University of Prešov in Prešov Institute of Roma Studies Alexander Mušinka THE THINGS THAT WORKED Examples of successful activities on the level of local administration aimed at improving the situation of the Roma Prešov 2012 This project was carried out with the fi nancial support of the Government Offi ce of the Slovak Republic. University of Prešov in Prešov is solely responsible for the content of the project Author: Mgr. Alexander Mušinka, PhD. Title: The Things That Worked. Examples of successful activities on the level of local administration aimed at improving the situation of the Roma Editorial: Prof. RNDr. Ivan Bernasovský, DrSc. Mgr. Tomáš Hrustič, PhD. Cover: Sergej Pančák Illustrations: Fero Guldan Publisher: Publications Department of the Unversity of Prešov in Prešov Edition: First, 2012 Printer: Kušnir Printing Press, Prešov ISBN 978-80-555-0531-2 Contents Introduction 5 Ten years of community development in Spišský Hrhov – possible inspiration for others who are serious 11 Two similar approaches – Pečovská Nová Ves and Sveržov 25 We have to work even though it’s not easy - the town of Lipany 37 Closing in on a socially and economically self-suffi cient community - Nitra nad Ipľom 47 A good direction - Liptovský Mikuláš 59 The negative media image doesn’t mean that nothing should be done: An example from Ostrovany 69 Devising of non-standard approaches – the village of Žalobín 75 Well-aimed help – lower standard fl ats and other activities in the town of Hanušovce nad Topľou 85 What they are doing in Nižný Komárnik has already been recognised 97 Village fi rms – possible impossible? (A few theoretical-practical observations from Spišský Hrhov) 103 The village of Rudlov and the civic association Svatobor pod Oblíkom 115 A village from farmer’s logic – Šimonovce 123 Good activities in the village of Rudňany 133 The primary school in Spišský Hrhov – an example of how to educate well 143 The Podsadek community centre in Stará Ľubovňa 153 Artfarm in Drienovec – connecting creative arts and the Roma community 163 The Pro Tornensis Civic Association from Turňa nad Bodvou 171 Lots of talent, but it has to be fostered (Vladimír Sendrei from Kokava nad Rimavicou) 177 Podbrezová – the STREET ELEMENT break formation 181 Church activities in the village of Čičava 191 List of some abbreviations used IOP – institute of special recipients KC – community centre KSP – community and social work MPSVaR SR – Ministry of Labour, Social Aff airs and Family of the Slovak Republic MRK – marginalised Roma communities MŠ – nursery school MŠ SR – Ministry of Education MVO – non-governmental organisation MVRR SR – Ministry of Construction and Regional Development of the Slovak Republic OSF – Open Society Fund OZ – civic association PHaSR – programme of economic and social development TSP – fi eld social work ÚP – territorial plan ÚPSVaR – Central Offi ce of Labour, Social Aff airs and Family USVRK – Offi ce of the Government Plenipotentiary for Roma Communities VÚC – higher territorial unit ZŠ – primary school Note: In the text we use the expression non-Roma in this form intentionally. We are of the opinion that this form (despite the fact that it violates the offi cial rules of Slovak grammar) most exactly expresses its meaning. In the Slovak language the names of nationalities and ethnicities are written with a capital letter (Roma, Slovak, etc.). In the Romani language there is the concept of a “gádžo”, which means the denoting of all people who are not Roma; this means that it involves members of all nationalities and ethnicities. Therefore, we intentionally translate the concept “gádžo” as non-Roma. Introduction Dear readers, you have in your hands a book about activities in an area which has been presented relatively extensively in society and in the media: from the area regarding the situation of the Roma in Slovakia and the area of resolving their problems. According to the latest information there are in Slovakia nearly 900 concentrations of Roma in which the living situation is partly (but not always) considerably insuffi cient. In many cases these concentrations are in overly dense urban areas, often lacking basic utility networks, and the civic facilities in them can be said to be only very marginal. They are often built on property that is unsettled in terms of legal property ownership or on property with known owners but without their consent (“black” or “illegally”), in shacks or other non-standard dwellings and the like. A high measure of unemployment predominates in these concentrations, as do unsuitable hygienic conditions, a low educational level and apathy. We think that there is no reason to further describe and detail this situation – we are saturated with it almost daily in the media. In fact it is the media that very often paints the worst picture in this fi eld and does so very often without having any elementary knowledge of the state of aff airs, using inappropriate snapshots, half-truths, inaccuracy and distortions, the result of which is the conviction today in the wider public that this situation is not being resolved or ultimately cannot be resolved. This conviction in the majority society rests on an unbelievable number of prejudices, generalities taken out of context, mistaken ideas and stereotypes. The result of this is in many cases growing tension, frustration, resignation or aggression. We intentionally speak in relatively plain and not in absolute terms; i.e. we frequently use words like “in many cases”, “often” or “many times”. The reason is pragmatic. Even the fi rst studies (for example, with the preparation of the Atlas of Roma Communities in the Year 2004 or research of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) from 2006 Report on the Living Conditions of Roma Households in Slovakia) have clearly shown that such a negatively described situation is not present in all Roma concentrations. From the total number of Roma “only” (or up to?) perhaps 14% live in shacks, “only” 4.6% did not have any utility networks (i.e. they did not even have an electricity connection). Nearly half of all Roma in Slovakia live outside of concentrations, i.e. diff used among majority residents, and “classical” settlements divided from a mother village by a certain distance or barrier only make up approximately 18%. Illegal dwellings in Roma 5 concentrations in Slovakia make up “only” about one-third, and the like. In no way do we wish to state here that the situation of the Roma, and especially of Roma in such concentrations, is satisfactory and without problems. We want to emphasise, however, that it is not as is presented in the public. The reason for this negative perception, aside from the mentioned media pressures (which to a certain measure is possible to perceive also in the public), is the absence of elementary quality data about this community. A gigantic “blank spot” still exists on the imaginary map of knowledge of this society. The small amount of quality data that has thus far been produced can in no case fi ll in this gigantic information chasm. In Slovakia there are still an insuffi cient number of capable experts who would dedicate themselves preferentially to this subject. We could “count on the fi ngers of one hand” the number of quality historians, sociologists, cultural anthropologists and the like who devote themselves long-term to Roma themes. Unfortunately, this disadvantageous state cannot be “saved” by even the high number of active lay public who base their opinions on their own experiences or researchers who devote themselves to this subject only marginally/haphazardly or the active Roma themselves who devote themselves to this subject from the position of members of this ethnicity; however, quality scientifi c “technical skill” (I’m not thinking here of formal education) is often lacking. As we have already mentioned the situation in many Roma concentrations suggests the idea that this situation is irresolvable (and is constantly getting worse). However, the opposite is true. The professional public has clearly been saying for a long time that a solution to what in general is called the “Roma problem” exists; however, it is essential to be aware of a number of principle premises and limitations. First of all, it is necessary to keep in mind that no universal solution exists. Thus, since Slovak society is not homogeneous (monolithic) and is divided into many social layers (religious, political and regional groups and the like), so the Roma community is also not homogeneous. Allow us to say that this community is in many cases a good way more stratifi ed than the surrounding majority population. In nearly every Roma community you’ll fi nd specifi cs and a distinctness which are often a limiting factor for how this community operates externally, how it lives, and the kind of relations it has with the majority and the Roma around it. Therefore, it is not possible to create a single functional model which would apply everywhere. Such a model simply will not work eff ectively everywhere. Secondly, it is essential to take into consideration that no rapid solutions exist. The not very satisfactory mutual relationship between the Roma and the majority is the result long-lasting processes, the roots of 6 which are necessary to look for at least ten years in the past. At the same time this often involved the implementation of bad solutions derived from mistaken ideas and a misunderstanding of the nature of the situation and the reasons for it. The last limitation is the fact that in the present situation no inexpensive solutions exist. In one breath, however, we can add that not resolving the problems between the Roma and the majority will cost us signifi cantly more.