Refugees will break the “Lockdown Mentality”
Jun 7th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
In the United States, African Americans were slaves to White Americans who held them in chains and subjugated their minds. On 1 January 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation declaring freedom for slaves in the states that violated their human rights.
Prior to the Proclamation, 4 million African Americans had been owned as property and brainwashed into accepting the authority and superiority of their masters. They had been generally submissive to arbitrary and unfair rules devised by people who exploited their existence by dominating their minds.
In Hong Kong, many Refugees are slaves to a repressive ideology that controls them by brainwashing into submission. This mental slavery results from propaganda that disempowers refugees by deemphasizing their rights and homogenizing their status as illegal economic migrants.
Vision First was informed by refugees that new tactics are consciously and unintentionally deployed every day to compel them to perform as either abusive characters or a burden that should be grateful to society for being allowed to stay and receive help.
A “Lockdown Mentality” is the latest of complaints raised by refugees, who say they are taught to be grateful to Hong Kong for the safe place they are offered, despite the humiliating conditions in which this supposed ‘safety’ is provided.
This mentality makes no reference to the government’s duties and obligations towards refugees. Instead it enslaves refugees by instilling fear such as warning that it could be worse, cautioning that the police could arrest and Immigration deport them, threatening cuts to essential services and the arrest of undeserving protesters.
Unaware of their fundamental rights, some refugees lose the ability to think critically and accept as unavoidable conditions that are orchestrated by those people who face-to-face profess to have their best interest at heart, but in fact, let’s believe unintentionally, perpetuate policies aimed at controlling refugees into poverty.
The lockdown mentality teaches refugees that they should not fight for their rights, because they are not citizens; that they should not protest or else they might be deported; that they should not ask for adequate welfare, as conditions are worse in their countries; that they should not demand more rent assistance, because it was recently raised to 1500$ (despite rooms in subdivided flats costing much
Some refugees voluntarily submit to a lockdown mentality perpetrated by the government and its supporters to pursue objectives incompatible with human rights and refugee rights. This mental slavery achieves the surreptitious social control of an undesirable group the authorities want to keep ignorant of their rights and freedoms.
Referring to locked-down refugees, a Refugee Union member commented, “Their brain is gone. They cannot think with their own mind and they believe what they are told. Their eyes are closed and they cannot see what is happening around them. They think NGOs are helping by buying them lunch. Refugees don’t need more food, they want their rights!”
An emancipated refugee remarked, “They treat us like nothing. They treat us like insects. But I don’t agree. We are warned that we don’t have rights, that there will be trouble, but we know they are lying.”
There is much to learn from listening to refugees.
Collusion between the authorities and DAB
Jun 5th, 2014 | Media | Comment
On the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre, the South China Morning Post reported disturbing news regarding the administration’s handling of refugee matters. The article says that ahead of the Security Panel meeting at LegCo on June 3rd, the Security Bureau appears to have fed questions unfavourable to refugees to the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) party.
In the article, Lawmaker “Long Hair” Long kwok-hung is said to have retrieved a document left behind by a DAB politician that revealed how the Security Bureau had submitted to them the follow up questions to be asked during the question and answer session, although a DAB representative explains these questions had been submitted to the government official to prepare them for the Q&A.
Whoever is in the right, questions were indicated to be such as:
“I think the system is highly fair – but only to the claimants. It is highly unfair to taxpayers.”
“A claimant should apply for assistance once they arrive in Hong Kong. But information showed they applied after an average of 14 months … why [did] they not do it as soon as they arrived?”
These are questions that in other occasions have appeared in the public domain and have often been taken as an indication that the asylum system is subject to abuse.
The point here is that Long Hair accused the DAB of colluding with the government to the detriment of refugees. He was reported to have said, “It is very inappropriate for the government to make up opinions.”
This embarrassing incident, we believe, is another vivid example of how the culture of rejection is created, strengthened and perpetuated in Hong Kong. From this news we cannot but think that a subtle agenda that deprives the refugee community of a fair opportunity to seek in Hong Kong realistic protection is being pushed against the promise of security.
Further, this incident raises other questions of grave public concern. It is to note that DAB chairman is a member of the Board of Directors of the International Social Service in Hong Kong (ISS-HK), a non-profit organization that strives to protect refugees, although in a fashion that arguably plays into the hands of politics fomenting anti-refugee sentiment
If we were to take this news as a plausible indication that the DAB is sympathetic towards the government current handling of refugees, and given that Mr. Tam Yiu-chung serves as this party’s chairman, while sitting on the Board of the ISS-HK, what does he contribute to ISS-HK?
At the very least it seems odd that the great majority of the slums Vision First and international news have reported about in the past year were found in the geographical constituency of New Territories West. Mr. Tam Yiu Chung is the LegCo representative for this constituency. Let’s hope this is only an unfortunate coincidence.
Refugee Union: The struggle continues
Jun 4th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
The Refugee Union song “Stand up and unite”
Jun 2nd, 2014 | VF updates, programs, events | Comment
An Octopus-like food assistance scheme
May 31st, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Vision First proposes the following to partly address some of the most hideous problems refugees have identified in the system that supports their livelihood. We propose the following in the hope of sparking discussion in view of the imminent review of the contract with which the government outsourced its responsibilities in the care of refugees.
If we are to objectively judge the problems of the current system, we should acknowledge the fact that 80% of refugees sell substandard food rations for cash and a large percentage sell it back to the shops in a fraudulent practice reminiscent of what is generally called “The Revolving Door”.
The Revolving Door allows shop-owners to repeatedly resell the same food rations to refugees who take 40% of the cash value without physically collecting any groceries. This illicit arrangement maximizes shops’ profit by reducing purchasing cost, inventory, manpower and overhead expenses to the detriment of Hong Kong Government and tax-payers.
When the shops are not giving cash in-lieu of rations, unscrupulous middlemen, often asylum seekers themselves, purchase the rations to sell them back to the ISS-HK shops under cover of night, or to other food businesses or resident families.
Vision First is of the opinion that it is vitally important to expose such pervasive practices, not so much as to encourage law enforcement actions, and certainly not to increase stereotyping about cunning refugees selling their food as a demonstration that they don’t need further assistance.
We believe this practice must be exposed especially to counter widespread public and official misconceptions that refugees should not be trusted with cash or coupons to purchase their food. This is because they are erroneously believed to be, or depicted as already abusing the system.
In our opinion, however, it is the refugees themselves who are being cheated.
The point is that whether Hong Kong Government agrees or not to provide cash-for-food, 80% of 5700 refugees are cashing in food rations monthly. But in so doing they enrich the grocery shops arranging the scheme and other parties exploiting an utterly failed system.
By monetizing just 40% of a 1200$ food allowance, refugees only actually receive 480$. The government should be concerned about 49,248,000$ of tax-dollars vanishing yearly (i.e. 720$ x 5700 refugees x 12 months). There is little logic in continuing a fraudulent system that causes such an unacceptable loss.
The refugees are the first to lament this monumental failure in which many dishonest people are dipping their hands. And Vision First join them by urging the government to stop the embarrassment of the current misconceived system.
Vision First urges the government to give due consideration to a coupon system, or an Octopus-like card that is recharged with the food allowance when refugees report monthly for recognizance at the Immigration Department.
In addition, we propose that Social Welfare Department officers be seconded to the Immigration Department, where the Octopus-like cards would be topped up. At this “one stop” office for refugees, SWD case workers would expand their role to enquire about refugees’ wellbeing and ensure that cases of destitution and homelessness are avoided.
A scheme jointly operated by the SWD and Immigration would eradicate fraud while return purchasing power to refugees, who would appreciate the respect and responsibility with which they are treated.
This, of course, in the event that a welfare system predicated on deterrent purposes is not aimed to foster refugees’ subjugation to a faulty mechanism.
Illegal activity at the ISS-HK appointed Safwan Provision Store
May 30th, 2014 | Advocacy, Food, VF Report, Welfare | Comment
Reliably sources close to the ISS-HK food team, informed Vision First that in late 2013 Hong Kong Customs mounted a special operation to combat the cross-boundary smuggling of illicit cigarettes and distribution of cigarettes in the Yuen Long area.
Customs agents raided Safwan Provision Store, one of the ISS-HK appointed shops in Yuen Long, where it is reported that they seized 500,000 cigarettes smuggled into the city without payment of stamp duty.
Vision First was also told that a shop partners was convicted for the offense and jailed for 2.5 months, as well as fined 1.8 million dollars. It is rumored that only one of the two partners took the fall for the illegal merchandise stacked in the storage, while the other continued to run the business.
The refugee community reports that illicit cigarettes are currently available at the same location, and from there allegedly distributed to numerous ethnic grocery shops across the territory.
Vision First was further informed that ISS-HK, claiming that contraband cigarettes are not related to the food business, did not terminate Safwan’s contract for the distribution of food rations to approximately one thousands refugees. We hope this decision was well pondered and wisely made.
However, Vision First has been informed by the refugee community, that the same shop is distributing milk that many refugees believe to be smuggled. It is indeed plausible that a trading company that smuggles one product might also be smuggling others.
Thoughtful consideration should also be given to the 1.8 million dollar fine, a loss that owners would seek to recover most rapidly, perhaps even cutting corners in food related services.
Refugees informed Vision First that Safwan is distributing smuggled milk to ISS-HK clients.
SAFA Milk is produced by Gulf & Safa Dairies Company in Dubai, UAE. Informed sources told Vision First that this brand of milk is currently being provided to refugees, a brand of milk that we have researched is not licensed for consumption in the territory.
Information on the package obtained by Vision First is problematic: the 3.0g fat content is lower than the minimum 3.5g required by law; the address of the Hong Kong distributor is missing; the nutritional information does not comply with the Hong Kong “chat ga yat” or “seven plus one”.
Our research confirms that reconstitute SAFA milk from dairy cows in the desert country of the United Arab Emirates is not licensed for importation, distribution or consumption in Hong Kong. This situation raises a red flag not only about Safwan’s business methods, but also about the SWD and ISS-HK welfare practices.
Further and in addition, the refugee community is concerned that ISS-HK selected SAFA milk for the food rations distributed by all three ISS-HK branches to refugees requiring emergency provisions. Could this relate to the fact that it might be the cheapest milk as it bypasses regular import channels?
It is assumed that management of the ISS-HK food team is fully aware of irregular labels on SAFA milk packaging that would manifestly strike any professionally trained eye at first glance.
In this regard, we can only hope that no offence has been committed by ISS-HK and the refugee community is not again object of unscrupulous exploitation. However, the evidence seems to indicate otherwise.
Vision First urges relevant government departments, including Hong Kong Customs, to urgently investigate these allegations and ensure that the health and safety of refugees is not compromised by prohibited practices.
Complaints mount against Safwan Provision Stores
May 30th, 2014 | Advocacy, Food, VF Report, Welfare | Comment
Vision First received numerous complaints against Safwan Provision Store, appointed by ISS-HK to provide food rations, paid by the government purse, to approximately 1000 refugees who live in the Yuen Long area.
It is unclear why more complaints are raised against Safwan than the other six ISS-HK stores. Perhaps this relates to the Pakistani proprietors refusing to address complaints and instead exasperating refugees with taunts like, “Go and complain to the Refugee Union, see if I care!”
Provided with two rotten apples for a ten day period, a refugee lady protested, “You see, it is black. How do I eat this?” The shopkeeper taunted her, “OK, this apple, you give it to the Refugee Union and complain! What will the Refugee Union do to me?”
The rations supplied are of such substandard quality that reportedly half of the refugees take cash instead. The transaction is arranged by first signing collection notices at the designated shop at Chun Chu House, and later getting cash at another Safwan store in the Hope Yick Commercial Center, also in Yuen Long.
This arrangement defrauds Hong Kong Government by discounting 10-day food rations, originally valued at 400$, to approximately 160$ depending on items selected. This results in 1200$ monthly food rations being worth 480$ in the hands of refugees, with a 720$ mysterious loss to tax-payers.
Only a voucher system guarantees the eradication of fraud in the food distribution system.
Sources familiar with ISS-HK food distribution informed Vision First that Safwan doesn’t provide refugees with traditional basmati rice (13$/Kg), but instead mixes Pakistani ‘PK365’ rice (9$/Kg) with a cheap Vietnamese variety (3$/Kg). This is done when repackaging rice into 5Kg bags for ISS-HK clients.
A refugee mother complained, “This is old rice. It smells like cooking gas [methane]. After cooking it smells very bad and taste bad. The colour is very white, as it is bleached again. The package says Basmati Rice, but it is regular rice. We know the difference because we eat rice since we are babies.”
The quality of the bread is equally dreadful and packages are often distributed 2 days before expiry dates for a 10 to 12 day period. Perhaps refugees are expected to gorge themselves and then starve until the next collection. On 15 May 2014, Safwan gave a refuge mother a bag of bread that had been chewed through by a rat.
The majority of refugees cannot read English and are unable to verify what items are delivered by the shop. This explains complaints whereby refugees might collect “Fish” instead of “Halal Chicken”, because collection notices are typed in English and claimants are too shy to ask for help.
The best many refugees can do is count the items on the collection notices and ensure they correspond numerically to the items collected. Any discrepancy in foodstuff is ascribed to case workers having mixed up the order and unscrupulous shopkeepers can swap items with impunity.
With regard to the unlicensed Safa Milk, refugees noticed that other legitimate brands are kept on the shelves in view of CCTV cameras, while cartons of Safa milk are placed into the grocery bags at the time of collection. The construction of the shelving unit is such that video cameras, viewed by ISS-HK through web connections, are unable to record the entire transaction.
It is hard to understand why ISS-HK is unwilling or unable to monitor dodgy practice at Safwan.
ISS-HK warns homeless mother not to join the Refugee Union
May 28th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Virginia was a domestic worker in Hong Kong for a decade before she moved to Pakistan with her husband and three children in 2005. She converted to Islam and hoped for a happy life in her husband country, but trouble started and eight years later she divorced and fled.
In September 2013, Virginia and the children returned to Hong Kong and for seven months renewed visas by travelling to China and Macao. In April 2014, she finally ran out of options and surrendered to the Immigration Department. She sought asylum because in the Philippines she would be persecuted for apostasy.
Homeless and indigent, the family roamed the streets of Wanchai and Central for one grim month, until they approached the Refugee Union protest camp at IFC mall for assistance. Welcoming arms were immediately extended to the exhausted mother and three children aged 13, 12 and 9, who experience the darker side of Asia World’s City.
At 17:52 on Saturday 24 May 2014, Vision First alerted the SWD to the unbearable condition the family endured for a month in the streets. They had spent many nights in Southorn Playground in Wanchai, where they chained their few belongings to a railing. Sometimes they slept at Ruttonjee Hospital, but the kids were disturbed by the sights that followed the ambulances. A third option was Star Ferry.
Their plight reveals an alarming welfare lacuna. The SWD is mandated to assist protection claimants whose claims have been accepted by Immigration. In this case, although in April Immigration issued the family with Immigration recognizance forms, their claim hasn’t been formally acknowledge. The SWD informed Virginia, “We need an acknowledgement letter from Immigration that they accept your claim. Until we receive it, we cannot help you.”
On 26 May 2014, an Immigration officer notified Virginia to, “Wait for a call, because your case has been passed to a supervisor and an answer would be given as soon as possible.” Based on precedents, it could take 2 to 8 weeks for registration, during which time the family remain homeless.
Immigration officers have no concern for prospective claimants’ living conditions, even relating to teenage female children, who could conceivably be abducted when sleeping in the street.
The Social Welfare Department should post a welfare officer at the Immigration Department Skyline Tower (surrender office), to ensure that most vulnerable claimants are not left destitute in the street.
On 27 May 2014, the SWD referred the case to ISS-HK and a case worker phoned Virginia and asked, “What is your claim? You have to prove that you should get assistance from the government. After you have proven this then ISS can help you.”
Vision first queries what mandate ISS-HK has to assess asylum claims? And why does ISS-HK question the referral of a needy family by the SWD? Who would challenge the urgency of this case anyway?
The caller continued, “We will put your case on top priority, so you just wait for a call from ISS and we will give you help for your case.” Finally a premeditated warning was issued, “We are both Philippina and I just want to give you an advice that you don’t join any union that is doing rally against ISS.”
This disturbing remark reveals ISS fear of and weakness before the Refugee Union. It is hardly astute to intimidate a homeless mother, left destitute in the street by a failed welfare system, who found assistance and protection among fellow refugees. Needless to say, actions speak louder than words.
Virginia unsurprisingly took offense at the caution and remarked, “I was in need and nobody give me help. Only this union give me help. Only they gave me what my children and I needed.”
The caller warned, “Now that ISS is going to help you, then you stop joining the union!”
Virginia asked, “May I know who is calling?”
The caller replied, “I am calling from ISS” and the line went dead.
