Strasbourg, 26/09/2007 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament (EP) believes that a good balance in the European immigration policy lies in the pragmatic and parallel treatment of both legal and illegal immigration issues, as these phenomena are indivisible. This is the substance of the position of the EP, which adopted resolutions in Strasbourg on Wednesday 26 September on two own-initiative reports: one by the Italian Socialist Lili Gruber (557 votes in favour, 101 against, 22 abstentions) on legal immigration, and the other by the Spanish Socialist MEP Javier Moreno Sanchez (418 in favour, 81 against, 8 abstentions) on political priorities in the fight against illegal immigration. Last week, both of these MEPs expressed their desire for a common policy on a European scale (EUROPE 9507). During the debate, the body of MEPs was also able to hear the positions of the Council and the Commission, and discuss the current and future policies of the EU in a field which, until recently, came under the sole jurisdiction of the member states, but in which recent developments have shown the need for increased intervention on the part of the EU.
In favour of a pragmatic approach towards legal and illegal immigration
Legal immigration: in their approval of the report by Lilli Gruber, the MEPs laid emphasis on the need to define instruments and channels of legal immigration, as a means of fighting illegal immigration. Given the current and future situation on the employment markets of the European Union, this will imply a correct management of demand for legal immigration, they stated. According to Eurostat, the working-age population as a proportion of the total population will fall by 50 million between now and 2050. At the moment, the number of third-country nationals present legally in the 27 member states of the EU stands at around 18.5 million people. First of all, the MEPs would like the Union to adopt a global and coherent approach to immigration, given the fact that the immigration policies conducted in a given member state will have knock-on effects on the migration flows of other member states, such as the mass “regularisations” carried out in recent years by Spain and Italy. On this, the report stresses the “institutional incidences” of the draft modifying treaty, which extends qualified-majority voting, and powers of co-decision in particular, to competencies relating to the asylum and immigration policy of the Union. The member states retain a right of veto on all policies implemented regarding legal immigration, as the illegal immigration plank was not included in the Community scope until 1 January 2005. The MEPs also took the view that a directive aiming to guarantee a common framework of rights to nationals of third countries employed legally in a member state was vital. This should be presented prior to the four specific directives soon to be put forward by the Commission and which define the conditions of entry and residence for the various categories of population (EUROPE 9501). In the framework of the directive on highly-qualified labour, the MEPs are calling for a study on the possible implementation of a “blue card” system, a reference to the green card in force in the United States. They believe that the risks of “brain drain” should also be taken into account when defining legal immigration measures, and stressed the need for agreements with third countries in order to allow an efficient management of immigration, both legal and illegal, respecting human rights.
Illegal immigration: in their approval of the report by Mr Moreno Sanchez, the MEPs support the communication of the Commission presented in May 2007 on priorities for action in the fight against illegal immigration (EUROPE 9318). According to the MEPs, migratory phenomena are exceeding “the capacity of the member states to manage them individually”, and for this reason, “a global and coherent approach to immigration is necessary at European level”. According to the report, this common policy calls for the respect, between member states, of the following principles: Solidarity, shared responsibility, mutual trust and transparency. The MEPs point out that illegal immigrants should not be likened to “criminals”, as many of them risked their life seeking liberty in Europe. Nonetheless, however, the MEPs agreed that the mass regularisation of illegal immigrants should be a one-off, as a measure of this kind does not solve the genuine problems at the root of this phenomenon. The MEPs also laid emphasis on the importance for the European Borders Agency (Frontex) to “obtain the resources required for its work”. Rescuing migrants and asylum seekers in difficulty and in danger of their lives should “be included in the mandate of Frontex and of the rapid intervention teams (Rabit) on the maritime borders of the EU”, states the MEPs. Various problems were also listed in the report, such as the importance of cooperation with third countries, the setting in place or improvement of the functioning of readmission agreements, and the need to adopt the proposed directive on returns under the Portuguese presidency. On the subject of the security of travel and identity documents, the MEPs stress that the establishment of secure identification documents in the state of origin and the development of biometric tools in the state of origin should be encouraged, in full respect of data protection. Lastly, particular attention should be given to the fight against the trafficking in human beings and illegal employment.
Plenary debate on legal and illegal immigration policies
Declarations of the presidency and of the Commission: the Portuguese deputy secretary of state for European affairs, Manuel Lobo Antunes, pointed out that the Council was continuing to discuss the various issues related to immigration, adapting the “global approach” to migration adopted on December 2006, as was the case at the European Council of June 2007 (EUROPE 9453). He pointed out that the Council was working on the suggestions put forward by Malta to come to the aid of a state under exceptional migratory pressure, but that the third states must also take their own responsibilities (see EUROPE 9502 for the most recent JHA Council). He stated that the list of equipment destined for Frontex (CRATE) was “crucial” to assist EU countries in distress. He went on to point out that the Council was currently examining the proposed directive on illegal employers (EUROPE 9422), and that it would be better to wait for the proposals to be put on the table in the near future by the Commission. The European commissioner for immigration, Franco Frattini, welcomed work carried out to date on the field of immigration. “Europe has made much progress in a very short time (…). We are starting to implement initiatives and to reap fruit”, he said. “The demographic decline is not irreversible”, stressed the commissioner; however, we must take a serious look at it, he said, hoping that we would see the last “obstacles to the free movement” of workers fall away, or a stronger family and birth policy in the EU. He pointed out that he was soon to make proposals on legal immigration and that in 2008, further proposals would follow. On non-qualified employees, a proposal called for by Ms Gruber, “we will have to do some thinking”, said Mr Frattini, indicating that he was to present “options” early in 2008, rather than putting forward a proposal immediately.
The rapporteurs: “Legal and illegal immigration are the two sides of the same coin”, were the words Lili Gruber used to start her speech. She said that she approved the Commission's plan to define structural policies. “Our economies can no longer function without immigrant workers”, posited Ms Gruber, who takes the view nonetheless that “it is up to the member states to define entry quotas”. She also asked for the EU to acquire “harmonised and reliable statistics” on immigration and an integration process based on the rights and duties of immigrants. In the view of Mr Moreno Sanchez, the legal immigration policy depends largely on the capacity to “fight decisively” against illegal immigration. He feels that “we need a zero-tolerance approach to black-market work to prevent its spread”. “The increase in the flow of illegal migrants to the EU is much faster than political answers”, which is why cohesion is required at EU level, said the MEP. “We should not fight illegal immigrants. Let us fight the causes. Immigration should be a personal matter above all”, he said.
The Groups: “If the fight against illegal immigration requires resources on the borders, it must also be mobilised within the European territory. Between 10 and 15 million people are living illegally on our territory “, stressed the president of the EPP-ED, the French member Joseph Daul. “How many more people must perish before governments see they cannot simply raise the drawbridge of Fortress Europe?”, asked ALDE president Graham Watson (UK). Jean Lambert (Greens/EFA, UK) called on the member states to show “greater honesty” on the need for immigrant workers in the economies, urging them “not to shed crocodile tears” for immigrants whilst voting on commercial policies making it impossible to move their situation forward. “There is no solely national favourable solution. It is up to us to initiate a new form of development, an intelligent way of regulating migratory flows”, said Patrick Gaubert (EPP-ED, France). Cristiana Muscardini (UEN, Italy) criticised the fact that Frontex must function “on a shoestring budget”. Keeping an EU immigration policy as it is, leads to the “criminalisation of innocent people by means of methods of oppression”, said the Italian GUE/NGL member Giusto Catania, calling on legal immigration channels to be opened up in order to prevent further tragedies from transforming the Mediterranean into “an open graveyard”. “Today, the world is a village. We will never be able to stop those fleeing misery and despair. Some people are feeding this fantasy of closing off our borders. But these people are irresponsible”, concluded French Socialist Martine Roure. (bc)