Simulación de Ejemplo de Funcionamiento del Modelo (Q, r) para pieza Tipo L-B 580-

This chapter’s central focus concentrated on the barriers to higher education, particularly those that ethnic minority groups encounter in accessing higher education opportunities. It is vital, from both a self-worth/actualisation and social justice paradigm, that human beings are afforded the possibility to self-develop and to lead well rounded, constructive and meaningful lives which, in turn, contribute to the well- spring of communal existence and broadened notions of participation and membership. ‘Ireland is sleepwalking itself into a colossal mess over integration’ (Forde, 2012d, 1). There have been stark contradictions between what the State envisages as the concept of ‘integration’ and what the reality is for different groups of migrants. The State promotes the notion of cohesion, along with the promotion of anti-racist practice, while it simultaneously discriminates, marginalises and impoverishes various groups of migrants. Currently, migration policy in Ireland widens the gap in many instances, as it imparts different rights and entitlements between groups of migrants and between the indigenous populations. Migrants are not a homogenous group but numerous separate groups of people and policies differ with regard to their separate and ever changing rights and entitlements (Nlessen & Huddleston, 2009). The migration management policy and legislation framework in Ireland is not transparent, accountable or fair. Migrants’ rights are not established or clarified in law (One Foundation, 2014). The current government appears to have dropped the facilitation of ‘integration’ (Forde, 2012a; Forde, 2012d; Integration Centre, 2012d). Crowley (2010) argues that this presents a ‘hidden message’, because government departments justify the importance of the role of ‘integration’ and all the policies and practices attached to this, yet the department that holds the major responsibility for the process of ‘integration’ and the management of the process, denies responsibility for the process (Crowley, 2010). There are numerous other examples where policy does not marry practice, while other policies could not address or implement policies on the ground. These are State

107 policies that disadvantage different groups of people (MRCI, 2007b) and even individual family members (Coakley, 2012).

Fanning (2011) refers to this process as ‘paper politics’, where the policies are on paper only and not in practice (Fanning, 2011). Lentin (2006) calls it ‘biopolitics’, that is, stating one thing but meaning another (Lentin, 2006). Foucault (1976) states that it is a source of power that examines how different aspects of human life are processed and transformed by the rules, regulations and power of the State. It is the way in which we are governed. Migrant groups who are classed as economic migrants or guest worker migrants are assumed to leave once the work is completed; therefore, they are considered temporary migrant groups. Key government representatives and successful Ministers for Justice who have been repeatedly responsible for serving to ‘construct asylum seekers as being associated with crime, welfare abuse, exploitation, cultural dilution, economic pressure and a threat to Irish citizenship’ (Moriarty, 2006, 302). State racism problematises and inferiorities ‘the other’ but effective official discourse on these issues is shaped and enabled by routinised practices (Moriarty, 2006). These practices are very common and widely used, to the extent that they may have become the norm in Irish society. The initial negative attention on asylum seekers has eventually transferred to other groups of migrants who are not deemed eligible for full citizenship rights and entitlements. The cohort of people with temporary residency status was the subject of debates in parliamentary question time, because this uncertain status was contrary to the concept of ‘integration’ (Houses of the Oireachtas Integration Policy Statement, 13 December 2007). Policies that marginalise significant numbers of migrants from mainstream society are disturbing (Fanning, 2011).

It is commonly known among politicians that some of the conditions of employment are horrific (Houses of Oireachtas Employment Law Compliance Bill, 18 February 2009). The work permit has been one of the most controversial issues for migrants employed in that way (Lynam, 2008). It is ‘a modern form of slavery’ (Middleton & Mitchell, 2006, 70). One migrant woman for example, paid her employer €500 to get her passport back (O’ Donoghue, 2004, 33). The law has to be changed to protect the most at risk from exploitative practices in the workplace (Ó Ríordáin, 2012). The reality of the working and living conditions of numerous ethnic minority groups means they are in fact working in ‘conditions of de facto apartheid’ (Mac Éinrí, 2005, 11).

108 Migrants who remain in low paid employment remain at risk from poverty; segregation is already occurring. The denial of social rights is an extreme form of being denied social citizenship (Hill, 2006). It is essential that economic and social rights are conferred on everyone inclusively as common basic rights (Mac Éinrí, 2007b). Fanning (2011) argues that workplace exploitation seriously hinders any commitment by Irish society to fully integrate migrants. Social inclusion incorporates economic and social rights as entitlements (Fanning, 2011). Fanning (2007a) refers to the debate on what citizenship infers. Frequently, the ideology of citizenship infers rights and entitlements on an individual. The fact is that people migrating to this country have access to different rights and entitlements, which is habitually dependent on their legal status, country of origin and visa status. Different groups of migrants have various rights and entitlements; certain groups have restricted legal rights and entitlements, while other groups have almost no rights or entitlements. Groups of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees are categorised by the State as being outside the remit of the Irish legal and social system (Fanning 2007a). Social policy, structurally, excludes them, as a direct result of the way policy is structured; for instance, the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act (2001) legalised the term ‘non-national’.

The overall concept of mainstreaming integration has merit but the fact that different groups of migrants are inferred various rights and entitlements is contradictory to the concept of inclusive ‘integration’. Mac Éinrí (2007) states that Ireland has yet to engage pro-actively with a purposeful and fundamental question about what we mean by policies of ‘integration’ in the most comprehensive sense of the term, bearing in mind the depth and intensity of the issues and debates involved in the whole process (Mac Éinrí, 2007). There are so many different strands to ‘integration’ and the issues are complex, multifaceted and interwoven. There has been a noticeable increase in negative attitudes towards migrants in Ireland since the recession began (Smyth, 2009; Grene & Bourke, 2014).

A solemn political message that equality was not important was conveyed when the 2008 budget cut the Equality Authority funding by 43% and the Human Rights Commission by 24% (Crowley, 2010). As one Irish politician stated, ‘it does not bode well for democracy and the protection of human rights in this country’. The questions were raised: ‘where is the Government’s policy on combating racism?’ ‘Where is our

109 integration policy?’ (Houses of Oireachtas Seanad Debate 2008, 5 November 2008). These are issues of fundamental human rights. In addition, education should present an individual with the opportunity to develop their full potential as an intelligent rational human being, because education is a basic fundamental human right laid down in international law. It is one of the ‘most affirmed economic, social and cultural rights’ (Chapman, 2007, 122). It is a strong social justice issue. Currently, the rights-based approach to education advocates an ‘inalienable right of the individual to education’ on an international level (UNICEF, 2008, 1). Education in itself is a goal but it is also a goal in realising all other human rights (Sandkull, 2005). The true power of education not only provides the tools to better one’s social and economic environment but also provides the opportunity for radical social change (Freire, 1976). Education also equips the individual with knowledge that awakens their consciousness (Freire, 1976). Knowledge gives people with little or no power, the power to understand and readdress the oppressive nature of their environment (Freire, 1976). People who have been denied certain opportunities that are freely available to other groups in society eventually end up denying that they want these goods in the first place (Nussbaum, 2011a). This is more or less the result of internalising a second class status. Education is at the heart of the capabilities approach and allows for the development of numerous important internal capabilities.

The Capabilities Approach is an approach that focuses on issues of human vulnerability and it is increasingly being developed to address human needs in a more positive way than other approaches to date. Human capabilities are about ‘what people are actually able to do and to be’ (Nussbaum, 2001, 3). There is more to the concept of capability than economics; it is to exercise one’s full ‘human powers’ with dignity and to have the freedom and thought to do it. No human being should be in a subordinate position to another human being: ‘to treat a person as a mere object for the use of others’ is exploitation (Nussbaum, 2001, 3). The ultimate goal is that each individual is ‘worthy of regard’ (Nussbaum, 2001, 6). Critical thinking is an essential humanistic ability in the promotion of human development (Nussbaum, 2009). The Capabilities Approach theorises basic social justice and is wholly concerned with ingrained inequality and social injustice. The principles ensure that each human being is treated with dignity and equal worth. Each and every individual must have the opportunity to engage in the planning of their life (Nussbaum, 2011a).

110 One of the most fundamental attitudes contrary to human dignity is racism. Racism ‘is always located in particular structures of power and oppression’ (McVeigh, 1992, 34). Traditionally there has been a strong sense of community in Ireland; ‘at a deep level, Travelling people, Jewish people, and, more recently, Black people have threatened the very nature of the sense of ‘community’ in Ireland’ (McVeigh, 1992, 42). These groups are regarded as ‘outsiders’ who ‘represent the presumed chaos which lies outside the protection of the community in Ireland’ (McVeigh, 1992, 42). This presumed chaos is transferred to the outsiders. Therefore, they are seen as a threat to the community. People on the right side of the community divide see those on the outside as bad and those on the inside as good. It is a transference process that allows those on the inside to be good and those on the outside to be bad per se. All sedentary classes in Western countries have a deep seated sense of the ‘outsiders’, whether these are ‘nomads or migrants or refugees’ (McVeigh, 1992, 44). The Irish tend to associate racism with Black people, which is highly dangerous as it suggests Black people cause racism (McVeigh, 1992).

From a Black perspective, racism is associated with power, where one group of people is generalised to be the disadvantaged group. Racist theory is underpinned by four main principles (Memmi, 2000). These include a real or imagined difference between the two groups; the difference is negative and it applies to the whole group and finally justifies legal ground for hostility (Martinot, 2000). Memmi (2000) states that ‘difference’ is the main component of racism between the relationships of different groups of people and this difference is wholly negative (bad). Furthermore, racism is ‘both overt and covert’ in nature (Ture & Hamilton 1992). There is another dominant element to racism which is institutional racism.

Institutional racism according to Lentin (2004) had primarily come to attention in Britain in light of the MacPherson report on the inquiry into the death of black teenager, Stephen Lawrence in 1993 (Lentin, 2004). Judge MacPherson overturned the conclusion drawn by Lord Scarman into the 1981 Brixton riots that institutional racism does not exist. MacPherson found that the investigation into the Lawrence murder was marred by institutional racism (Lentin, 2004). According to Lentin, racism is a political system that is embedded and controls Government bodies and State agencies, (Lentin, 2006). One prime area that the media tends to ignore is the impact of institutional racism on policies and practices. This subject is generally never a public issue.

111 As a result of The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry [1999], Judge McPherson found institutional racism imbedded within the policies, procedures, attitudes, and behaviours of an organisation and the members within that institution which effectively amounts to discrimination against ethnic minority groups (McPherson, 1999). Institutional racism perseveres because the organisation fails to recognise and address its existence. Institutional racism becomes part of the norm or ethos of the organisation (McPherson, 1999). Basically, institutional racism is a corrosive disease.

According to Beire and Jaichand (2006), institutional racism is also an equality issue and it is the most difficult form of racism to tackle because of its covert nature and the unwillingness of the State to investigate the existence of hidden or unhidden barriers to equality (Beire & Jaichand, 2006). The structure, policies and practices of organisations can provide protections against racist practice but they also have the potential to reinforce racist attitudes or behaviour. There is a structural attitude embedded that sustains institutional racism (Beire & Jaichand 2006). The influence of ‘ingrained cultural attitudes’ cannot be underestimated, as they can have powerful influences on the State’s policies and legislation, (Beire & Jaichand, 2006, 15). The key to measuring institutional racism is finding that a particular policy or practice has a negative impact on ethnic minorities (Beire & Jaichand, 2006, 16-17). One prime example of institutional racism is the Irish education system, because it decides which groups can access education (Kitching & Curtin, 2012). The tiered college fee is another example of institutional racism, which creates inequalities between groups in society and marginalises different groups.

Equality in its most basic form inherently means that everyone is the same. In reality what generally occurs is that one group of people will dominate another group of people, ‘it’s what the population with power do to those without it’ (Walzer, 1983, xiii). Migrants are regarded as newcomers and are not welcomed by the host country as citizens. They are regarded as guest workers who free the citizens from unpleasant work (Walzer, 1983). Therefore, they are a necessary requirement like servants, with no political rights, sourced from poorer countries. There is a strong thought process of denial of the right to citizenship and there is a strong underlying threat of deportation. Individuals who are classified as non-members do not qualify for any of society’s social goods. Politically, the guest worker is tightly constrained, exploited and

112 oppressed; basically they are disenfranchised. The State is seen as all powerful. Undeniably, the ‘rule of citizens over non-citizens, of members over strangers, is probably the most common form of tyranny in human history’ (Walzer, 1983, 62). Residency is strongly tied to employment; the migrant must be economically viable, otherwise s/he is deported. Guest worker status is temporary and guest workers are deemed outcasts as they are barred from citizenship.

Non-members are stateless people who continuously encounter ‘a condition of infinite danger’ (Walzer, 1983, 32). These are the living conditions and experiences of many ethnic minority groups in Ireland. Numerous groups are employed in low-paid low- skilled employment (3D jobs). Their residency status is temporary and is very dependent on employment. There are too many migrants who live in fear of deportation with no sense of belonging on a daily basis. Every aspect of their lives is tightly controlled. Yet as one politician pointed out, we invite them here, they contribute to the tax system but we restrict them from the companionship of their family: this ‘is a proposition that flies in the face of civilised norms in Western society’ (Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008, 15 May 2008).

Regardless of the arguments that multicultural policy is dead, a multicultural policy approach is essential for Irish policy-makers. Torres (2013) critiques multiculturalism as the ‘struggle to incorporate diversity’ and argues that multiculturalism is not dead. The current ‘straw man’ theory of multiculturalism is too easily pulled apart, and policies and practices based on the ‘straw man’ theory also easily fall apart because they are misinterpreted or misrepresented (Torres, 2013). In addition, multicultural policy and practice contradict one another (Torres, 2013). Therefore, it is essential to focus on ‘building a social-justice-oriented multicultural education system’ (Torres, 2013, 3). Incorporating diversity is a major struggle. This will be an ongoing challenge that Ireland will encounter in a similar manner to Britain and the Netherlands. Ireland will benefit from proactive promotion, development and implementation of multicultural policy (see section 3.6 for further discussion on multicultural policy). Chapter three focuses on Britain and the Netherlands. It critically reviews the higher education system and the experiences of well-established ethnic minority groups in both countries. Both countries also have a long-established history in migration management policy which is discussed in chapter three.

113

Chapter Three

A focus on migration management policy and higher education in Britain and the Netherlands

Education forms the biggest part of integration policies in all European countries

(Kallas & Kaldur, 2007, 34).