EN Official Journal of the European Union C 67/110

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States’

COM(2013) 460 final — 2013/0229 (NLE)

2014/C 67/22

Rapporteur: Mr TOPOLÁNSZKY

On 26 June 2013 the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 19(1) and 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States

COM(2013) 460 final — 2013/0229 (NLE).

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 October 2013.

At its 493rd plenary session, held on 16 and 17 October 2013 (meeting of 17 October), the Committee adopted the following opinion by 135 votes to 4, with 6 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1 The Committee welcomes the European Commission's proposal for a recommendation, recognising – while considering most regrettable – the need for the raft of measures it contains, which can also be seen as a sort of minimum implementation programme.

1.2 The Committee also regrets that, as pointed out in the recommendation's explanatory memorandum, achievement of the objectives of the framework strategy is constantly running up against serious difficulties in terms of implementation and political commitment at national, regional and local level.

1.3 The Committee draws attention to the shortcomings highlighted in the analysis documents drawn up by civil society organisations on the framework strategy and the national strategies. Going on the information provided by the interested parties, it is vital to take these shortcomings seriously and remedy them, by devising and implementing effective and substantial public-policy responses within a short timeframe.

1.4 The Committee considers that the part of the proposal regarding horizontal policy measures is poorly framed, and urges the Council to develop it further, and to establish much more specific requirements regarding the four fields indicated, while aiding their implementation by outlining the best practices expected.

1.5 Given the conclusions reached in the explanatory memorandum of the proposed recommendation (1) and given the deterioration of the socio-economic situation due to the crisis, the Committee considers that the Council should make use of its power to adopt legally binding acts in order to alleviate in particular the distress and great poverty that endangers people's lives and to combat the most extreme effects of discrimination, racism and anti-Roma prejudice.

1.6 The Committee advocates – especially in cases of extreme disadvantage – the establishment of clear frameworks for the implementation of human rights and the long-overdue introduction of benchmarks and indicators to enable this kind of situation to be assessed.

1.7 The Committee recommends that groups of independent researchers equipped with legal instruments and the necessary safeguards in terms of research ethics carry out assessments of the implementation of the strategies and are backed up by assured funding and transparency in the use of funds.

1.8 Legal and other necessary guarantees should be used to strengthen the equality authorities, which are key to anti-discrimination policy, as well as the national contact points, which play a vital role in the implementation of the strategies, and the collaboration between these various bodies and the sections of society concerned.

1.9 In order to increase the effectiveness of strategy implementation and remedy the loss of trust observed within these communities, it is vital to properly involve and mobilise the Roma in all of the areas of action. The Committee suggests and expects a broader conceptual framework for cooperation, a culture of consensus that goes beyond consultation alone, and puts forward proposals to this end.

1.10 The Committee stresses the need for decision-makers to unambiguously distance themselves from the alarming pronouncements about the Roma that have been tinged with racism and violence and are highly discriminatory. It also emphasises the importance of consistently condemning and openly monitoring outbreaks of violence and hate speech, and putting in place legal, administrative, regulatory and public relations instruments that can effectively tackle such phenomena.

2. Background

2.1 On 5 April 2011, the Commission adopted an EU Framework for national Roma integration strategies up to 2020 (2), at last making it possible, after a lengthy wait, to conduct concerted action to reduce the extreme poverty and segregation that also affect Roma people. In June 2011 the Council endorsed (3) this document and called on the Member States to adopt national Roma integration strategies by the end of 2011.

2.2 Under the provisions of the framework, the European Commission is to report annually on the state of progress in implementing the strategies. In 2012, for the first time it assessed (4) the national strategies presented by the Member States and adopted horizontal conclusions and, in an annex, analysed the strengths and weaknesses of each Member State's strategy (5).

2.3 Roma representative associations followed the process of framing these strategies very closely, conveyed their points of view or reservations in a series of documents, and also assessed the final strategies (6).

2.4 All these analyses have pointed to major shortcomings in Member State strategies. Civil society organisations view the horizontal content and its failings as a major problem. These shortcomings include: a) insufficient effective measures to combat discrimination; b) a lack of measures to promote "full access"; c) a lack of measures aimed at recognising and strengthening the human dignity of the Roma and their community; d) a lack of measures to reduce disparities and the particularly serious disadvantages noted within the Roma community (for instance, the lack of measures aimed at easing the specific difficulties experienced by Roma women and children); e) a lack of measures to mobilise and encourage the Roma, their communities and civil society organisations with a view to implementing strategies.

2.5 The abovementioned analysis documents drawn up by the Commission do not refer to the fundamental shortcomings identified in the Member States' strategies. They are lacking in condemnation and calls to alleviate or put an end to the myriad and most serious forms of social and societal handicap that sometimes undermine human rights. For example, insufficient emphasis is placed on violations of human rights, such as: a) human trafficking, which develops alongside prostitution and the issue of jobs under conditions of "slavery"; b) Roma women's fundamental right to have control over their own bodies and to have free access to birth control; forced sterilisations, carried out without the consent of those involved, also sometimes occur; c) extreme forms of poverty that infringe human rights, lack of provision of basic needs (e.g. lack of access to drinking water or to health care and basic sanitation for people living on the outskirts of towns, camps, etc.); d) and lastly, the inadequate nature of anti-racist objectives and measures aimed at ensuring the safety of Roma lives and property, together with their rights, and at stepping up protection against racist attacks.

2.6 The EESC has drawn up two opinions on the framework strategy and national strategies for Roma integration. Its previous opinion (7), which focuses on the issue of the societal empowerment and integration of Roma citizens in Europe, endorses the framework strategy, discusses the need for a three-fold approach regarding its design and future implementation (race/ethnicity-neutral inclusion policy, a policy to support empowerment of those who regard themselves as members of any Roma community and the celebration of social inclusion they have achieved, general policies and publicity to combat racism), and puts forward further proposals.

2.7 In its additional opinion, the EESC (8) warns, with reference to a study carried out in 2012, of the loss of trust noted by Roma opinion formers and thus submits proposals concerning in particular their integration and involvement.

3. General considerations

3.1 The Committee recognises and considers most regrettable the need for the Council recommendation in the light of the situation of the Roma, the impact of the crisis and the widely varying commitments on the part of the Member States; it endorses the recommendation's objectives. However, it considers that the raft of measures it contains, which can also be seen as a sort of minimum implementation programme, is in some cases so unclear and non-operational that it cannot achieve the objectives set out in the document.

3.2 According to the Commission proposal's explanatory memorandum, it seeks to "speed up progress by focusing the attention of the Member States on a number of concrete measures that are crucial for implementing their strategies more effectively". The Committee regrets that this aim suggests, at the same time, that achievement of the objectives of the framework strategy is constantly running up against serious difficulties in terms of implementation and political commitment at national, regional and local level.

3.3 The Committee points out that if this politically favourable moment for Roma integration is not to be missed - which would constitute a real danger to both the Union's objectives and any improvement in the living conditions of those concerned - a list of recommendations backed up by a system for analysing real situations should be adopted with the involvement of relevant Roma and civil society organisations, in conjunction with wide-ranging consultations. The list should be genuinely ambitious and open to monitoring, comprising sufficiently practical and operational elements, as well as being subject to evaluation.

3.4 The Committee considers that the policy recommendations set out in the proposal are helpful, and should receive wide backing as a short-list of measures that must be implemented unconditionally. It notes, however, that the recommendations lay down an overly-restrictive framework for action, and that they are not ambitious enough; it would therefore argue that the list of recommendations need to be fleshed out and augmented with monitoring and follow-up tools.

3.5 The Committee considers that the part of the proposal regarding horizontal policy measures is poorly framed, and urges the Council to further develop the four fields indicated (anti-discrimination, protection of Roma children and women, poverty reduction and social inclusion, and empowerment) and to establish much more specific requirements, at the same time providing some indication of the best practices expected.

3.6 The Committee is not convinced by the reasoning set out in the document, according to which the "choice of a non-binding [legal] instrument aims at providing practical guidelines to the Member States as regards the problem of Roma social inclusion, but without laying down strict binding rules", because "according to the Commission’s findings, strong and proportionate measures are still not in place to tackle the social and economic problems of much of the EU’s Roma population". In the current period of crisis, if this is not handled in an appropriate and targeted way, Roma groups who are also particularly affected by segregation, discrimination and extreme poverty will be disproportionately exposed to its effects, although it is already imposing an unbearable burden on them. The Committee thus feels that this situation requires decision-makers to come up with immediate and effective solutions and measures including with regard to the enforceability of rights.

3.7 Given the conclusions reached in the explanatory memorandum of the proposed recommendation (9), the Committee therefore considers that the Council should make use of its power to adopt legally binding acts in order to alleviate in particular the distress and great poverty that endangers people's lives and in order to combat the most extreme effects of discrimination, racism and anti-Roma prejudice. Such measures are needed precisely because of the evident shortcomings, at Member State level, in terms of legislation and case law (10).

4. Specific proposals

4.1 The Committee suggests that the competent EU services re-evaluate their functions where these directly concern the application of the fundamental rights of the Roma and of minority rights and do not involve the open method of coordination, particularly where the above-mentioned issues are concerned. The Committee therefore considers it necessary for: a) the Union to define precisely the criteria which, under its powers, it uses to determine violations of the second- and third-generation human rights defined by the UN and, at the same time, to clarify in which cases, when it suspects a violation of human rights has occurred, it takes legal action within its powers; b) the Union to interpret and adapt these fundamental and minority rights in keeping with circumstances and the social handicaps which may disproportionately affect the Roma; c) the Union to define, together with Eurostat and using an interpretation of EU statistics on incomes and living conditions (EU-SILC framework), income and deprivation indicators which highlight not only the thresholds for extreme poverty but also conditions that undermine human rights and dignity; d) wider use to be made of techniques that have so far only been rarely applied in this area. For example, as well as an analysis of the situation of "poor" people whose incomes are 50 or 60 % below the median, the situation of people whose income is 30 % (25 %) lower could also be analysed. Alternatively, in addition to "aggregate" discrimination indices currently applied, "marginal discrimination" measurements could also be used to identify particularly serious instances of exclusion in the form of deprivation, thanks to highly sensitive indicators (such as comfort or overcrowding in housing).

4.2 The Committee proposes giving priority to the preservation of the linguistic and cultural traditions that underpin Roma identity, together with social and budgetary support, following a re-examination of the strategies.

4.3 The Committee considers that in order for the national Roma integration strategies to succeed, Member States must focus particularly on monitoring related policies in terms of legislation and case law and as regards corrections to be made concerning possible anti-discriminatory effects; Member States will need to put effective mechanisms in place to this end.

4.4 With a view to promoting Roma integration and their material independence, the Committee expects in particular the Member States to deliver a response commensurate to what is needed and introduce employment, entrepreneurship and vocational-training programmes. It calls on them to strengthen the legal instruments that are likely to effectively motivate companies to hire Roma. For segregated Roma communities where employment has long been extremely low and discrimination on the labour market very high, innovative forms of employment policy need to be introduced, such as enough suitable temporary public-funded jobs.

Monitoring and evaluating policies

4.5 The Committee regrets that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and the Member States have not yet been able to establish the indicators and benchmarks which are a prerequisite for evaluating strategies and intervention programmes, or the relevant methodologies and requirements on which proper and independent data collection and reporting depend (11). Current Member State monitoring and evaluation practices are often limited to reports drawn up without any real evaluation method, sometimes based on data, and it is not unusual for them to produce entirely baseless results.

4.6 The Committee proposes that evaluation tasks should be entrusted to groups of researchers and institutions selected by open calls for tender. They should be professional and free of political links, and their independence should be further upheld by a range of legal instruments (e.g. introduction of a declaration of absence of conflict of interest, transparency rules for finance and use of funds, verification by the scientific community, monitoring of research methods, etc.) (12).

Policy recommendations

4.7 In addition to the programmable, transparent and appropriate funding of equality authorities, the legal situation of such bodies must also be strengthened in order to minimise the ability of political authorities to influence their operations, at the same time as they ensure the conditions for them to carry out their work. Equality authorities must also maintain permanent and close links with the relevant associations representing the Roma, in addition to the contact points for Roma.

4.8 The National Contact Points for Roma integration must be fully transparent in performing their tasks, in both theory and practice. Their work is crucial to achieving the framework strategy. The rights of the contact points, together with those of the government bodies responsible for planning and implementing social policy for the Roma should be guaranteed in law, so they can function as watchdogs, express their opinions on legislative procedures concerning government policies that also affect the Roma, and influence them to ensure that they do not weaken each others' effects. The Roma contact points have an obligation to inform the associations representing Roma civil society. This could be done, for example, by publishing the annual reports by the independent evaluators, the content of which would be free of any political influence, or by holding specialist conferences.

4.9 The Committee believes that it will be difficult to achieve the objective set out in point 5.1 of the proposal, namely that "the Member States should take the necessary measures to ensure the application of this Recommendation at the latest by [24 months from the publication] and should notify the Commission of any measures taken in accordance with this Recommendation by that date"; to achieve this, it would need to be ensured that the Member States could not be exempted from the obligation to implement the EU framework strategy and their own commitments. The content of the proposal as it stands represents only one part of a wider system of requirements defined by the framework strategy in a far-reaching context, which the Commission is required to evaluate annually.

Roma integration and involvement

4.10 A number of experts and Roma civil society organisations - who partly agree with the European Commission's evaluation in this field - consider that some current Member State policies and aid mechanisms do not allow the issue of Roma integration to be tackled effectively enough, and that they are not always grounded on and guided by a human-rights based approach (13). Unfortunately, in the meantime exclusion of Roma has been seen to be on the rise in several countries. This state of affairs is mainly due to the ongoing discrimination against the Roma and deep-rooted anti-Roma prejudice, to which law-enforcement agencies are failing to devote adequate attention. As pointed out in the explanatory memorandum of the proposed recommendation, "the crux of the problem lies in the close links between discrimination and social exclusion experienced by Roma" (14).

4.11 The Committee believes that countering the mutually-reinforcing negative effects of these mechanisms should be the main objective of all inclusion policies. The main instruments in this regard include Roma integration and encouragement of their involvement, together with empowerment and capacity-building of Roma organisations. This is only possible within an openly accepting culture, where Roma policy effectively centres on areas of real concern to them, and where the Roma are not seen only as beneficiaries, but as equal actors whose involvement is essential. The old paternalist approach under which processes were defined by majority opinion-formers and decision-makers in society must be changed, and the Roma must be recognised and accepted as responsible members of society, able and willing to actively shape their own future.

4.12 The Committee would refer to a previous opinion (15) in which, on the basis of a study, it pointed to widespread dissatisfaction, distrust and frustration among many spokespersons for the Roma community, civil society and their representatives. According to the same EESC opinion, despite the declared intentions, "there has been a failure to sufficiently involve the relevant organisations or to develop effective mechanisms ensuring involvement. At the same time, due (in some cases) to centuries of discrimination and segregation, current processes have failed to inspire sufficient trust among representatives of those concerned". A study carried out by the ERPC during the same period reached the same conclusions (16).

4.13 Turning to changes in social and decision-making approaches, the Committee notes that this process is inconceivable without the involvement of Roma – and civil society organisations working with them – in designing, implementing and evaluating policies at all levels. The Committee considers that indicators must be defined for accurately measuring the degree of Roma integration and involvement (e.g. local or central administration, data on school attendance, rates of involvement in programme implementation, etc.).

4.14 The Committee suggests and expects a broader conceptual framework for cooperation, a culture of consensus that goes beyond consultation alone, the introduction of platforms for permanent dialogue (also at local level), the creation of organisational mechanisms that are suitable for participation, greater transparency in decision-making by public authorities (at local level), and reasons to be given for decisions (also reporting any differences of opinion and giving voting results).

4.15 The Committee proposes that, as indicated previously, a fund be set up (as one aspect of the Europe for Citizens programme, for example) to assist Roma integration and empowerment, as well as capacity-building for their civil society organisations. The ESF operational programme, or more specifically the guarantee for support programmes providing technical assistance, would be equally important in building the institutional capacities of Roma organisations.

4.16 Decision-makers must unambiguously distance themselves from the alarming pronouncements about the Roma that have been tinged with racism and violence and are highly discriminatory. Outbreaks of violence and hate speech must be consistently condemned and openly monitored, and legal, administrative, regulatory and public relations instruments must be put in place that can effectively tackle such phenomena. In this respect, opinion leaders, the political and media elite in particular, have a special responsibility to bear. The Committee proposes carrying out systematic research into prejudices, using a standard methodology, together with the creation of instruments that can, if negative trends are identified, encourage public policies in this field, back their implementation, or help intensify efforts.

4.17 The Committee would firmly draw Member States' attention to the fact that in order to tackle this segregation and discrimination that goes back generations and weighs on all facets of the lives of those concerned, implementing programmes in the form of projects focusing on one particular problem area is not enough. It is now vital to opt for a systematic approach to achieving the strategic objectives.

Brussels, 17 October 2013. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Henri MALOSSE

(1) "… while Member States have had the legal possibility to act to address the issue of Roma integration, the measures planned so far are not sufficient. Due to the lack of a coordinated approach to the issue of Roma integration, there are growing discrepancies among Member States."

(2) COM(2011) 173 final.

(3) Council Conclusions on an EU framework for national Roma integration strategies up to 2020.

(4) COM(2012) 226 final.

(5) SWD(2012) 133 final.

(6) Analysis of National Roma Integration Strategies, ERPC, March 2012.

(7) OJ C 248, 25.8.2011, p. 16-21.

(8) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 21.

(9) "… while Member States have had the legal possibility to act to address the issue of Roma integration, the measures planned so far are not sufficient. Due to the lack of a coordinated approach to the issue of Roma integration, there are growing discrepancies among Member States."

(10) "The objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States on their own and may therefore be better achieved through coordinated action at EU level rather than through national initiatives of varying scope, ambition and effectiveness." 2013/0229 (NLE), explanatory memorandum.

(11) Point 4.4 of the proposal for a recommendation.

(12) Evaluators must make a declaration of absence of conflict of interests, stating that he/she is not a government employee or using public funds, which could jeopardise the independence of the results of the evaluation.

(13) COM(2012) 226 final, SWD(2012)133 final, Analysis of National Roma Integration Strategies, ERPC, March 2012.

(14) The European Roma Policy Coalition (ERPC) recommends that national Roma integration strategies should be based on a core meant to eliminate anti-Gypsyism. Although eliminating the gaps related to income, health and education are important, there will be no progress without making the elimination of anti-Gypsyism a key priority of national Roma integration strategies. Final ERPC recommendation.

(15) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 21.

(16) "(…) a large majority of respondents across Member States described the drafting process of the NRIS as lacking transparency. In most of the cases, stakeholders’ participation, in particular the involvement of Roma, is still unclear with regard to implementation of the NRIS." Analysis of National Roma Integration Strategies, ERPC, March 2012.