The Tribune

THE FNM is exactly right when it criticises the immigration commission launched to review issues at the Department of Immigration.

The announcement of the commission came after a series of concerns raised about apparent interference with the work of members of the department by then Immigration Minister Keith Bell.

And yet those issues are not being examined by the commission.

Instead, the commission will simply look at how the department exercises discretion. Not specific cases and instances.

If the claims over Mr Bell’s interference prompted the creation of the commission, it is nonsense that those specific allegations do not form part of the review.

FNM leader Michael Pintard had leaked documents at the time that showed senior immigration officials were concerned with Mr Bell’s involvement in their work.

That particularly related to the release of Chinese nationals working at the British Colonial Hilton in January despite work permit irregularities. That promped then Immigration Director Keturah Ferguson to write to the permanent secretary at the ministry to express disapproval.

It seems we will never get a proper explanation of how that release was decided and authorised if this commission is not to examine it.

Mr Pintard said that the commission is “neither a fully representative consultative body, nor does it have the remit to investigate the precise instances of alleged wrongdoing”.

He said it was “just another example of PLP political performance art masquerading as sound governance. It is only a cynical deflection strategy”.

We are not sure if it is even that. Without findings on specific allegations, its likely outcome is going to be nothing more than general guidelines, which can as quickly be ignored as the previous ones allegedly were.

It does nothing to show exactly what took place – and it does nothing to even attempt to clear Mr Bell’s reputation if the allegations were baseless.

Whether we will ever hear from this commission again is one thing – but given what is being investigated, even if we do, it will tell us nothing about particular concerns that have been raised.

Mr Pintard is right to call that out – and should go one step further. If this review is needed, fine, go right ahead, but where’s the investigation of the specific allegations to go with it?

Mr Pintard should demand the full investigation and the answers that seemed to have a prospect of being forthcoming when Mr Davis announced the commission.

After all, if one set of workers can get a minister swooping in to release them after being detained because of work permit irregularities, why can’t every other business get the same treatment?

What incentive is there for businesses who are doing their part and following the work permit regulations when others seem to have freedom to ignore those rules?

As for others in the construction industry, how much frustration must they feel that one project seems to be able to have significant numbers of workers with irregularities in their permits, while others are held to stringent account?

This commission can go about its work – but where is the investigation that will deliver real answers?

If the government truly wants to commit to transparency, that is the investigation we need to hear about.