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.
An apparent act of revenge by case worker Ms. Helen Lee
May 25th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
The Refuge Union protest against ISS-HK was triggered by widespread dissatisfaction with food provisions, the only sustenance for refugees who are not allowed to work. Refugees continue to allege that the ISS-HK shops fail to deliver the entire food allowance scheduled by the government.
On 24 January 2014, the Social Welfare Department enhanced the Provision of Assistance for Asylum Seekers and Torture Claimants. With regard to food, SWD instructed ISS-HK, “To increase the average budget for food … to $1,200 per month … to instruct case workers to increase claimants’ food consumption with the additional budget …”
These instructions failed to reach case worker Ms. Helen Lee, who appears determined to starve into submission one of her clients. After being dragged into court for failing to lodge a homeless pregnant mother, Miss. Helen Lee is on a path of vengeance against Madam Lama and her family.
Refugees depend entirely on the services arranged by their case workers and Madam Lama has no recourse against an oppressor who determines her family’s assistance. It matters not what refugees selects on food sheets, because these are frequently reduced and replaced at the arbitrary whim of case workers.
Food assistance is arranged three times a month and refugees have to ration provisions until the next collection date, often more than ten days later. Every collection should be worth about $400, although refugees complain about receiving less than $700 for the entire month, as verified in this SCMP report.
Madam Lama is in a distressingly grim position. Ms. Helen Lee hasn’t taken a liking for her family and disregards the additional nutritional needs of the pregnancy. The food allocated is vastly insufficient and might be related to revenge for the embarrassing court incident.
For a 10 day period, Miss. Helen Lee approved this for Madam Lama:
2 catty cabbage
2 catty onion
2 catty tomatoes
1 chicken
100gr spices
475gr yogurt
6 small mango juice boxes
5Kg basmati rice
1lt oil
For a 10 day period, Miss. Helen Lee approved this for Lama’s husband:
2 catty cauliflower
2 catty choi sum
2 catty onion
2 catty tomatoes
475gr yogurt
6 small mango juice boxes
5Kg basmati rice
For a 10 day period, Miss. Helen Lee approved this for their son:
NOTHING!!!
Vision First is alarmed by the abusive treatment of a pregnant mother and family by a vindictive case worker who should be removed from this account for obvious reasons. At ISS-HK there is such a lack of oversight and due diligence that permits case workers to cause actual bodily harm to refugees.
Meanwhile, the Social Welfare Department failed to take action on repeated requests from Madam Lee and Vision First to change her case worker for reasons of conflict of interest. Thus Miss. Helen Lee remains in a position to take revenge against her nemesis to the detriment of the unborn baby.
Vision First urges the Social Welfare Department to investigate this complaint and take action.
How ISS-HK cheats the Social Welfare Department
May 23rd, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Iqbal was a human rights activists in Pakistan before he fled for his life in May 2007. His torture claim is still pending seven years later as he languishes in the welfare hell that Hong Kong Government offers asylum seekers. Based on the evidence he brought with him, his case appears to be meritorious.
For seven years Iqbal suffered abuse and humiliation at the hands of his case workers at ISS-HK. The litany of complaints is as long as it is detailed, a shameful confirmation of how a failed welfare system oppresses all those unfortunate enough to be trapped in such a cruel and inhumane system.
The rent crunch is hard for all Hong Kong residents, but brutal on indigent refugees without the right to work. A resourceful person like Iqbal, with the advantage of not having a family, might raise a few hundred dollars here and there, but still struggles to make ends meet month after month.
In September 2013, a rent increase forced Iqbal to move out of a tiny room (without kitchen or toilet) at 107 Tai Nam Street. He cooked on a bench outside the front door and showered in a shared bathroom, but felt secure in this legal structure, where ISS paid 1200$ a month in rent assistance.
Unable to secure another room for 1200$, Iqbal had to rent the next best thing: an illegal structure on the rooftop of 137 Un Chau Street in Sham Shui Po. It should be noted that in 2010 ISS-HK issued guidelines to case workers not to confirm illegal structures in Kowloon, though this rule was clearly not implemented in the New Territories.
Vision First visited the illegal structure Iqbal calls home where conditions are as dangerous and unhygienic as in the slums where ISS-HK relegates refugees with no concern for their safety or the SWD tender specifications, “The Contractor shall ensure that Service Users … are provided with accommodation (including electricity, water, gas supply and other basic utilities)”
In September 2013 Iqbal signed a tenancy agreement with the landlord and submitted the documents to case worker Rhoda Despabiladeras for approval. From that moment Miss. Despabiladeras was fully aware that her client had moved out of the room on Tai Nam Street and into an illegal structure on Un Chau Street.
For reasons that must be investigated, Miss. Despabiladeras failed to update the ISS-HK records with the change of address. The old address in a LEGAL structure was retained on the Agreement on Provision of Assistance from October 2013 until today. The new address in an ILLEGAL structure was conveniently concealed from the contract that ISS-HK submits to the SWD for documentary inspections. Why?
On 17 April 2014 Iqbal raised his concerns with Miss. Despabiladeras who refused to change the address in the agreement. At this point, Iqbal remarked that he would make the change himself on his own copy as evidently ISS-HK was uninterested to reflect the truth in the official government documents.
Vision First is deeply concerned about such questionable practices that might amount to fraudulent behaviour on the part of case workers who are fully aware of agreements bearing false information. It is suspected that ISS-HK might engages in such a manner to cover-up an undesirable reality from SWD inspection.
God now give me the Refugee Union
May 23rd, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Following the publication of his story on the Vision First website, Iqbal approached ISS-HK to discuss his housing problem with case worker Ms. Rhoda Despabiladeras. As she was absent, Ms. Sulma Samsula, the manager of the Prince Edward office, tried to solve the embarrassing problem.
Having explained his predicament, Iqbal asked Sulma, “Who gives me money to pay rent and to buy clothes and shoes? I am angry after seven years waiting. What do you want me to do? Where do you want me to live? Do you want me to walk without clothes … with a towel around my waste?
Iqbal explained, “Hong Kong government doesn’t allow me to work. If I do work, I go prison one or two years. ISS give little food … ISS give little rent … this is policy to make me go to prison … must be I do work to survive … then police arrest me …”
Sulma replied, “This is not my problem. You move to a better place to live.”
Iqbal clarified, “If there is room for 1500$, you find for me. I am your client. This is your job. Two times I found a cheap room, but ISS didn’t confirm and property agent gave to another people. Now cheapest room in Shamshuipo is 3000$ on ninth floor [of a walk-up building]. Some are 3500$ on lower floors. I have no money. What I do? How I can pay?”
Sulma was indifferent to reason, “This is your problem. You find room and ISS pay deposit.” Then, upset at having her photo taken, Sulma ordered, “You close your mobile phone! You cannot take photos here!”
Iqbal retorted, “Why I close my mobile? You use CCTV to record everything. Why me not allowed? This is my rule. Every time I follow your rules, but your rules [are] not good for me!”
Sulma rose in anger, grabbing the files, and called the police to remove an uncooperative refugee who refused to obey. Iqbal noted that previously when he had called the police, they refused to respond upon hearing it was at an ISS-HK office, again. However, when ISS-HK called, they came running!
Iqbal complained to the policemen, “If I do work, maybe you arrest me. This is the ISS fault. ISS give me trouble. ISS don’t give me money, don’t give me enough food, rent or clothes. If you arrest me the charge must be for ISS, not for me. I work because ISS don’t help me enough!”
The undesirable mismatch in negotiating powers between ISS-HK and refugees must be addressed as a matter of fairness. Shouldn’t Hong Kong offer a level playing field for all human beings who live here?
Shouldn’t the most vulnerable people also be treated with respect, and not like outcasts?
The solution might rest with the Refugee Union. Hong Kong Government should note that the strengthening of the Union relates directly to the incompetence of and abuse by ISS-HK case workers.
Taking stock of another lousy experienced, Iqbal expressed his hope for the future at the protest camp in Central, “For a long time I am thinking who can help me? God now give me the Refugee Union!”
Refugee Union marks 100 days of protest against ISS-HK
May 22nd, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
A year after the slums were exposed ISS-HK declines to comment
May 19th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
On 20 June 2013, ISS-HK justified the slums to TVB claiming it was very difficult to get exact addresses in rural New Territories. Miss. Adrielle Panares explained, “Most of it is just a lot number, it doesn’t have a building address or anything. So for cases like this … our case workers will say, ‘Can I meet you at the bus stop? And then let’s go together’”.
Miss. Panares added that ISS-HK goes on a trust basis with local landlords that the units rented to their clients are legitimate. Panares also said that ISS-HK has case workers that follow each client and insists no one has raised any concerns about poor conditions with them.
In other confidential documents, Miss Panares defended the slums, “The landlords in the New Territories have document proof to show approval by the Lands Department for the structures in their properties … Our staff are in contact with the landlords during the negotiation for the rent and mode of payment.”
In May 2014, almost a year later, ISS-HK seem to have lost their tongue and decline press interviews to shed light on the refugee slums and food manipulation that have raised grave public concerns.
At a time when the Chinese media and society may be waking up to the disturbing conduct of this government contractor, ISS-HK is attempting to deflect attention by hiding behind lawyers and raising unacceptable excuses.
Nobody at ISS-HK said that they are looking into these matters because they are concerned about services to asylum seekers and refugees. Not one person said that they are investigating complaints and conducting due diligence to ascertain the veracity of such complaints.
Together with the Social Welfare Department, ISS-HK and ISS Geneva are holding a line that there is no need to take action unless criminal charges are brought. Mr. Stephen Yao, executive director of ISS-HK, cited his lawyers’ advice that it was not the right time to respond.
Instead of taking responsibility for ISS-HK’s disastrous failure to meet refugees’ basic needs, Mr. Yao attacked the integrity of Vision First which has been advocating for the rights and interest of refugees founded on hundreds, if not thousands, of complaints.
Vision First has not made any defamatory statements and ISS-HK’s lawsuit for defamation is wholly without merit. Vision First’s lawyers are in the process of preparing all underlying evidence which will be put before the court in due course and which we will be more than happy to share with the public at that time.
Mr. Yao has made it clear that he, his board of directors and case workers are looking forward to the entire world having the opportunity to look at the evidence of ISS-HK’s corrupt practices.
A refugee clashes with the absurd at ISS-HK
May 16th, 2014 | Advocacy, Food, Housing, Refugee Community | Comment
In September 2013, Bassirou fled deadly trouble in Niger to seek sanctuary in Hong. His ISS-HK file was opened at the Mongkok office in October, when his struggle with case worker Lok Lam commenced.
For eight months he complained to his case worker that his room was unfit for living. Bassirou is 180cm tall while the space for his mattress is 160cm long, which forces him to fold his legs to sleep. The room has no window and ventilation is a problem as he suffers from asthma.
During recent thunderstorms, the ceiling of this top floor room was flowing with rain. The cracks in the roof are so significant that one afternoon all his belongings were soaked in water. Recently three of the other five ISS clients left these crumbling premises.
The six refugees shared a subdivided flat with one toilet bowl, no bathroom or kitchen. However, Bassirou sells his food rations, not for lack of a kitchen, but because Lok Lam arbitrarily refused to provide cooking gas since October 2013. In eight months his never received toiletries either.
Bassirou sells his food for bus money. He gets 300$ for a 1200$ monthly allocation. Who keeps 900$?
When asked how he eats, Bassirou explains, “I am a man. I am strong. I put my life in God’s hands. My food is to write. My eating is my memory for everything wrong that ISS did to me. One day they will pay for everything.”
On 14 May 2013, Bassirou blasted his case worker, “You have salary. You have money for your room. You have money to eat. Everything you have, so why you don’t want to help me? Why you don’t pay for my room? Why you don’t give me gas? Why you change my food? Why you give me rubbish food?”
Lok Lam stumbled, “ISS doesn’t have money to deliver food to all people. Everyone who takes the food sells it to the Pakistani who stand outside the shops.” [N.B. Refugee are forced to sell substandard, unwanted food to buy what they really require.]
Lok Lam repeatedly instructed Bassirou to buy cooking gas and present a receipt for refund. But Bassirou was furious, “Are you crazy? How do I pay for gas, if I don’t work? I told you that I have no money to buy anything! Where I get the money?”
When Lok Lam explained, “ISS doesn’t have money to pay you gas,” Bassirou interrupted, “You mean that ISS doesn’t have little money to buy gas, but has big money to pay lawyers to take Vision First to court? So … no money for refugees, but only money for lawyers?”
Bassirou lambasted is case worker, “Before I don’t like to give you problem, but now I am very angry because I know ISS is an organization for corruption. I have many proof. You can take me to court and I will talk to the judge.”
Lok Lam concluded in frustration, “If you want to go to court, you go to court. I don’t care!”
Instead of accepting Bassirou’s request to rent a modest 3000$ flat in Tokwawan, Lok Lam advised him to move into a guesthouse in Mirador Mansion instead. This temporary solution would cost ISS-HK, and therefore Hong Kong tax-payers, about 9000$ a month – three times more than the flat.
Lok Lam described the absurd policy, “ISS will not pay 3000$ for your room, as your rent assistance is 1500$. But if you go to the guesthouse, we can pay [300$] every night and you don’t worry about rent.”
Vision First is concerned about the irresponsible disbursement of public funds entrusted to ISS-HK. What rational supports the settling of refugees in guesthouses that cost three times more than basic flats?
In a separate case a family of three was placed for several months in a guesthouse at 18,000$ a month before they secured a 4500$ apartment. Such irrational squandering raises doubts about ISS-HK financial accountability and the Social Welfare Department’s oversight.
Does somebody besides guesthouse owners benefit from such extravagance?
ISS oppresses female refugees through rent and food reductions
May 15th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Case workers at ISS-HK fancy themselves Immigration officers in training. Instead of treating every client as a destitute asylum seeker without money or work rights, case workers tailor services according to nationality. By doing so they fail in their role as contractor for social welfare services.
The SWD instructions to ISS-HK concern “enhancing the humanitarian assistance for non-refoulement claimants” without consideration of nationality and previous immigration status. All protection claimants must be treated equally irrespective of how they arrived, or whether they work visa prior to seeking sanctuary.
Vision First is concerned about the prejudiced treatment of ex-Foreign Domestic Helper by ISS-HK case workers. To support this claim we offer a comparison between two African and two Indonesian ladies living together:
Example A: Two Somali ladies requested ISS-HK pay in full a shared 4000$ room in Kowloon. They state their claim pointing out that nothing cheaper was available, and they were banned from working. They met initial refusal with a promise of a sit-in until their non-negotiable request was met. And they got what they wanted!
Example B: Two Indonesian ladies requested ISS-HK pay in full a shared 3000$ room in a slum. They noted that the room was cheap and each could receive 1500$ rent assistance. Their case worker Tanya Tse refused to provide what they were entitled to. Tanya said, “It’s enough to give you 1400$ each. That is enough. Just sign and go!”
Tanya Tse also arbitrarily reduced the utility allowance from 300$ to 200$ each, despite the SWD clearly stating that, “300$ per month which may be used to meet different utilities charges (i.e. water, gas, electricity, etc.)”
Tanya Tse visited the room in illegal structures and signed an Agreement on Provision of Assistance bearing false information. Both Indonesian ladies were provide with ISS-HK agreements stating, “I confirm my address to be at Letter Box, XXX Shek Tong Tsuen, Au Tau”. Clearly two people cannot live inside a letter box!
Tanya Tse does not abide by the principle: “Treat other people the way you want to be treated.”
Vision First is deeply concerned about food problems at the ISS-HK appointed shops, New Bauddha and Safwan in Yuen Long. The quality problem is a shortcoming of the shops, though we understands that ISS-HK case workers are responsible for the quantity/selection problem. These issues must be addressed by the SWD:
- The rice is contaminated with excrement. A lady said, “The rice is very bad. Sometimes the rice is so smelly. Inside have shit. The rice is no good. When you finish cooking it becomes very smelly. Even if you wash very clean it is no good. All people are saying no good this rice … Everyone complain and asking how to solve this problem … Please ask them to change the rice. We cannot eat it!”
- Food selections are cut short. Milk, milk powder and Milo are not distributed despite being ticked on the order sheets. A lady complained, “If Tanya wants to give, she will give. If she doesn’t want to give, she will not give. It depends what she wants to give. Also, things like eggs and spices she never gives. I think that in one month I get 600$ [worth of foodstuff].Sometimes she only gives onion too much and expensive food don’t give. Vegetables too much give because it is cheap. Milk, powder milk, Milo don’t give.
- Cooking oil is insufficient despite what is selected on the forms. A lady explained, “I ask for cooking oil but only receive three small bottles a month. The very small bottles. We write the big one but they give the small one only. They give small one because it costs less money. How can we cook without oil?
- Basic toiletries, including detergent for clothes, must be distributed monthly as SWD pays ISS-HK for such provisions. Many refugee ladies share this complaint, “Sometimes they don’t give us toiletries. The shop doesn’t give every month. They give only one time in two months. The soap is not enough for us. They should give more as we need it to wash our clothes. We only get ONE toilet tissue roll each month. That is not enough for one month. If we cannot work how we buy toilet paper?”
- The food collection should be every 10 days. However, to save money over time, the ISS-HK shops progressively extend the frequency to as many as 15 days. The excuse of public holidays doesn’t hold up when distributing emergency rations to hungry people with no options. Distribution dates should be brought FORWARD, not pushed backward. A lady protested, “It is very bad, so we don’t have enough food and we are hungry. My food is not enough for 5 days. How can it last me for 15 days? They say we collect food every 10 days, but they lie. Now it is always 12 days or longer. And I don’t have any money …”
- These refugee ladies are intimidated by the male staff at the ISS-HK shops. If the ladies complain, the vendors shout back, “This is not your business. You ask your case officers. You are lucky we give you this!”It appears that these vendors believe they are engaged in charitable distribution. They forget that their bosses are paid tens of millions of dollars from the government purse to provide essential assistance to needy people. Would they speak like this to their Chinese customers?
- These refugee ladies get no redress from ISS-HK case workers. One explained, “We complain many times to Tanya and she just says, ‘Next time, next time.’ But [there is] never any change. Tanya doesn’t want us to complain. She said to me, ‘Don’t listen to what other people say. No need to complain too much!’”
Refugee Union celebrates three months of occupation
May 14th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Three months after the Occupation action against ISS-HK started, the stand-off continues. The Refugee Union consolidated its protest camp on the footbridge outside the IFC mall to maximize exposure and avoid the worst of the rainy season. Five comfortable sofas offer space for talks and presentations.
The protest started on 11 February 2014, when refugees demanded a halt to food manipulation, which detracted one-third of rations’ value, and the publication of the contract between the Social Welfare Department and ISS-HK. Neither objective has been achieved yet.
Evidence is mounting against a food distribution system that fails to deliver to 5700 hungry individuals the 1200$ stipulated by the SWD in the Provision of Assistance for Asylum Seekers and Torture Claimants, enhanced on 24 January 2014.
In a city as costly as Hong Kong, 40$ hardly provides sufficient food for three meals a day. When reduced to 25$ and exacerbated by sub-standard quality, expired dates, rotting food and faeces contamination, the ensuing hardship is intolerable for those banned from working.
Anyone who disagrees with this statement is invited to live off ISS-HK rations for 10 days.
Reliable sources informed Vision First that 80% of refugees sell their food as soon as collected to crafty middlemen who consolidate it in illegal, unrefrigerated storerooms prior to reselling it to residents, restaurants and, it is rumoured, back to the ISS-HK appointed shops.
The ripple effect caused the halving of prices in ethnic groceries stores of competing items.
The Hong Kong Government should be concerned about the annual loss of over 50,000,000 HKD this farcical, failed food distribution system causes the government purse. The hemorrhaging of tax-dollars could be instantly halted by giving 1200$ cash directly to refugees.
Vision First submitted evidence of this financial damage to the relevant authorities.
The Refugee Union’s Occupation was trigged by discontent with food manipulation and the questionable practices that supported it for many years. A broader scope was later adopted to also expose the slums and petition the SWD to terminate its agreement with ISS-HK.
To achieve these goals, protesters file complaints daily at the SWD head office, where social workers appear to be sympathetic with the refugee cause and mightily annoyed with the incompetence of ISS-HK case workers. The Union anticipates that SWD will not renew its contract with ISS-HK this August.
The fact that the SWD earnestly handles complainants without deploying security, unlike ISS-HK and other non-profits, gained trust that contributed to the Union shifting the protest camp to Central. Ultimately the SWD will be part of the solution, while ISS-HK will not.
In a short three months the Refugee Union established itself as an effective pressure group to lodge complaints with the Social Welfare Department and even write to the Security Bureau urging change.
Never before did refugees in Hong Kong emerged with a Union that can stand on its own feet before forces that encourage either voluntary departure, or compliant submission to unbearable treatment.
As days roll into months and the Refugee Union grows in experience and consolidates its presence, anyone supporting the social injustice of the past has reason to be concerned about their future.
