4, Rue de
Pascale, B-1040 Bruxelles
174,
Rue Joseph II, B-1000 Bruxelles
Boltzmanngasse
14, A-1090 Wien
4,
Rue De Pascale, B-1040 Bruxelles
8
Haachtsesteenweg, B-1210 Brussel
50,
Square Ambiorix, B-1000 Bruxelles
"For I was a
stranger and you welcomed me” (Mt 25:35)
Contribution
to the debate on the
Community Immigration Policy,
(COM (2000) 757 final)
The above-named
organisations represent Christian churches throughout Europe, Roman Catholic,
Orthodox, Protestant and Anglican, as well as church agencies particularly
concerned with migrants and refugees.
From our biblical
and Church traditions, migration and welcoming of strangers are not new phenomena.
As Christian organisations, we are deeply committed to the dignity of the human
individual. We therefore welcome the opportunity to comment on the EU
Commission's Communication on a Community Immigration Policy, COM (2000) 757
final.
This paper
focuses on (1) the need for a policy shift and a welcoming society, as well as
(2) additional considerations regarding effective cooperation with countries of
origin, the context of enlargement and irregular migration. Specific comments
(3) are made on the immigration policy framework, on the common approach
regarding admission, equal rights and free movement, on enhanced integration
policy and the need for information and monitoring. A last chapter (4) draws
conclusions containing practical proposals.
1. A
necessary policy shift: from preventing migration to active immigration
We sincerely
welcome the Communication’s new approach, which constitutes in fact a
policy shift towards a pro-active immigration policy. The Communication clearly
recognises the need for a change in the overall conception of migration.
Migratory movements have become a permanent global phenomenon. They are closely
related to the EU’s relationship to the countries of origin, for example
to development co-operation, world trade policy, arms exports and military
policy where the Union bears a strong responsibility.
In comparison
to previous attempts to launch a similar discussion, both the political scene
and public opinion have become more open to the subject. The concept of zero
immigration, as an underlying principle of policies existing during the last
decades, has been misleading. Moreover, the adaptation of other policy areas to
the logic of this underlying principle has produced lamentable effects in areas
such as irregular immigration, trafficking and smuggling in human beings etc.
In our view, a thorough review of all related policy areas seems necessary.
Global
migration will continue to be a reality which no Member State can face alone.
The reasons are manifold. Oppression, war and internal conflicts force people
to leave their homes; poverty and drought, environmental disasters cause people
to seek a secure place; a lack of trade and job opportunities lead many to look
for a better place to make their living. In some ways, global migration is an
expression of inequality which ought to be addressed also in view of
establishing just relationships.
We wish to reiterate the Churches'
recognition of migration as a twofold right, to leave one’s country and
to look for better conditions of life in another country. We are aware that an
“open door policy” is not conceivable and, certainly, migration
(policy) will not solve the challenges of global imbalance. The exercise of
such a right needs to be seen in the context of the global common good and
justice. In this context, however, it is important to prevent unilateral
decisions that are harmful to the weakest.
A
Welcoming Society
The
Communication rightly emphasises a welcoming society as an essential element of
a pro-active immigration policy. By being able to welcome – and integrate
– foreign cultures and traditions, Europe can show that it is faithful to
its history of permanent exchange between people of different origin. In a
world which is coming closer together, a European continent which would not be
able to welcome migrants from outside its own continent would entirely deny its
own history.
We wish to
recall that European colonialism – as an important part of its history
– can be seen as a root cause of still existing economic, political and
cultural domination in various areas throughout the world. For centuries,
Europeans have migrated to all parts of the globe, often without any ambition
to integrate into existing societies. We recall this history, because it is
against this background that many people from other regions in the world meet
Europeans. It is important to be aware of this history also when we talk about
integration of foreigners into our European societies.
At the same
time we notice that people in European societies are concerned about their
security. As one of the consequences, xenophobia and racism have been rising
throughout Europe. This can certainly be dangerous to the societies, but we are
also convinced that comprehensive social and integration policies are able to
counter these phenomena. In this context, media play an important role. They
bear a responsibility to avoid distorted images and to provide comprehensive
information on migration[1].
However, as the
Commission rightly states, the governments of Member States need to work openly
and actively on these measures. If third country nationals are accorded equal
rights and enabled to participate also in policy development, particularly on local
level, joint efforts of European and immigrant persons will be far easier.
Integration is not a one-way road: it is a task of citizens as well as
migrants.
We would like
to recall that important work in these fields has already been accomplished on
various international levels which ought to be taken into account like the
International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Civil and
Political Rights, ratified by all EU Member States. More recently these rights
have been integrated and consolidated into the United Nations International
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of their Families.
The following
more detailed remarks may contain several repetitions, which underline the
complexity and the inter-relatedness of the different aspects of migration.
2. Additional
considerations towards a comprehensive immigration policy
2.1.
Effective co-operation
In the context
of a partnership with the countries of origin, which we strongly welcome as a
principle, several questions arise in relation to the current practice of these
partnerships.
Within a
comprehensive approach to the phenomenon of migration, the development of the
local situation in the countries of origin is of particular importance. The
contribution of migrants’ remittances to the development of their country
of origin should not be underestimated, as the examples of the Philippines and
Mexico have shown during the last decades[2].
This economic contribution of migrants is, however, not complemented by legal
guarantees for their rights and social standards by the host or by the
countries of origin.
Joint debates
and action by both the Councils of Justice and Home Affairs and of Development
Co-operation Ministers as started in the year 2000 would therefore be an
essential element of this future policy. Within these debates, it should be
taken into account that both policy areas have until now been guided by
entirely different approaches: global development is a middle or long term
perspective while the protection of borders and public order (Home Affairs) can
be seen as a rather short term policy. Development policy considers the needs
in other countries, while home affairs naturally focus on domestic concerns.
Another aspect
is to regard migrants and migrants’ organisations as actors of
immigration and also as a link to their country of origin. The choice whether
they regard their life in an EU country as permanent or short-term should be
left open to migrants themselves. This determination requires that third
country nationals be granted rights accordingly to facilitate such a decision.
Currently
migrants often hesitate to travel back and forth between their country of
origin and residence, because such travels might endanger their residence
status. Another aspect is the lack of recognition of already acquired pension
rights in other countries.
It would be of
great value for future integration, if comprehensive information as well as
preparations for the country of destination, language courses etc., were
already offered in the countries of origin.
The EU
Council's High Level Working Group on Asylum and Migration has touched on some
of these issues in its analysis of some countries of origin. However, the
implementation of measures in co-operation with the countries of origin is not
yet living up to the expectations.
Of particular
concern is the elaboration of repatriation clauses, currently a condition to
all bilateral EU treaties. Although we recognise that repatriation would remain
one of the elements of a comprehensive immigration and asylum policy, we recall
that any repatriation policy should be based preferentially on the concept of
voluntary return. In any case, the human dignity of the person who needs to be
returned must always be respected and preserved. Special attention needs to be
given to victims of trafficking, especially in the case of sexual or workforce
exploitation (slavery). Priority must be given to their protection needs before
and when repatriation is considered.
2.2.
Enlargement
It
is surprising that in the context of a Community Immigration Policy for the
coming years, thus a middle term view, the issue of “internal”
migration (between present EU Member States and candidate countries who will be
part of the Union) has not been addressed in a more comprehensive way. Taking
into account the current debate on restrictions to free movement for citizens
of new Member States, we believe the EU should apply the same principles as for
previous enlargements. Access to the labour market and the free movement of
persons are among the fundamental freedoms of the EC treaty. They should be
facilitated as early as possible. For public opinion in the candidate
countries, this is an extremely important aspect of integration in the European
Union. In the current political debate the possible East-West migration within
the enlarged Union is often exaggerated. Perspectives for economical
development as well as potential gains are not sufficiently taken into account.
People's fears should be taken seriously. A transparent information strategy
should be put in place. Scientific studies like the Final Report “The
Impact of Eastern Enlargement on Employment and Wages in the EU Member
States”, carried out on behalf of the European Commission[3],
may not have been adequately communicated or are not yet recognised
sufficiently.
Another
aspect is the dramatic demographic decline in most Central and Eastern European
countries[4].
While demography is a central element of the immigration debate in the present
EU Member States, there is no sufficient recognition of these developments in
the enlarged Union.
Whenever
the future immigration policy gets into effect, many countries of Central and
Eastern Europe will be members of the Union. Presently, these countries are
supposed to adopt the EU acquis, suggesting a rather repressive approach to
immigration, while the demographic situation may require increased immigration
into these countries as well. At the same time, there is little experience with
migration phenomena, which is especially delicate in countries which are in the
process of reaffirming their national identity. These aspects make it urgent to
include Central and Eastern Europe in the debate from the beginning. Our common
immigration policy for the future should be discussed and decided by all
present and future EU members. We consider such a broad debate as essential for
public opinion in East and West.
2.3.
Irregular migration
As many
immigrants in search for a better life currently either have to enter the EU
irregularly or to resort to the asylum channel, the first step to achieve a
coherent and more pro-active immigration policy is the opening of legal
channels for immigration. Due to the current lack of sufficient legal
possibilities to immigrate, society is facing the increasing problem of
irregular migration and critical employment situations. New forms of slavery
can be observed. This does not only include the exploitation of women as
prostitutes, but also of domestic workers or of workers on construction sites.
Paradoxically, these appalling circumstances could logically be seen as the
living proof that the clandestine labour market is actually able to absorb the
influx of these migrants.[5]
There are
reasons to believe that with the opening of immigration possibilities less
people would be forced to choose these ways as their last means to enter the
EU. In this, unfortunately, they are exploited by and unwittingly supporting
the work of traffickers. However, it should be remembered in this context that
even refugees often have to resort to smugglers or traffickers to escape
persecution and reach a safe place[6].
A comprehensive
view of a Community Immigration Policy needs to take into consideration that
thousands of migrants are living in irregular situations throughout the Union.
The Communication recalls several Member States’ efforts for
regularisation. Still, many immigrants live among us without basic social
rights or even without any rights at all. The recognition of the need for legal
channels consequently implies to recognise the presence of migrants who already
live on the territory and have arrived here without complying with legal entry
obligations. Current policies show a broad variety of approaches, ranging from
different regularisation procedures to (occasional) case-by-case
considerations. Member States should be encouraged to give account and analysis
of their respective situation. An exchange of best practice as well as
consequences of these policies might help to find appropriate solutions.
Evidently, criminal
organisations gaining from trafficking need to be fought. However, the
protection of individual victims, and often also of their family in the country
of origin, has to be considered carefully.
A person who exercises his or her right
to search for better living conditions by legitimate means should not be
considered as a criminal simply for doing so. Regardless of their legal
status, their fundamental rights such as education and health-care need to be
honoured, which they should be able to demand without fear of being penalised.
Current provisions in some Member States where every person can have access to
legal proceedings regardless of the status should be regarded as best practice.
Organisations
providing assistance in these fields to irregular migrants should not be
penalised. We believe that it would be of great benefit to the immigration
debate if the skills and qualifications also of irregular migrants were
considered.
3. Specific
Comments
Regarding
several specific subjects addressed in the Communication, we would like to give
the following comments.
3.1.
Framework for a EU immigration policy
The
Commission’s Communication rightly re-emphasises the priorities of the
Union’s Migration policy as defined by the Tampere European Council in
October 1999.
It
is important to stress that all four main strands of a European migration
policy underlined at Tampere are equally essential to a coherent immigration
policy: (1) partnership with the countries of origin, (2) a common European
asylum regime, (3) fair treatment and increased integration of nationals of
third countries who reside legally on Union territory, and (4) better
management of migratory flows. Instead of focusing solely on better protection
against irregular immigration, this last point especially should now be
interpreted in broader terms of a comprehensive immigration policy. Moreover,
effective links between the different policy areas should be improved.
A future
immigration policy of the European Union should take as a starting point
Europe’s heritage as an area of exchange and mutual enrichment, recalling
the historical benefits of migrants in European societies. A European Union
that promotes the freedom of movement and residence inside its borders as one
of its guiding principles should not appear as a fortress to the outside world.
Any framework
for an EU Immigration Policy must without any doubt include family
reunification and the admission of refugees, asylum seekers, and others whose
protection needs are recognised. We strongly support the European
Commission’s approach in this respect.
Family
reunification and admission of persons in need of international protection
should not be regarded as a burden, but a necessary consequence of the European
Union’s respect for human rights as well as Member States’
international obligations.
We believe that
the benefits particularly of family reunification have not yet been adequately
assessed and communicated. Not only should family members get work permits as
soon as possible, but their qualifications and skills – especially
women’s, as they usually have less opportunities – should be
recognised and developed. Easier access to employment would also be beneficial
to a large number of refugees.
3.2.
Common European Approach regarding admission
criteria, recognition of equal rights and free movement
It is obvious
that an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice without internal borders needs a
common definition for admission into its territory. We recognise that there are
considerable differences concerning Member States’ capabilities to deal
with migrants and refugees. While these differences need to be taken into
account in the context of a Common Policy, they should not justify different
standards with regard to visa regulations and admission criteria.
Secondly, we
think that a key element to effectively establish such an Area of Justice is
certainly a commonly defined minimum set of migrants’ rights. The guiding
principles of such a policy should be based on the concepts of equal treatment
and transparency for both migrants and the society.
It should
include freedom of movement as well as establishing the principle of equal
treatment also for long-term resident migrants. It should further include a set
of rights as outlined in the United Nations' International Convention on the
Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
Naturally, the European Social Charter as well as the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union form the basis to define migrants' rights. A set
of rights for long-term residents granted by one Member State should be
recognised by the others without discrimination.
Administrative
conditions should be as simple as possible. For example, we cannot see any
reason why a long-term residence permit should not systematically be connected
to a work permit. Furthermore, we advocate that all third country nationals who
are granted a residence permit be entitled to a work permit to be able to make
their living, so that they are not forced to live in dependence on social
benefits[7],
or are not pushed into criminal activities to meet their basic needs. We are
convinced that this would be important to the migrants, as unemployment has
severe psychological consequences on an individual, but also to the perception
of immigrants by the society at large.
3.3.
Enhanced integration policy
In order to
maintain Europe’s tradition as a welcoming society, the priority is to
combat racism and xenophobia. In this context, already existing programs need
strong support by public opinion. An underlying problem is the perception of
migrant workers as temporary residents. As the Communication rightly states,
the “Gastarbeiter” idea of migrants who leave the society after
"they have done their job" has proved an illusion. Furthermore, it
has been detrimental to integration. Public affirmation – by some
politicians – that migrants will only stay for a certain period of time
will not lead to the shift in public opinion which is bitterly needed. An
immigration policy cannot be implemented without strong political determination
and impetus. The political debate must make a resolute commitment in favour of
promoting pluralist societies and fighting the root causes of racism and
xenophobia. This implies the open commitment to a durable stay for migrants
and, particularly when they have stayed already for five years or more,
accepting them as long-term residents. Such a long-term permit should be open
also to refugees after some years of residence in a safe country.
Secondly, an
important aspect of an area of freedom, security and justice implies equal
rights for all who live in it. An effective integration policy should not only
start “as soon as possible after admission”[8],
but ideally with the individual migrant’s admission to the EU.
Preparatory information and action in the country of origin (see above) will
not only contribute to better partnership, but also constitute an element of
enhanced integration efforts. Granting migrants a wide range of rights from the
beginning of their stay should also give them the freedom of choice whether or
not to enjoy these rights. On the one hand, this would strengthen their
position as actors of migration. On the other hand, this can foster a sense of
belonging on the part of the immigrants who would feel themselves not as an
economic burden but as contributing members of the wider society whose presence
is recognised and needed[9].
We support the
idea of a “civic citizenship” as mentioned by the European
Commission, as the enjoyment of the same range of rights would contribute to
better integration into society. Such a newly defined concept of citizenship
should be independent of the nationality and be based on the recognition of
social, cultural and economic rights of each individual resident. It would
facilitate participation for migrants and allow them to perceive the Europe
they live in as a community of contributors[10],
involving rights as well as obligations towards society. As developed above,
this citizenship would include the right to free movement at the latest when
the status of long term resident is acquired. Taking into consideration that
free movement is not even exercised broadly by EU citizens, competition within
the EU’s labour market might profit from increased flexibility.
As stated
above, we hope that the interpretation of the non-discrimination legislation
will cover third-country nationals as widely as possible.
Thirdly, we
re-emphasise the importance of family links for integration. As we have
expressed before[11], we share
the European Commission’s view that family reunification is an extremely
important aspect of integration policies. In providing for families to live
together, solidarity among family members, thus within a basic element of
society, is facilitated and trained. While this is important emotionally as
well as socially, it is also beneficial economically. All these aspects are
important facets of integration. We would also like to underline that family
reunion is not only an integral part of a coherent immigration policy, but
important to foster a coherent social policy throughout the European Union.
Last but not
least, the Communication rightly states that integration is a two-way process
involving adaptation on the part of both the immigrant and the host society.
Mutual respect for each other's values and traditions is an important and
necessary aspect of this process. Furthermore, tolerance and respect for diversity are
part of the cultural, humanist and religious heritage of Europe. These
fundamental values should therefore be upheld by all who live here. A measure
of the effectiveness of intercultural dialogue is how migrants are welcomed by the receiving society and
how well they become integrated into their new environment.
At the same
time, we need to be aware that mobility and communication can facilitate two
things, (1) the maintenance of migrants’ cultural identity and (2) the
adoption of multiple identities by migrants and Europeans. With growing
mobility and cultural exchange Europeans adopt attitudes, styles, philosophies
or traditions from all over the world. It is only natural that cultural
practices brought along by immigrants should be respected and accepted, as long
as they do not contravene fundamental rights.
In all matters,
it is important to remember the principle that immigrants must always be
treated with the respect due to the dignity of every human person. They should
not be regarded as filling the needs of our continent, but as individuals with
personal projects and choices. To prepare for the debate about a future policy
of the European Union, it should be reiterated that the benefits of immigration
are not limited to the economy.
Europe is by nature a pluralist society, rich in its variety of cultural
and social traditions, and this diversity has contributed to its success.
3.4.
Information, research and monitoring
While we fully
agree with the need for more information about migration flows as indicated by
the Commission, we think that the information chapter should involve at least
three different aspects:
3.4.1.
We affirm the need of a concise evaluation of
harmonised and comparable statistics concerning all existing forms of
immigration. This should include estimations of clandestine immigrants and
those who have had their situation regularised. The statistics should also
reflect the qualifications of immigrants and refugees, which were rarely taken
into account in the past. Such an evaluation could play an important role for
public perception.
3.4.2.
Statistical information is not enough. The creation of
a welcoming society where integration should take place in two ways cannot be
achieved without clear and transparent information about the challenges of
migration. This information, together with a coherent communication strategy,
is necessary in EU Member States as well as in the current candidates
countries. It is needed in order to create a welcoming society, in which
integration is a two-way process between immigrants and the local society. We
would suggest that publicity on the history of migration from and to Europe is
provided as a tool to change the negative images.
3.4.3.
Information about immigration is not only needed in
the European Union but also in the emigration countries. A European strategy
might include information centres in the countries of origin. These centres
should provide information about the possibilities of legal immigration and
offer practical help – a “balance between risks and hopes”.
Ideally, they could even offer orientation courses to provide a decent
preparation for the future immigrant. Such an introduction to language,
culture, and the social situation in the country of destination could be
organised and funded in co-operation with potential employers. The involvement
of trade unions in such activities would seem another important element.
4. Conclusions
4.1.
It seems most urgent to provide the public in European
societies with thorough information about migration, from the
positive contributions of migrants to societies – not just to the labour
market – their traditions and habits to statistics and reliable data.
Policy makers bear responsibility to avoid distortion in media portrayal of
migrants especially in the amalgamation between immigration and criminal
activities. Transparency and information will help to counteract people’s
fears, which are often fears of the unknown. The Churches commit themselves to
engage fully in the debate, to the promotion of solidarity, of integration and
mutual respect. In this context, a courageous political commitment is needed,
which must be exercised with great care, starting from the language used.
4.2.
In order to support the interdisciplinary approach as
proposed by the European Commission, radical coherence between the different
policy areas should be pursued. As a permanent and increasing phenomenon in our
societies, the issue of migration needs to reconcile the long term approach
which is needed for global development with the short term approach, which has
predominated Justice and Home Affairs for too long. Europe’s
responsibility in the world calls for the development of countries rather than
a brain drain, in order to achieve a fair share of benefits and burdens in a
global economy. If Europe is now searching for the well-educated and trained
persons from the South to meet its needs, as well as for migrants to do
unskilled or low-skilled labour, the obligation to facilitate exchange with the
countries of origin, including improved and cheaper channels for remittances
are vital.
4.3.
The chances of migrants in the society they live in
are at the same time chances for this society. These chances depend on
the rights that migrants enjoy and which are an essential element of their
integration. We call for a broad set of uniform rights, as laid down
in the United Nations' International Convention on the Protection of the Rights
of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, which migrant workers and
their families should enjoy in all Member States. This will broaden their
perspectives as well as their readiness to integrate into the host society,
which will more easily become one of their own. As the European Commission
rightly stated, integration is a twofold process. This needs to be taken into
account by both migrants and the welcoming society, which will be the
constituting elements in the process of shaping a multicultural society.
4.4.
Migration is a global challenge. It should not only be
addressed jointly by the Member States of the European Union, but also at
higher levels of international co-operation. As a first step to more
regional co-operation, the EU activities should involve co-ordination and
exchange with – as well as support for – the work the Council of
Europe has already done in this area.
We would especially support the idea of setting
up a European Monitoring Centre for Migration, as proposed by the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe[12],
competent for monitoring regular and irregular migration as
well as advising on legal immigration and integration policies.
4.5.
In the context of labour migration, we propose to concentrate
at a European level the competence to provide information on labour
needs between Member States and to coordinate their Immigration
Policy. Under a potentially extended EURES network, information about labour
market needs could be provided to Member States and to third
countries. Furthermore, the responsibility for the co-ordination of national
quota, the collection of information from national offices and the exploration
of employment possibilities in the Member States could be added to this
competence.
For many in the
churches, practical and pastoral work with migrants is a daily, often
challenging, experience. They always strive to respect and affirm the human
dignity of every individual.
Christian
churches and organisations will be closely monitoring developments in the
debate on a Community Immigration Policy in a spirit of constructive dialogue.
We are committed to participate fully in the elaboration of a humane,
transparent and coherent immigration policy in keeping with the EU commitment
to develop and maintain the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice.
Brussels, May 2001
[1] See also our Comments on the Commission's Communication Towards a common asylum procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted asylum, p. 2. A clear distinction between migration and asylum is of particular importance.
[2]
Data on the importance of remittances as export earning factor for these
countries are regularly available in the annual Global Development Finance,
Vol. II of the World Bank, Washington.
[3]
Final Report of the European Integration Consortium (DIW, CEPR, FIEF, IAS,
IGIER), “The Impact of Eastern Enlargement on Employment and Wages in the
EU Member States”, carried out on behalf of the Employment and Social
Affairs Directorate General of the European Commission, Berlin and Milano,
2000.
[4]
Recent demographic developments in Europe, Council of Europe, Strasbourg,
December 2000.
[5] We are aware
that the complex challenges of the clandestine labour market require solutions
beyond migration policy, involving inter alia social, labour and tax policies
based on consultation with the social partners.
[6]
See our Comments on the Commission's Communication Towards a common asylum
procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted
asylum, p 5, 2.3.
[7]
We are aware that this applies only to some Member States, while it is an
established principle in others.
[8]
Communication on a Community Immigration Policy – COM (2000) 757 final
– Point 3.5. p. 20.
[9]
Jan Niessen, The management and managers of immigration, Migration Policy
Group, December 2000, p.25.
[10] The Council of Europe
has recommended participation in local elections as a possibilitiy to foster
participation., European Convention on Participation of Foreigners in Local
Public Life, Chapter C, art. 6. While this is not the immediate competence of
the EU, we believe that the Council of Europe's Convention should be considered
a basis by Member States when designing a common policy.
[11]
See our Joint Position on the Amended EU Commission Proposal for a Council
Directive on the right to family reunification [COM (2000) 624 final],
Brussels, 22 November 2000.
[12]
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1449/2000, Clandestine migration
from the South of the Mediterranean into Europe.