identity theft, is a smokescreen for the real agenda: Using personal issues to further political causes.

It shouldn't matter to the Arizona GOP, the Mitt Romney campaign or the general populace whether Babeu is gay, straight or pink with polka dots. If he's doing his job right, that's what's important. It's 2012; let's accept a homosexual can be a Republican, even though he might not agree with all of the party platform.

I'm a pro-life Catholic progressive social Democrat. There are parts of the party line I don't agree with (abortion rights), but by and large, the Democrats are closer to my way of thinking. Grass-roots efforts are the best way to address issues of morality, so I'll vote Democrat and work pro-life. I'm guessing that's how it is with Babeu. Like me, he might not like the two-party system, but he knows that to vote otherwise would basically be a discarded vote.

As per the oxymoron between Babeu embracing a Republican anti-immigration, anti-gay message but acting otherwise, people often fight hardest against issues that are raw spots. He's not the first. Look at televangelist Jimmy Swaggert decrying immorality while patronizing a prostitute. Look at Republican nominee Newt Gingrich, telling MSNBC that while harping on the Clinton-Lewinsky affair, he was carrying on an affair.

As for Orozco's retaliation with the online harassment, that needs to be addressed, but not under the guise of residency status. If, as per the Huffington Post, hints were dropped about the advisability of Orozco's keeping mum in view of his expired student visa, that's exploitation on all sides.

First, it exploits his relationship with Babeu and imbues it with shame. Second, invasion of Internet privacy is wrong, regardless of sexual preference. Third, mixing in immigration dilutes Orozco's real criminal activity of hacking. Last, a threat of deportation for personal gain is legalized extortion and a base misuse of authority.

Read more »

Airport immigration chief in 'bribe' probe

Jakarta - Indonesian police said on Monday they had arrested the head of immigration at Jakarta airport on suspicion of taking a bribe to issue a fake travel document to a Singaporean citizen.

Rochadi Iman Santoso allegedly issued the forgery to the Singaporean - who is involved in a court case with a local company.

Local media reports said the document falsely showed a visit to Indonesia on certain dates that never took place.

"We arrested him on Friday on suspicion that he forged a travel document for a Singaporean," said police spokesperson Rikwanto, who like many Indonesians goes by one name.

"The Singaporean's lawyer had requested the document for a legal case and Santoso allegedly issued it, saying the person had arrived in Indonesia and left the following day. But that never happened."

Widespread corruption

Rikwanto said police were investigating Santoso, the head of immigration at Jakarta's Soekarno-Hatta international airport, on suspicion of bribery.

Official graft is rampant in Indonesia, a vast archipelago of about 240 million people scattered on more than 17 000 islands.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's popularity has steadily fallen throughout his second term as the public loses faith in his fight against corruption.

A Gallup poll released in October 2011 found that 91% of Indonesians believe corruption in government is widespread, compared to 84% in 2006.

Read more »

LuaLua signs... for immigration department

Published on Saturday 10 December 2011 08:45

While Pool struggled with the weather, Lomana LuaLua didn’t exactly have the best preparation for today’s game either.

The Seasiders frontman had to dash to London to sign immigration papers which allowed his wife to enter the country.

Manager Ian Holloway explained: “He had to go to immigration to sign a form to get his wife back over here from Cyprus.

“I had to give him permission to do that, which isn’t ideal because Thursday is always about preparation.

“But I had to do it, otherwise his wife wouldn’t be here and that wouldn’t have been right.”

LuaLua will make his own way to Southampton – the rest of the squad are due to flew from Manchester yesterday afternoon.

Holloway added: “It took us 10 and a half hours to get to Brighton last time we travelled on a Friday. That was an absolute nightmare, so we decided not to go by coach this time.

“However, I’m now worried about the weather. I hope it calms down. The elastic band on our little plane might struggle to get us off in these winds.”

Stephen Crainey and Kevin Phillips will be more up for today’s game than most – both are former Saints.

Phillips, who spent two seasons with the south coast club, will almost certainly be on the bench, with Holloway admitting the 38-year-old is likely to become more of a super-sub for the remainder of the season.

Crainey is always one of the first names on the teamsheet, which wasn’t the case at Southampton, who let him go after an unhappy few months in 2004.

Holloway said: “Whatever has happened in Stephen’s career is history. He will have taken it on the chin and he will have learned from it. Some things are fair, some things aren’t.

“He hasn’t got a single thing to prove to himself or to me because I know how good he is, and he knows how much he is respected here.

“I have honestly never worked with a better left-back. I haven’t worked with a bloke who trains better than him either or has a better attitude.

“It doesn’t matter how old he is. With the way he trains, that lad can keep going for years.

“He has been absolutely foot-perfect ever since I have been here.

“He is a wonderful fella and I’m so glad he signed a new contract in the summer”.

Read more »

Unions And Immigrants Join Occupy Movements

by David Bacon

Oakland, California - When Occupy Seattle called its tent camp "Planton Seattle," camp organizers were laying a local claim to a set of tactics used for decades by social movements in Mexico, Central America and the Philippines. And when immigrant janitors marched down to the detention center in San Diego and called their effort Occupy ICE (the initials of the Immigration and Custom Enforcement agency responsible for mass deportations),people from countries with that planton encampment tradition were connecting it to the Occupy movement here.

This shared culture and history offer new possibilities to the Occupy movement for survival and growth at a time when the federal law enforcement establishment, in cooperation with local police departments and municipal governments, has uprooted many tent encampments. Different Occupy groups from Wall Street to San Francisco have begun to explore their relationship with immigrant social movements in the US, and to look more closely at the actions of the 1 percent beyond our borders that produces much of the pressure for migration.

Reacting to the recent evictions, the Coalition for the Political Rights of Mexicans Abroad recently sent a support letter to Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and the other camps under attack. "We greet your movement," it declared, "because your struggle against the suppression of human rights and against social and economic injustice has been a fundamental part of our struggle, that of the Mexican people who cross borders, and the millions of Mexican migrants who live in the United States."

Many of those migrants living in the US know the tradition of the planton and how it's used at home. And they know that the 1 percent, whose power is being challenged on Wall Street, also designed the policies that are the very reason why immigrants are living in the US to begin with. Mike Garcia, president of United Service Workers West/SEIU, the union that organized Occupy ICE, described immigrant janitors as "displaced workers of the new global economic order, an order led by the West and the United States in particular."

Criminalizing the act of camping out in a public space is intended, at least in part, to keep a planton tradition from acquiring the same legitimacy in the US that it has in other countries. That right to a planton was not freely conceded by the rulers of Mexico, El Salvador or the Philippines, however - no more than it has been conceded here. The 99 percent of those countries had to fight for it.

Two of the biggest battles of modern Mexican political history were fought in the Tlatelolco Plaza, where hundreds of students were gunned down in 1968, and three years later in Mexico City streets where more were beaten and shot by the paramilitary Halcones. In both El Salvador and the Philippines, strikers have a tradition of living at the gates of the factory or enterprise where they work. But even today, that right must be defended against the police, and (at least until the recent election of the Funes and Aquino governments) even the military.

Plantons or encampments don't stand alone. They are tactics used by unions, students, farmers, indigenous organizations, and other social movements. Each planton is a visible piece of a movement or organization - a much larger base. When the plantons are useful to those movements, they defend them. That connection between planton and movement, between the encampment and its social base, is as important as holding the physical space on which the tents are erected.
Leobardo Benitez Alvarez. a fired SME member, in the union's planton. (Photo: David Bacon)

For the last two years, that relationship has been very clear in the Zocalo, Mexico City's huge central plaza. During that time, fired members of Mexico's independent left-wing electrical workers union, the SME, have lived in a succession of plantons. They've often been elaborate, with kitchens, meeting rooms and communications centers, in addition to the tents where people slept and ate.

At various time, the SME encampment was one of several in the huge square. A year ago, the workers were joined by indigenous Triqui and Mixtec women from Oaxaca, who protested the violence used by their state's previous governor against teachers' strikes and rural organizations. The social movement in Oaxaca, which the women represented in Mexico City, grew strong enough to finally knock the old ruling party, the PRI, from the governorship it had held for almost 80 years.

In the Zocalo plantons, people from different organizations mix it up. Last September's Day of the Indignant brought together people from very diverse movements. Some see electoral politics as a vehicle for change, but many indigenous activists and SME members don't. Even among those who do, there are deep disagreements over how to participate in the electoral process.

But the people in the Zocalo have two things in common. Different plantons may not see every political question eye to eye, but each represents a social movement in the world outside the plaza. And the planton itself has value primarily because it forces public attention to focus on the crisis that has led each group to set up its encampment.

The SME workers used their plantons to dramatize repression by the federal government. When Mexican President Felipe Calderon dissolved the state-run power company for central Mexico and fired its 44,000 employees, he sought to destroy their union and move toward the privatization of the electrical system - to benefit Mexican and foreign 1 percenters. A year ago, several SME members conducted a hunger strike at the planton that generated front-page headlines for weeks, and lasted so long that doctors warned participants they were risking death. At the height of the protest, the union battled police in front of the power stations, as it tried to exercise its legal right to strike and picket.

The planton and the movement outside it were intimately connected. The hunger strikers were few, but spoke for a union of tens of thousands of workers. In the end, the SME negotiated the removal of its last planton in return for government acknowledgement of its right to exist. It organized other unions to resist the government's assault on labor rights, and mobilized electricity consumers to protest rising bills and cuts in service. The planton helped to focus attention on these demands, and to pull the union's allies into action.

Clearly, someone in Seattle knows this tradition of plantons in the Zocalo, perhaps even as a participant. When the painter made the Seattle banner, she or he also included, right next to the word "planton," the anarchists' "A" with the circle around it. This symbol was a reminder of another aspect of cross-border fertilization. Many anarchists or anarcho-syndicalists - members of the Industrial Workers of the World - fought in the Mexican Revolution. Because of that revolutionary upheaval, even today, almost a century later, ordinary Mexicans expect certain rights, including the right to set up a tent in the Zocalo. US workers crossed the border to fight alongside Mexicans in that insurrection long ago, for a government that would acknowledge that right. The planton, therefore, is a common heritage, with a history that makes it as legitimate on Wall Street as it is in Mexico City.

Not long after the OWS camp was set up in Zuccotti Park, the planton/occupy movement crossed the US/Mexico border. In Tijuana, home to a million people, mostly displaced migrants from Mexico's south, activists came together and set up an occupation on the grassy median of the Paseo de los Heroes. Their tents were pitched in the middle of the Zona del Rio, where the city's 1 percent meet in fancy hotels and work in government offices. Then, on October 18, police reacted even earlier than they did in most US cities, arresting two dozen activists at the urging of local businessmen. Occupy Tijuana condemned the detentions, declaring, "We are not assassins, delinquents, tramps or crooks."
In the US, we have our own history of defending public space for protest, and it isn't necessary to reach back a 100 years to find it. In just the last few decades, immigrant workers have popularized the use of the planton here, helping unions recover the militant tactics of their own past. In 1992, immigrants trying to join the United Electrical Workers mounted the first strike among production workers in Silicon Valley, and set up a planton and conducted a hunger strike to pressure their employer. A year later, other Latino immigrants in San Francisco erected their tents on the sidewalk in front of Sprint's headquarters, after their workplace was closed days before they were scheduled to vote in a union election.

A decade ago, anti-globalization activists and unions shut down the meeting of the World Trade Organization in Seattle. Young protesters chained their arms together inside metal pipes, and lay down in the intersections of downtown Seattle. Tens of thousands took over the streets. Other anti-globalization protests followed, in which activists battled for their right to use public space to challenge the international policies of the 1 percent.

Working-class support for the battle in Seattle had its roots in the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Workers could see the cost of free trade in the loss of their own jobs, as production moved south. Over the last two decades, many have also discovered that those same agreements and policies didn't make Mexicans better off, but led to their impoverishment as well.

NAFTA and free-market policies forced on developing countries produced opportunities for banks and corporations to reap profits. They drove down wages, forced farmers off their land and destroyed the unions and livelihood of millions of people. This system was designed on Wall Street, by the same bankers Occupiers hold responsible for the current crisis of foreclosures and unemployment in the US. The current economic crisis doesn't stop at the border. In fact, in Mexico, Central America, the Philippines, and elsewhere, it's been a fact of life for a long time. This is the source of forced migration - what Garcia condemned at Occupy ICE.

The 99 percent live in all those countries where free-trade agreements and structural adjustment policies are imposed. They also live in the communities of people who have come here as a result. Who, then, are more natural allies for Occupy protesters than people who've been on the receiving end of these policies for years?

In New York, this connection wasn't lost on Occupy Wall Street. In October, a group called Occupy Wall Street - Español was formed at the first Asemblea en Español. They, in turn, translated the first issue of the Occupied Wall Street Journal. Participants formed a subgroup, Occupy Wall Street Latinoamericano to spread the movement to Spanish-speaking communities, recognizing that the city is home to so many Mexicans from the state of Puebla that its nickname is PueblaYork, as well as much older established communities of Puerto Ricans, Colombians, Ecuadorians, and other Spanish-speaking people. The group will soon publish the first issue of its own newspaper, with articles talking about immigration, globalization, and the specific attacks by the 1 percent on Latinos.

Claudia Villegas, a women's rights activist working with the group Occupy Wall Street Latinoamericano, helped organize a demonstration of immigrant women four days after police raided the Zuccotti Park encampment. "We decided to change our original plan for a march because we were afraid they would stop it," she says. "Nevertheless, 23 organizations participated including women's rights groups and above all, those working with immigrant women."

In San Francisco, a joint march of immigrant activists and Occupy participants helped to defend that city's encampment. In the general assembly meeting preceding it, participants talked about the city's offer to move the Occupiers into an abandoned building in the Latino Mission District several miles away. Few wanted to give up the camp on Justin Herman Plaza, and most felt the city was just trying to move them out of sight. But many people also felt that having an Occupy camp in the barrio was a good idea.

"We're still really working in parallel," Villegas says. She draws attention to the potential power of the immigrant rights movement, and what it could mean to OWS. "We have to include the movement that began in 2006, when there were hundreds of thousands of people in the streets across this country. People were reacting to the injustice of the system then too." They're separate movements, though, she warns, and "our agenda has to come from immigrants themselves. We need to integrate, and at the same time the Occupy movement has to learn to accept us. But we're all on the same path."

Bringing the immigrant and Occupy movements together means more than setting up an encampment. The San Diego demonstration didn't set up an overnight camp, but it brought thousands of workers and supporters down to the ICE detention center to protest the firings of immigrant janitors.

The Occupy ICE protest was intended to draw public attention to the federal government's immigration enforcement strategy that requires employers to fire undocumented workers. In Southern California, the multinational corporations that clean office buildings are terminating 2,000 union members. Earlier waves of firings have targeted unionized building cleaners in Minneapolis, Seattle and San Francisco; sewing machine operators in Los Angeles; food service workers on university campuses; and thousands of others.

Garcia says ICE and the employers are in collusion. After firing union janitors with high seniority and benefits, using immigration status as a pretext, the companies can then hire new workers at lower wages with fewer benefits.

"To hide their greed the commercial real estate industry has used the tools of government to confuse and divide the 99 percent," he charges. "They first said we were unskilled workers who should be happy to be working. They then weakened worker protections to make organizing virtually impossible. Over the last decade the industry has used immigration as a wedge to intimidate and, if need be, replace our workers. ICE is doing what the 1 percent corporate real estate industry wants: using immigration laws to recycle well paid janitors in the hopes of taking back gains in pay and benefits our union has won." (Ironically the week United Service Workers West organized Occupy ICE its parent union, SEIU, endorsed the re-election of President Obama, who is responsible for the ICE policy of firing workers.)
For Occupy, defending workers under attack is a way to survive, grow roots and develop a strong base. That's not always the direction activists take, however. Near Oakland, over 200 immigrant workers at the largest foundry on the West Coast, Pacific Steel Casting in Berkeley, are being fired in another "silent raid" like that hitting the janitors. Through the summer and fall, foundry workers went to city councils, unions, churches and community organizations, seeking help to pressure ICE not to force them from their jobs. Their campaign held "the migra" off for months, but the firings began nevertheless in November. Now, these immigrant families are trying to survive. Occupy Oakland has yet to respond, however.

Instead, some of its activists are trying to shut down work in Oakland's port a second time, as well as others along the West Coast. An earlier march to close the port after the first eviction of Occupy Oakland drew thousands of people. The proposal for a second coast-wide shutdown, however, is opposed by the longshore union. The International Longshore and Warehouse Union's (ILWU) opposition does not come from conservatism. The union, whose members make a living from international shipping and trade, has been one of the most vocal critics of US free-trade agreements. ILWU members have taken action many times to defend the SME and unions in Mexico, as well as other countries. Its locals and members, however, had no role in the decision to try to close the ports, nor did other port workers.

Real solidarity is a two-way street, based on mutual respect. In most cities, including Oakland and San Francisco, labor has welcomed Occupy and sought to defend the encampments. In New York, Occupy activists have been given resources in many union halls, and unions have mobilized against police raids at Zuccotti Park. An alliance of unions, immigrants and Occupiers has great potential strength, not just in numbers, but also in the exchange of ideas and tactics. Unions in particular might benefit from wider use of the planton or Occupy encampment. Occupy ICE challenges the Occupy movement to take up the firings of immigrant workers, but it's also a challenge to unions themselves, many of whom have watched in silence as longtime members were forced from their jobs.

The vision of Occupy - the 99 percent vs. the 1 percent - has enormous support among immigrants and unions. In place of the tired rhetoric of politicians, shedding crocodile tears for the "middle class" while demonizing the poor, Occupy gives workers a vision of their commonality in the 99 percent. This powerful message blows away illusions that higher-paid workers have more in common with stockbrokers than with immigrants laboring at minimum wage, or unemployed young people on the streets of African-American ghettos or Latino barrios.

The Coalition for the Political Rights of Mexicans Abroad shares the same vision of class-based commonality. "We are outraged," it says, "that US citizens, when they demand justice and expose the inequalities that exist in their society, are treated like criminals. With the same outrage, we condemn the criminalization of migrant Mexicans by the US government, the raids by immigration authorities [and] the militarization of the border ... No human being should be treated as a criminal because they struggle to find better conditions in which to live."

Read more »