Showing posts with label The Open Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Open Society. Show all posts

Monday, December 12, 2011

Breakfast on the Bus

This article comes to us from The Open Society via The Roma Virtual Network. I've had the opportunity to hear the authors of this article, Gwendolyn Albert and Jack Greenberg, speak at the Inaugural Romani Studies Conference at Berkeley in November. Please follow this link for more articles and information from The Open Society. http://blog.soros.org/2011/12/breakfast-on-the-bus/

Breakfast on the Bus

December 5, 2011 | by and
Not more than a two-hour drive from Budapest’s elegant pedestrian downtown, you wouldn’t really notice that something is out of kilter. The provincial towns have new, bright renovated centers, neat cobbled public areas and are imbued with a cozy neighborliness. Apparently, the post-communist transition is complete and everyone has prosperity and freedom of choice.

Not so.

Travel a little further to the periphery, scratch a little deeper into the social fabric of Hungary, and stop for a moment, and you will soon find the peripheral neighborhoods that would evoke comparisons with the most heartbreaking locations of the Civil Rights era: improvised housing totally inappropriate for a harsh temperate climate, far too many dirty, underfed, and illiterate children, nearly total unemployment for anyone of working age and a deep reliance on what few social benefits suffice to keep a family at or below the poverty line, muddy streets that better resemble a bayou than a public road, and perhaps the best building in the neighborhood, a windswept school, what could be a beacon of stability, progress, and a real future or another marker of segregation and utter despair. But who are these people, hardly any different in appearance from anyone else and avoided like lepers, pushed to the margins, denied services, and treated as subhuman?

Ring any bells?

They are Roma, one of Europe’s most diverse and largest ethnic group estimated to be nearly twelve million strong, people without a state, a parliament, or a clear voice—and a convenient political threat by populist hatemongers in Europe in need of easy political points to hide their own incompetence and mismanagement. Long ignored, far too frequently blamed for every social trauma imaginable, they have been doomed to the margins with no remedy in sight despite a huge philanthropic mobilization and the decisions of Europe’s most authoritative courts.
But take a breath, peep inside the local Roma school and see what you find.

Will it be a heartwarming exception or a broad policy of integration? Mixed rows of Roma and Hungarian children working diligently and attentive, an array of school supplies for each, a teacher and a Roma teaching assistant carefully attending to each child’s needs, helping them surmount the daily obstacles to their education and implant in them the beginnings of the knowledge, perspectives and skills that will allow them to advance equally towards the educational milestones ahead?
Or will it be the chilling status quo, what the Roma have come to expect as typical? A hostile, uncommunicative teacher insisting that her hungry, cold, 100-percent Roma class only fill in the color between the lines, hardly bothering to assign in-class tasks that would require any mental agility from the pupils, much less daring to suggest any homework, the teacher capable of little more than another groan at the thought of another hopeless day diluting the curriculum to make her job simpler?

Naturally, with Hungarian public opinion hardened by a hostile, homogenous domestic media and politics held hostage by revisionist public attitudes towards diversity and modernity, it’s a stalemate between the status quo and the exception: while the state gives lip service to the directives and decisions coming down from the European Union, very little is done, and what’s done is done cautiously with the expected methods of a resistant bureaucracy: decision-making delays, new rounds of studies, more conferences, and ill-willed vacillation on commitments until a new election cycle, when any progress is flushed down the toilet to cater to misconceived majority interests.
Meanwhile, in Hungary’s nearly 1,600 impoverished or marginal Roma settlements scattered around its glorious towns and villages, many local schools doggedly hang on to the old segregation model buttressed by the hollowed out reform vocabulary of decentralization and choice, municipalities repeatedly separating students and classes for fear of earning the electoral ire of the majority—unless forced by the expense of an impending court case or the rare charismatic mayor to change their curriculum and enrollment procedures.

Working in step with a few NGOs to end the worst cases of segregation and inconceivable gaps in Roma children’s education, the Roma Education Fund provides educational programs, incentives, and scholarships to Roma children to attend school and achieve in the classroom. For the youngest and most at risk, these interventions may be morning and midday meals, regular doctor’s visits, basic literacy, and numeracy. For students further in their educational careers, the Roma Education Fund sponsors after-school centers and tutoring tied to academic achievement, and in the most intransigent cases the Fund may even resort to what was the most radical action of the American Civil Rights era with mostly positive implications for generations to come, the decision that catapulted the race and education issue from the TV in the living room to the neat suburban districts nearest you: busing.
But set aside the scenes of hysterical white parents in America in 1971 chaining themselves to school buses ordered to transport their precious white children to black schools. This will never happen in Hungary, such is stigma associated with Roma, and any politician who openly accepts such an option will soon find himself/herself without a job before too long, penalized by an irrational majority explicitly/passively supporting Roma children’s segregation from white schools.

Bus some exceptions have been created by ambitious young mayors, like in the unpronounceable named Hodmezovasarhely or Szeged, where desegregation started right after local elections, Roma-only schools were closed down, school busing is paid by the city, and the Roma Education Fund's mentors are working with the Roma pupils in the afternoons. These actions have been singled out in the best practice catalog of the European Union for a third time and visitors are coming yearly wondering if it is really possible.

Yet, just because you can’t integrate Roma all at once does not mean you should do nothing.
Within the northeastern town of Nyiregyhaza’s municipal limits, two locations host its poorest Roma residents, the Guszev and Keleti settlements, both dispersed far from the town center and isolated from any white neighborhoods or schools. Here, a number of attempts have been made to ensure that the children living in these poor areas are provided with quality education and opportunities for advancement. Over the last four years, a legal campaign by Chance for Children Foundation has forced the local government in Nyiregyhaza to shut down the segregated primary school in this neighborhood and open the doors of Nyiregyhaza’s supposedly off-limits majority schools to Roma pupils.

But how do young children living in a neighborhood untouched by Nyiregyhaza’s public transport services (unlike the majority of white students) get to downtown schools in which they are now suddenly enrolled? What hazards await them on their commute by foot during the few hours of light of eastern Hungary’s notoriously bitter winter? Will any of them show up?

Rather than waiting for a new set of indicators on attendance and achievement for these pupils, the Roma Education Fund, backed by the local Roma community, refused to accept that they were being given access to education (integration) but nothing else other than a mandatory, legislated discount for school-age children on public transport. A solution was negotiated in which the municipality agreed to pay for the driver, fuel, and maintenance, and a grant was cobbled together to purchase to two buses in order to collect pupils each day from Guszev and Keleti, deliver them to their new schools and bring them home each afternoon. Nearly everyone reported better results and seemed to relish the chance to mingle and integrate: Roma children acquired new perspectives and knowledge outside their isolated neighborhoods, Roma parents often accompanied their children on the bus and joined programs to boost their own and their children’s literacy and numeracy and Hungarian-language skills, teachers genuinely welcomed Roma pupils into their classes and schools, and a seemingly receptive majority was glad to see progress, even if the pupils might not have been as well groomed as their classmates and were entitled to breakfast and lunch.

But this cautious cooperation has ceased in the past year due to alleged financial pressures in the municipality and been conveniently matched by a new attempt to reopen Nyiregyhaza’s segregated Roma schools. The buses have been abandoned in a municipal garage and the students from Guszev and Keleti have been left to wind their way to school and back along Nyiregyhaza’s threatening winter roads.

For every bit of progress, two bits of revisionism.

That’s why we fight and that’s why we started.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Roma Integration

This article comes to us through the Roma Virtual Network from The Open Society blog which work to improve the lives of the world's most vulnerable people and to promote human rights, justice, and accountability. This blog aims to bring that work a little closer by giving our experts and grantees a platform to reflect on their issues, sharpen their thinking, and engage in a conversation on how to advance open society values around the globe. You can find them at http://www.soros.org/.

What Lies Ahead for the EU Framework on Roma Integration?

October 13, 2011 | by
When the European Council endorsed the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 [pdf] on June 24, Commissioner Vivien Reding declared:
Today's agreement is a huge step forward for millions of Roma around Europe. The EU is sending a strong signal: the exclusion of the Roma is not compatible with our societal values and our economic model.
A giant step for EU officials maybe, but a giant step for mankind, a huge step forward for millions of Roma? There is much to be done to live up to the hyperbole, because the challenge facing the European Framework is stark. For how do we define “societal values” in the face of the electoral successes of hate-mongering, far-right political parties across Europe, and the increasingly strident—if incoherent—denunciations of multiculturalism emanating from the mainstream right?
And what’s inclusive about “our economic model” in a Union where so many of the constituent member states remain in thrall to the orthodoxies of neoliberalism? There is a very real prospect that the Europe of 2020 could comprise increasingly closed societies and illiberal democracies where inequality and poverty thrive unabated, and Roma and other visible minorities continue to be denigrated and humiliated as scapegoats and pariahs.

However the Framework hints at another possibility: a viable prospect of forward-looking and fully inclusive societies that foster a sense of common belonging, cohesion, and mutual respect among all citizens regardless of their ethnicity. For this reason, and whatever the caveats, the Framework is to be welcomed by all who are committed to deepening democracy.

The anti-Roma riots and conflagrations across Bulgaria serve as a grim reminder that across Europe, anti-Gypsyism is so deeply ingrained—prejudice and intolerance towards Roma is so pervasive—that national integration strategies cannot succeed without resolute and unequivocal action to combat racism and discrimination. Put simply, prejudice unchecked will derail progress. On March 8, a resolution of the European Parliament called on the European Commission to link social inclusion priorities to a clear set of objectives that included protection of citizens against discrimination in all fields of life; promotion of social dialogue between Roma and non-Roma to combat racism and xenophobia; and for the Commission, as guardian of the treaties, to ensure full implementation of relevant legislation and appropriate sanctions against racially motivated crimes.

The Commission is entirely correct in its insistence that the primary responsibility for safeguarding the rights, well-being, and security of citizens lies with national governments. However, if the Framework is to live up to its billing as “10 years to make a difference,” then the Commission must do everything within its remit and competences to take up the Council’s invitation and signal to member states and candidate countries that nothing less than a zero-tolerance approach will suffice when it comes to anti-Gypsyism and all forms of discrimination against Roma.

The Framework priorities are identical to those of the Roma Decade, in that EU member states are urged to set targets, allocate adequate funding, define concrete action plans, and develop monitoring systems to measure progress.

The family resemblances between the Decade and the Framework are such that there are valuable lessons to be learned that can save a lot of time. Five years into the Framework we don’t want to be talking about the implementation gaps, the lack of realistic targets in the priority areas, inadequate budgets, or the lack of coordination across line ministries with regards to the National Roma Integration Strategies. Five years into the Framework we don’t want to be sitting in conferences and workshops bemoaning the lack of reliable disaggregated data, or pondering what to do about the bottlenecks and obstacles to making the most of EU funds for Roma inclusion. Five years into the Framework we don’t want to be facing a situation where the living conditions of millions of Roma living in acute deprivation has actually worsened, and anti-Roma prejudice is still gaining ground. Because as we lurch into the second half of the Decade, that’s where we are right now.

This is not to downplay the Decade’s achievements which have provided working templates of what needs to be done to achieve integration, equity, social cohesion, and combat discrimination and prejudice. At the last International Steering Committee Meeting in Prague, at the close of the Czech Presidency, Decade governments fully endorsed the EU Framework and pledged to bring all the convening power, experience, and knowledge gained since the launch of the Decade, to ensure that the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies meets its primary stated objective: to put an end to the exclusion of Roma.

There is a wealth of experience and good practice that has been generated since the launch of the Decade that needs to be harnessed to best effect and scaled up. Between now and 2020, one definite lesson learned is that there is a need for the Commission to put in place a coordinating mechanism proportionate to the tasks that lie ahead; a coordinating mechanism that can sustain the necessary momentum to ensure that this EU Framework will, to use the Commission’s catchphrase, “make a difference by 2020.”

The danger is that we could witness a familiar pattern of diminishing political will, resulting in weak and uneven implementation, with hopes for a better future for Roma once again raised and then duly dashed. And this would posit a real danger for the future, because the present situation is simply unsustainable.

It is a matter of regret to note that soon after the Prague meeting, and the Decade pledge to support the Framework, the Czech government was the first to decline the Commission’s request to submit a national Roma integration strategy. The government stated that it:
has a well-developed national coordination mechanism relating to the Romany agency. It is neither desirable nor useful to create new tasks for ministries, especially at the time of budget austerity.
Quite apart from the almost weekly incidents of violent extremist mobs descending upon Roma settlements, there is much to indicate that the “well-developed” mechanism for Roma integration has broken down.

The resignation in May of more than 50 education experts tasked with designing a plan for inclusive education, and the ongoing protests from political parties and civil society groups concerning the role of Ladislav Bátora within the Education Ministry, suggests that there is neither consensus nor progress on the key priority of equal access to quality education for Roma.

In a damning public letter announcing their resignation, the 50 experts stated that the stalling of reforms means that “the Czech Republic is violating its obligations flowing from international treaties and from the European Court for Human Rights judgment,” and that “‘inclusive education’ now amounts to nothing more than mere rhetoric intended to calm the international community.” The sociologist Ivan Gabal stated that “we currently have 16,000 Roma pupils in the ‘special schools,’ and last year less than 50 of them managed to return to mainstream schools—in other words a minuscule number. This shows that the current state of affairs is not in order.”

The Czech Republic is in something of a crisis, anti-Roma hate speech by politicians is ever more common, hate crime is on the rise, the neo-Nazis are on the march. And to cap it all, in a time of austerity, there is the real danger, according to the former Prime Minister Jiří Paroubek, that hundreds of billions of crowns from the EU financing prospects for 2007–2013 that could go for regional development “won't even be touched.”

It is to be hoped that the Czech opt-out is an aberration and that EU member states with significant Roma populations will follow the example set by the Hungarian government and meet the submission deadline. The strategy outlined by the Hungarian government is rich in analytical detail and ambitious in scope. This strategy lays down a sound basis for discussion, consultation, and participation. It is to be hoped that the enthusiasm and commitment shown by State-Secretary Balogh, will be shared across key line ministries, especially the ministry of education.
“Nothing about us without us” was the catch-call at the launch of the Decade, with the assertion that Roma participation “will make or break” the Decade. The reality is that the lack of substantive Roma participation is at the heart of the shortcomings of the Decade so far.

The time has passed when Roma can simply be viewed as an undifferentiated, passive, and dependent population. The Commission has a vital role to play to promote substantive Roma participation in this process and to strongly encourage member states to embrace the idea that active citizenship is fundamental to social inclusion, and include all of the citizenry regardless of their ethnicity. Roma communities and representatives must be accorded the opportunity for participation in shaping the policies and initiatives that directly impact their lives.

From the side of the municipalities, partnerships with community-based civil society organizations are vital to close the evergreen implementation gap. Civil society organizations have garnered much by way of sound practice and lessons learned. From the side of the NGOs, to transform project-based knowledge into sustainable change, partnerships with municipalities are essential.

There has been little evidence to date of coherent, complex, and comprehensive policy interventions to simultaneously combat poverty; provide access to health services and quality education; and resolve housing and infrastructure issues. Such approaches require the ingredients of political will, partnership, resolve, know-how, and knowledge. It is to be hoped that the Framework can provide the necessary glue to hold these ingredients together.