Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?
- Thread starter nino_savatte
- Start date
durruti02 said:
Thanks, but I don't feel sharp, more like a stuck record.
Anyway, here's a FRFI article from July 2006:
The reality of capitalism's immigration policy
Oxfam Press Release – 13 April 2007
Oxfam calls for more doctors not band aids
More money to pay for health workers and teachers not short-term solutions
International agency, Oxfam today urges governments and other major donors to provide more aid to solve the chronic shortage of doctors, nurses and teachers in poor countries around the world.
In a new report, "Paying for People," published today Oxfam estimates that US$13.7 billion must be invested every year to fund the additional 2.1 million teachers and 4.2 million health care workers – half of them in Africa – urgently needed to break the cycle of poverty.
“What is needed are doctors not band aids. You can teach a child without a classroom but not without a teacher. There is no use building new clinics and schools or funding drug programmes for different diseases if the doctors, nurses and teachers are nowhere to be found. Education and health care are crucial in saving lives and helping people escape poverty yet only eight cents of every dollar in aid goes to paying for the people that deliver these essential services,” said Elizabeth Stuart, Senior Policy Advisor, Oxfam International.
Oxfam calls for 25 per cent of bilateral aid to go directly to support the health and education budgets of poor country governments for a minimum of six years. This long-term, predictable aid is the only way to help governments solve the staffing crisis in these vital services. With salaries barely above the poverty line and a shortage of training institutions in poor countries, recruitment of workers has not just stalled, it has gone into reverse.
The IMF should stop imposing ceilings on the wage-bills for health and education workers in developing countries and should leave such decisions to individual countries which are in a better position to judge the most appropriate use of their budgets.
“Today in too many of the world’s poorest countries health and education services are dependent on a handful of workers struggling heroically to do their jobs on pitiful wages and in appalling conditions. Becoming a doctor, nurse or teacher is like signing a contract with poverty,” said Stuart.
Oxfam accuses some G8 and EU countries of side-stepping their responsibility and concentrating their aid in short-term, quick fix projects. This includes Germany - president of the G8 in 2007 - and France who continue to provide bilateral aid in a form that does not pay for teachers and health workers.
The warning comes a week after the publication of the OECD overseas aid figures for 2006 which show that aid from the richest 22 countries fell by 5.1 per cent, the first time aid had fallen since 1996.
In the past aid for health and education has concentrated on individual projects rather than building public services that have the potential for the greatest benefit to the poorest people. Later this week the World Bank will discuss its Action Plan for Africa. But a real plan for Africa – and all developing countries – must focus on working with individual governments to deliver these essential services.
There is already proof that a closer partnership between donor and poor country governments on long-term aid is benefiting poor people. Countries like Zambia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Uganda have either used the money freed up from debt relief or invested vital donor aid in their hospitals and schools. Now, children in these countries have free access to primary school and the sick in rural areas can go to the doctor for free.
World leaders have promised to increase both the quantity of aid they provide for health and education, and to ensure that aid can be spent where it’s most needed – such as on salaries and training. But those promises have been repeatedly broken. Oxfam’s new report calls for urgent action to help poor countries pay for the six million teachers and health workers who would deliver health and education for all.
How much extra aid will be needed to ensure that doctors are not tempted by the much higher wages on offer in this and other countries?
Oxfam calls for more doctors not band aids
More money to pay for health workers and teachers not short-term solutions
International agency, Oxfam today urges governments and other major donors to provide more aid to solve the chronic shortage of doctors, nurses and teachers in poor countries around the world.
In a new report, "Paying for People," published today Oxfam estimates that US$13.7 billion must be invested every year to fund the additional 2.1 million teachers and 4.2 million health care workers – half of them in Africa – urgently needed to break the cycle of poverty.
“What is needed are doctors not band aids. You can teach a child without a classroom but not without a teacher. There is no use building new clinics and schools or funding drug programmes for different diseases if the doctors, nurses and teachers are nowhere to be found. Education and health care are crucial in saving lives and helping people escape poverty yet only eight cents of every dollar in aid goes to paying for the people that deliver these essential services,” said Elizabeth Stuart, Senior Policy Advisor, Oxfam International.
Oxfam calls for 25 per cent of bilateral aid to go directly to support the health and education budgets of poor country governments for a minimum of six years. This long-term, predictable aid is the only way to help governments solve the staffing crisis in these vital services. With salaries barely above the poverty line and a shortage of training institutions in poor countries, recruitment of workers has not just stalled, it has gone into reverse.
The IMF should stop imposing ceilings on the wage-bills for health and education workers in developing countries and should leave such decisions to individual countries which are in a better position to judge the most appropriate use of their budgets.
“Today in too many of the world’s poorest countries health and education services are dependent on a handful of workers struggling heroically to do their jobs on pitiful wages and in appalling conditions. Becoming a doctor, nurse or teacher is like signing a contract with poverty,” said Stuart.
Oxfam accuses some G8 and EU countries of side-stepping their responsibility and concentrating their aid in short-term, quick fix projects. This includes Germany - president of the G8 in 2007 - and France who continue to provide bilateral aid in a form that does not pay for teachers and health workers.
The warning comes a week after the publication of the OECD overseas aid figures for 2006 which show that aid from the richest 22 countries fell by 5.1 per cent, the first time aid had fallen since 1996.
In the past aid for health and education has concentrated on individual projects rather than building public services that have the potential for the greatest benefit to the poorest people. Later this week the World Bank will discuss its Action Plan for Africa. But a real plan for Africa – and all developing countries – must focus on working with individual governments to deliver these essential services.
There is already proof that a closer partnership between donor and poor country governments on long-term aid is benefiting poor people. Countries like Zambia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Uganda have either used the money freed up from debt relief or invested vital donor aid in their hospitals and schools. Now, children in these countries have free access to primary school and the sick in rural areas can go to the doctor for free.
World leaders have promised to increase both the quantity of aid they provide for health and education, and to ensure that aid can be spent where it’s most needed – such as on salaries and training. But those promises have been repeatedly broken. Oxfam’s new report calls for urgent action to help poor countries pay for the six million teachers and health workers who would deliver health and education for all.
How much extra aid will be needed to ensure that doctors are not tempted by the much higher wages on offer in this and other countries?
becky p said:
They already do in massive amounts, and not only the doctors and nurses.
The brain drain caused by the West is one of the major problems in every developing nation and the cost is multifold. All money and effort invested in higher education is lost to the West who thus receives all the benefits without any investment.
salaam.
Here's an interesting article from Permanent Revolution on the RCG, imperialism etc.
Britain Parasitic and Decaying Capitalism
I'm increasingly impressed by PR. Perhaps more on this later.
Britain Parasitic and Decaying Capitalism
I'm increasingly impressed by PR. Perhaps more on this later.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
becky p said:Oxfam Press Release – 13 April 2007
Oxfam calls for more doctors not band aids
More money to pay for health workers and teachers not short-term solutions
International agency, Oxfam today urges governments and other major donors to provide more aid to solve the chronic shortage of doctors, nurses and teachers in poor countries around the world.
In a new report, "Paying for People," published today Oxfam estimates that US$13.7 billion must be invested every year to fund the additional 2.1 million teachers and 4.2 million health care workers – half of them in Africa – urgently needed to break the cycle of poverty.
“What is needed are doctors not band aids. You can teach a child without a classroom but not without a teacher. There is no use building new clinics and schools or funding drug programmes for different diseases if the doctors, nurses and teachers are nowhere to be found. Education and health care are crucial in saving lives and helping people escape poverty yet only eight cents of every dollar in aid goes to paying for the people that deliver these essential services,” said Elizabeth Stuart, Senior Policy Advisor, Oxfam International.
Oxfam calls for 25 per cent of bilateral aid to go directly to support the health and education budgets of poor country governments for a minimum of six years. This long-term, predictable aid is the only way to help governments solve the staffing crisis in these vital services. With salaries barely above the poverty line and a shortage of training institutions in poor countries, recruitment of workers has not just stalled, it has gone into reverse.
The IMF should stop imposing ceilings on the wage-bills for health and education workers in developing countries and should leave such decisions to individual countries which are in a better position to judge the most appropriate use of their budgets.
“Today in too many of the world’s poorest countries health and education services are dependent on a handful of workers struggling heroically to do their jobs on pitiful wages and in appalling conditions. Becoming a doctor, nurse or teacher is like signing a contract with poverty,” said Stuart.
Oxfam accuses some G8 and EU countries of side-stepping their responsibility and concentrating their aid in short-term, quick fix projects. This includes Germany - president of the G8 in 2007 - and France who continue to provide bilateral aid in a form that does not pay for teachers and health workers.
The warning comes a week after the publication of the OECD overseas aid figures for 2006 which show that aid from the richest 22 countries fell by 5.1 per cent, the first time aid had fallen since 1996.
In the past aid for health and education has concentrated on individual projects rather than building public services that have the potential for the greatest benefit to the poorest people. Later this week the World Bank will discuss its Action Plan for Africa. But a real plan for Africa – and all developing countries – must focus on working with individual governments to deliver these essential services.
There is already proof that a closer partnership between donor and poor country governments on long-term aid is benefiting poor people. Countries like Zambia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Uganda have either used the money freed up from debt relief or invested vital donor aid in their hospitals and schools. Now, children in these countries have free access to primary school and the sick in rural areas can go to the doctor for free.
World leaders have promised to increase both the quantity of aid they provide for health and education, and to ensure that aid can be spent where it’s most needed – such as on salaries and training. But those promises have been repeatedly broken. Oxfam’s new report calls for urgent action to help poor countries pay for the six million teachers and health workers who would deliver health and education for all.
How much extra aid will be needed to ensure that doctors are not tempted by the much higher wages on offer in this and other countries?
Link please?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Rather than kicking against immigration, wouldn't you be better off fighting for equal wages for all workers? Instead, you carp on about immigration ad nauseum and whinge about capitalism without actually doing anything to challenge it. This is why your position on this issue is so weak.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
becky p said:
As even Oxfam will acknowledge though, a lot of doctors who want to specialise in particular forms of medicine (oncology for example) pretty much have no choice but to go abroad to work, at present, to get the degree of training necessary, purely because their own health systems are unable to afford to prioritise stuff like oncology over basic healthcare.
And you can bet the IMF (whose policies cause a lot of the problems, and whose "founder" countries benefit most from the export of skilled labour from the developing world) won't be in a hurry to make substantive changes to their policies.
Those with skills who do migrate are caught between a rock and a hard place.
ViolentPanda said:
True enough as far as you go.
But those people who support liberal free market policies on migration....In the name of anti racism ............ Have some explaining to do. Taking so many
health care workers from poorer countries is a disgrace.
Ive had terminal cancer for 2-3 years....Im still going strong at the mo thanks to some great doctors and nurses from overseas....How different would it be if i lived in one of their countries.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
tbaldwin said:
You're missing the point.
A lot of developing countries don't have a large enough educational infrastructure (due to a multitude of reasons that include lack of development aid, bureaucratic corruption and good old-fashioned lack of political will) to allow for the career development/progression of specialists. South Africa sources about 20% of it's registrars (trainee consultants) from it's neighbours. It's a quid pro quo, they train them, they get several years of skilled work from them, and then they go back to their country of origin with skills they couldn't have got at home.
It may not be a solution, in fact it's a pretty awful answer to the problem, but until the IMF removes its' rrestrictions on investment in health infrastructure, it's just about the only way that important medical specialisms can be kept going in developing countries.
Aldebaran said:
Thanks Aldebaran.
Those arguing in favour of the free movement of people,appear to be overlooking this.
The arguements seem to rely on a mixture of innuendo and hysteria. Which can be amusing for a while. But after 20,000 odd posts you might think a couple of them would take a little time to reflect...
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
becky p said:Thanks Aldebaran.
Those arguing in favour of the free movement of people,appear to be overlooking this.
The arguements seem to rely on a mixture of innuendo and hysteria. Which can be amusing for a while. But after 20,000 odd posts you might think a couple of them would take a little time to reflect...
So, what about the points you and others make, have you all been in reflective mood I wonder?
First, you would be against the 'free movement of people' then? Yes/No?
Second, if you are against the 'free movement of people' then how would achieve the goal of halting the 'free movement of people'?
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
becky p said:tbh. I am not sure exactly of what could or should be done. But I dont see anything positive coming from people trying to close down debate (as the op appears to want)
And hysterical accusations of racism are no help to anyone.
Becky, in a debate it would be helpful to give answers to your critics, then perhaps the you would get a more positive response.
As it stands you're just throwing out meaningless, inane comments, that give the impression that you're just doing that to wind some posters up.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
becky p said:Thanks Aldebaran.
Those arguing in favour of the free movement of people,appear to be overlooking this.
The arguements seem to rely on a mixture of innuendo and hysteria. Which can be amusing for a while. But after 20,000 odd posts you might think a couple of them would take a little time to reflect...
Do you ever travel abroad? Just curious, like.
Here's a comment from the Spark (US Trots) on US imperialism with respect to Mexico.
Mexico the Great Migration
Eta: This is also a crucial point:
Standard Maxist analysis of the manner in which wages are set. Its something I've been trying to gather empirical evidence for, but its not easy. Any helpers?
Mexico the Great Migration
Eta: This is also a crucial point:
Standard Maxist analysis of the manner in which wages are set. Its something I've been trying to gather empirical evidence for, but its not easy. Any helpers?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
becky p said:tbh. I am not sure exactly of what could or should be done. But I dont see anything positive coming from people trying to close down debate (as the op appears to want)
And hysterical accusations of racism are no help to anyone.
But you and your pals are always trying to close down debate, particularly if it challenges your views on immigration.
Tell me, why are you lot so damned obsessed with it? The only other people to have such a single minded obsession with this issue are Tories and the fash.
Dorito is always using language like "looking after one's own". The BNP and the NF also use that phrase...or perhaps I shouldn't tell you that? Is that what you think?
becky p said:
Except that no one has done anything so facile as "argue in favour of the free movement of labour" since, in a capitalist society, to argue for or against it as as futile as arguing for or against rain.
While inequalalities of wealth persist, workers will migrate to try to improve their earning power. Fact. Which leaves reformists like yourself with two options:
a) to argue in favour of state immigration controls, dividing "legal" workers from "illegal" ones and ensuring that migrant workers' economic position will remain precarious, forcing down wages and conditions for all: or
b) to argue against state immigration controls and for the regularisation of migrant workers and their protection under employment regulations.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Pigeon said:Actually, that's not true. They don't "close down debate". They just "debate" with phantom positions - eg, no one arguing against immigration controls recognises the relationship between immigration and capitalism.
I think you'll find that they do try to close down debate - particularly baldwin and his pal durutti. In fact, the whole UK P&P forum is full of their immigration threads; they are the ones who dominate any discussion on the issue.
Pigeon said:
pigeon it has not been that simple .. many leftists on urban, and in the real world at first tried to deny there was any immigration ( 2 years ago) .. they then tried to argue it had no material effect .. they then said ok it exists but we must treat it as an ideological issue and resond with anti racism .. etc etc etc NEVER dealing materially with the issue
i agree with how you divide the issue into 1) and 2), and support option 2) ..
HOWEVER to have any chance of getting people to support your option 2) we need first to acknowledge the material consequences of neo liberal migration AND be at the forefront of campaigning for the victims .. if we can not support those in this country there is NO possibility of EFFECTIVELY supportting immigrants to it
Pigeon said:Actually, that's not true. They don't "close down debate". They just "debate" with phantom positions - eg, no one arguing against immigration controls recognises the relationship between immigration and capitalism.
Well, if more posters elaborated on their understanding then maybe this wouldn't happen.
Pigeon said:
Could I just say that I agree with this post. But at the same time this means that most of the left are reformists on this issue. Almost all groups (barring the various anarchists who I don't know so much about) call for some sort of reform of the immigration system - even if they do it in a bombastic way.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:
Who are these "leftists" who said that there was "no immigration"?
What is "neo-liberal migration" and how does it differ from what you an baldwin call "mass migration"?
Presumably you would describe yourself as a "socialist". Why, then, do you spend so much time attacking the "Left"?
I don't expect a straight answer to any of these questions btw.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Interesting story, though it is no reason to call for tighter controls. The issue here is the exploitative nature of the current capitalist system.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6594577.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6594577.stm
Pigeon said:
I dont agree with Your a and b positions.
You could argue for immigration controls,international labour rules and reparations.
Your seem to want to tackle the problem of worldwide economic inequality by making it easier for people to migrate.
I dont honestly think that is a credible position to take.
nino_savatte said:
Yeah Nino. I think it shows the weakness of the open borders position.
Forced prostitution and gangmasters exploiting workers are two things to have greatly increased since the UK allowed more people from the expanded EU into the UK.
I think Socialists should attempt to address worldwide inequality by calling for reparations and international labour rules.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
The UK didn't allow anything.tbaldwin said:
They were obliged to follow the reciprocity rules Major signed up to in (IIRC) 1993.
Were you making a fuss about them back then, when it would have served your purpose better?
Similar threads
