EU Immigration
...he Treaty of Amsterdam gave the EU competence for immigration. Immigration was therefore no longer a matter for inter-governmental co-ordination but for actions to be adopted by the Council of Ministers of the EU based on proposals from the European Commission or, until 2004, the Member States. Realising that a new approach to managing migration was necessary, the leaders of the EU set out at the October 1999 European Council in Tampere (Finland) the elements for a common EU immigration policy. o development of a common policy on asylum and immigration: partnership with the countries of origin including policies of development; o a common asylum system: the main objective of the common European asylum system will be to determine a uniform asylum and subsidiary protection status, a common procedure for granting and withdrawing this status, and a common system of temporary protection; o fair treatment of third country nationals: it includes giving them comparable rights and obligations to those of nationals of the Member State in which they live; o more efficient management of migration flows so as to find a balance between humanitarian and economic admission; As the first step in creating a common EU immigration policy, the European Commission presented in November 2000 a communication to the Council and the European Parliament in order to launch a debate with the other EU institutions and with Member States and civil society. The communication recommends a common approach to migration management which takes into account the following: o the economic and demographic development of the Union; o the capacity of reception of each Member State along with their historical and cultural links with the countries of origin; o the situation in the countries of origin and the impact of migration policy on them (brain drain); o the need to develop specific integration policies (based on fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in the Union, the prevention of social exclusion, racism and xenophobia and the respect for diversity). This was followed in July 2001 by another communication which proposed the adoption of an open method of co-ordination for the Community immigration policy, to encourage the exchange of information between the Member States on the implementation of the common policy. The procedure comprises reaching agreement on a number of European objectives or guidelines which Member States would then incorporate into national action plans which would be reviewed on a regular basis. But still not all Member States agree with the common EU immigration policy, for ex. Denmark which has decided to opt out of Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community or the UK and Ireland which decide on their involvement on a case-by-case basis (possibility of an 'opt-in') 2. 1. Legal immigration Graph: Tendencies of net immigration into EU-15 and the US • The EU Council of ministers reached an agreement in February 2003 on a draft directive on the right of third country nationals which are legally established in an EU member state to family reunification. Final adoption is pending on the opinion to be given by the European Parliament. A directive on an EU long-term resident status for third country nationals who have legally resided for five years in the territory of a member state is on the verge of being adopted, pending the lifting of parliamentary reservations. A draft directive put forward by the European Commission in July 2001, suggesting clear and transparent rules for non-EU nationals working in the EU is also on the Council table. In June 2003, the European Commission adopted a policy paper on immigration, integration and employment in which it calls on the EU member states to step up their efforts to integrate immigrants. There are disparities among Member States on the procedures to grant or withdraw refugee status. To reduce such disparities, the European Union (EU) is committed to drawing up common standards for a fair and efficient asylum procedure. Such common standards are one of the short-term measures for the establishment of a common European asylum system. On 29 April 2004 the Justice and Home Affairs Council reached a general approach on the amended proposal for a Council Directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status. The Council decided to reconsult the European Parliament on its general approach. 2. 2. Illegal immigration According to EU sources, there are around half a million illegal immigrants who enter the EU every year - in addition to the 680,000 legal immigrants. On 28 February 2002, the EU Council of ministers adopted a comprehensive plan to combat illegal immigration and trafficking of human beings in the European Union. On 28 November 2002, the Council adopted a Return action programme which suggests developing a number of short, medium and long term measures, including common EU-wide minimum standards or guidelines, in the field of return of illegal residents. On 11 July 2003, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation establishing a programme for financial and technical assistance to third countries in the area of migration and asylum. It contains a multiannual programme for 2004 to 2008, with an overall expenditure of 250 million Euros. The general approach of the Council includes provisions on 'safe country concepts': The application of a safe third country concept by a Member State on the basis of a national list and/or an individual examination, provided the Member State concerned is satisfied that the third country treats the applicant in accordance with international obligations and there is a connection between the applicant and that country; The United Nations and several Human Rights Organisations showed their concern, whether the adoption of the new rules would breach international law. 3. Recent news On the 25th of October EU counterparts met in Luxembourg trying to scrap the requirement for unanimous agreement on asylum and immigration policy in favour of a system of qualified majority voting. The system shall be changed to speed up decision-making on asylum and immigration, what has been made more urgent by the expansion to 25 member states. At the moment any one country can scrap any policy plan. The change would see a decision going through if supported by at least 14 member states representing at least 65% of the EU's total population. This is going to have a huge impact on EU policies, because the least likely countries to agree to changes in asylum and immigration policies are the more lax ones. The removal of their ability to veto changes would allow the countries who want "tougher" policies to bring them in quicker. One example is the EU’s wish for having its own corps of border guards. The UK opposes it. With an opt-out the UK could stop EU border guards operating in the UK, but they could not veto the creation of a corps of EU border guards to cover the other member states. Whether this would be a feasibly position for the long-run is where the two sides differ. The European Council on 5 November 2004 is due to adopt a "Tampere II" agenda for Justice and Home affairs. The proposal is for an integrated border management system and visa policy, including a European corps of border guards, biometric identifiers in travel documents, a common policy on management of migration flows and a common policy on European asylum. Ministers broadly support the plan but oppose the border guards. They say they have an "opt-in" choice for any...