Note
on the Communication from the Commission to the council and the European
Parliament ON A COMMUNITY
IMMIGRATION POLICY
The recent communication to
the European Parliament on a joint policy
on immigration issues is a big step towards the harmonization foreseen
in the Treaty of Amsterdam. In
particular the communication underlines that the creation of legal ways of immigration which are
practical and effective is a fundamental element in a balanced immigration
policy and represents a conditio
sine qua non to counterbalance illegal immigration. From this point of view, the preparation of a common
juridical framework for the admission of non EU citizens – particularly
those who request entry into a member state for economic reasons – could
constitute a base for the creation of such a policy. The purpose of this note is to present, in the light of
Italian experience, some points which could contribute to an adequate and
longterm definition of the criteria for admission of economic migrants.
The legislation on immigration
for work in Italy, throughout the 1990s, limited the possibility of legal entry
to workers taken on by employers before arrival. Since there was legally no possibility of direct discussion
on Italian territory between employer and employed to arrange such employment,
this option was not often used by
immigrants, notwithstanding the fact that the Italian labour market in recent
years – also through “regularisation” measures –
absorbed a significant number of foreign workers (some 100,000 a year) and the
law did not pose limits on the number of entry permits for work. In any case the social needs of foreign
workers were not adequately met.
The majority of foreign workers thus attained a legal stay permit by
benefiting from “amnesty” laws to redress situations of stay which
started and continued in illegal conditions. Many of those who entered Italy following prior arrangement
with an employer, actually entered the country illegally first to find work,
and then, having found an employer prepared to go through the legal
procedure, returned to their home
country and came back.
An estimate of the percentage
today of the total of immigrants with regular stay permits for work who first
entered to Italy illegally before achieving legal status would be very high.
Sponsored entry
The entry into force of the
new law on immigration last year introduced a new method of entry:
entry “for insertion in the labour market” of worker for whom
someone legally in Italy (Italian or foreign citizens, companies or
association) guarantees maintenance for a period of one year to search for a
job. This form of entry has been
welcomed, and the ceiling fixed by the Government (in fact very low, 15,000 for
the year 2000) was reached in only a few weeks. That is to say that, due to the large number of persons
illegally present, and the low figures foreseen in the initial introduction of
this measure, the majority of the
quota was used by foreign workers already present in Italy, again following
repatriation which was not intercepted with controls. The quota should be renewed for 2001, given that – at
least according to the draft of the decree presentation by Government to
Parliament – the ceiling has not been raised in the meantime, and the
number of illegal persons in Italy
has probably grown over the last 12 months (despite a significant
increase in border controls). The measure of “loan of guarantee”,
if not rendered useless by a very low ceiling figure, could certainly create
for the future a valid means of entry and one which provides for a certain
percentage of those who hope come to work in Italy. However these measures are
still in the experimental stage.
It is necessary therefore to
widen the scope of workable measures, to avoid that a large section of the
migrant population be “obliged” to follow illegal methods in order
to gain legal status.
The Italian legislation does
actually offer another measure which could respond to this problem. It is foreseen that, where the ceiling
fixed for sponsored entries is not reached in a given time (two months) entries
can be authorized for workers from non EU countries who are able to guarantee
themselves their own maintenance in the year they are searching for work. To this end, the law foresees that the
worker must be registered in the “booking lists” held by Italian
diplomatic representations in emigration countries, and must show that they
have a sum of money of
approx. half the annual sum
of social security (approx. 2,500 euro).
The establishment of very
limited ceilings for sponsored entries, and especially the lack of the booking
lists in Italian consulates and embassies, blocked the use of this mechanism in
the year 2000 – and the situation will probably be the same in the year
2001. It is hoped however that it
will soon be possible to test this method in Italy, and that the same means may
be considered in the European context.
This means of entry would correspond, in fact, more than any other to
the methods effectively adopted by those who enter and stay illegally in Italy,
but it avoids many of the negative aspects ( slipping round the laws on
immigration and work, recourse to traffickers, enforced hiding and risk of involvement
with criminals), which make illegal immigration a social problem.
The essential elements for the
operation of a means of self-sponsored entry to search for work are therefore:
a) institution of an
accessible booking list (also by post or computer, if this helps avoid useless
bureaucracy), based, rather than on professional qualifications, on
“first come first served” (the object being to give opportunity
also to unqualified immigrants who would otherwise be forced to follow illegal
channels).
b) the definition of a
financial requirement which is not too restrictive and in any case such as to
render legal entry more advantageous for the migrant than illegal entry through
traffickers.
c) the definition of
annual quotas which are not excessively low (the prospective migrant must be
able to see his application progressing with reasonable speed; if progress is
too slow and means a wait of many years before legal entry is possible, the
worker will again be tempted to try illegal means) but in any case quotas should be linked to measures
which guarantee effectively a correct social integration.
d) Efficient
orientation of the migrant in the difficult phase of searching for work.
If it is decided not to follow, in the EC, the method currently
being tried in Italy of defining entry quotas, and if it is decided instead to
leave more space to market dynamics (even with adequate attention to social
tensions which could arise due to lack of sufficient reception structures), a
somewhat modified mechanism for selfsponsored entry to search for work could be
created.
The mechanism in question
could consist of entry for short stay (say 6 months) conditional on fulfilment
of the following criteria:
a)
availability of means of subsistence, proportional to the amount of
social security and the length of stay (this requirement could be more easily
demonstrated due to the shorter length of stay, than that described in the
preceding paragraph).
b)
Depositing on entry a travel document for eventual repatriation or the
sum of money necessary to obtain it.
c)
Taking of fingerprints.
It would then not be necessary
to have a numerical ceiling.
The citizen of a third country
thus admitted would be authorized to search for dependant work, and also to
carry out occasional autonomous work (it would mean, in other words, a form of
“tourism for work”).
The authorization of stay
could be, on request, extended for a similar period, providing possession of
corrisponding means could be demonstrated (sign of a certain integration in the
economic field). It could also
– and this is the relevant point – be changed into an authorization
for a longer period (similar to that granted to those who today make legal entry
for subordinate or autonomous work) where there is a job available, or after a
sufficient number of extentions of the original authorization, which
demonstrate adequate integration(whether it be by autonomous or occasional
means).
The deposition of fingerprints
and travel document would enable immediate identification and eventual
repatriation of the foreigner who, avoiding the regulations for short stay,
would be subject to subsequent controls.
A mechanism of this kind, even
though it could not be considered complete liberalization of migratory
movements, would provide a legal framework to keep track in a realistic way of
what is happening today in immigration – often disregarding formally
restrictive regulations. The
states would retain the possibility of avoiding intolerable tensions linked to
eccessively precarious means of integration, whilst it would certainly stop
trafficking organizations taking advantage of immigrants wanting to make a
better life for themselves.
ACSE
Caritas Italiana
Comunità di
S. Egidio
CSER (Scalabrinianan Fathers)
Federazione delle
Chiese Evangeliche in Italia (FCEI)
Fondazione
Migrantes della CEI
Jesuit Refugee
Service
UCSEI (Ufficio Centrale Studenti Esteri in
Italia)
Segreteria di
coordinamento:
Via Firenze 38 - 00184 Roma - tel. 06 48905101 - fax 06 48916959