Define migration

FROM basic social science, we know that the word ‘migration’ is the movement of a large number of people from one place to another.
Whether it be seasonal or mass migration of people, there are factors (pull or force) which trigger such movements of people.
In its simplest understanding, migration of people is the result of a permanent or a seasonal settlement to which gives rise to a hamlet, a village, shanty town, city and a new independent nation – if you like; from causes of famine, war (civil or criminal in nature) – natural and man-made factors; and the list goes on.
We have seen on TV, read on newspapers and through other forms of media channels that people, due to forced or voluntaryism, individuals and families leave their native homes because of famine, civil war and persecution.
They are regarded as refugees when they try to seek refuge in another place.
Those who fled from their native homes due to political warfare and any other political reasons, which put their lives at risks, are a group of refugees who are regarded as asylums.
They often seek assistance from their host country’s government for protection and an alternate resettlement.
They are referred to as asylum seekers.
Given the high rate of unplanned settlements popping up in the nation’s industrial and cosmopolitan cities of Port Moresby, Lae, Mt Hagen and other growing towns, I believe, the term ‘refugee’ should be revised and defined to fit the local context of influx rural-urban migration.
Now the question is, how do we define and categorise those immigrants (those who have left their native districts and provinces to come and settle in another district or province) who migrated for politically related reasons (tribal warfare due to politics or tribal fights as civil in nature)?
In this context, they are believed to be refugees already, occording to social science definition and the factors which are appealing to regard a person as a refugee.
They should be assisted to seek asylum from the authority from their secondary home.
By doing this is legal and will help the host government to plan on the budget and not over their budget, which is the current trend the country has been experiencing there and then.
Do we define these group of immigrants as asylums in the process of seeking asylum?
I hope not; because since their arrival time to their host province, they have not voluntarily sought for asylum so they would be regarded as an asylum seeker.
Almost 90 per cent of those immigrants give reason of tribal fights (which is an extreme psychological burden of a person’s mind) which a genuine reason to seem assistance and protection from the host province.
If this is a legal practice in other countries of the world, why has the PNG government not taken a chance to research and try to address the issue of unplanned migration – which is now a very big problem.
If these immigrants are not categorised as refugees, then the meaning of an asylum and an immigrant within a country in the study of general social science has been a mistake and should be a subject for review.
The government has spent a lot in the Manus asylum project without even doing proper research in establishing facts of why unplanned settlements are popping up, causing immense pressure on the power to ‘keep and feed’ and to minimise law and order issues and improving these people’s basic necessities of life (a promise that only our grand, grandchildren will experience in cities and towns).
Now that we are seeking opinions of people to ‘move back people to their native homes’ it is interesting that this idea, if established, can only be another multi-million kina project.
I’m afraid the government has gone off-track in the spirit of a sound project leadership and management approach where the three-tier factors of time-cost-resource (scope) is of paramount importance, when we are experiencing a very serious debt game here.
I believe they (those people who have ‘ran away’ from their homes long since independence and those who have recently migrated into towns and cities due to nature or man-made factors which put their lives at risk) should be regarded as asylums.
The study of migration in general social science categorises such a group of immigrants – and that only shall be legal and within a statutory, planned budgetary framework of the host province (town or a city) to cater for immigrants who fall under this category.
I believe, by legally classifying these group of immigrants will assist the government of the day to plan wisely to accommodate them and will assist in monitoring of their behaviours – not to restrict their freedom of movement and expression of thoughts, but to monitor them like any other asylum seeker would feel, do and have.
Until then, the opinion of this Vagrancy Act will be cost-effective and time bound in this pressing economic time.

Concerned Mosbi East