Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on 'Migratory flows in Europe'
Date: 1999-11-18
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions, Provisional data
Subjects: illegal migration, migratory movement, refugee, right of asylum

29.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 57/67

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Migratory flows in Europe’

(2000/C 57/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 2 June 1999, under the 5th paragraph of Article 265 of the
Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an opinion on ‘Migratory flows in Europe’ and
to direct Commission 7 for Education, Vocational Training, Culture, Youth, Sport and Citizens’ Rights to
draw up an opinion on the matter;

having regard to the contribution of Commission 5, following its meeting on 6 September 1999
(rapporteur: Mr von Plüskow, D, PES);

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 227/99 rev. 2) adopted by Commission 7 on 1 October 1999
(rapporteur: Mr Distaso, I, EPP),

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 31st plenary session of 17 and 18 November 1999
(meeting of 18th November).

1.

Introduction

A sharp increase in immigration in the EU Member
1.1.
States — with numbers running to several millions — is one
of the distinctive features of the 1990s. In some Member States
this increased immigration has been the main source of
population growth.

1.2.
The underlying causes of the sharp increase in migra-
tion to the Member States are rooted primarily in a number of
key events:

— heavily increased population pressure, particularly in the
EU’s neighbour countries to the south, and in the south-
east Mediterranean;

— the fall of the Iron Curtain, break-up of the Soviet Union,

etc.;

— the break-up of Yugoslavia and its impact on the Balkans

and the rest of Europe.

— The sharp increase in immigration in the EU Member
States sometimes has, and continues to have, serious
implications for the local and regional authorities. The
EU’s local and regional authorities, as the tiers of govern-
ment most immediately affected by migration believe they
should be able to participate in the decision-making
processes of the national governments and international
organisations involved in addressing the issue.

1.3. More specifically, the Apulia region of Italy and the
Council of Europe’s Congress of Local and Regional Authori-
ties (CLRAE) held an international conference in Bari on 2 and
3 October 1997 on Local and regional authorities in the face
of Mediterranean migration: From intolerance to development.

The conference sought

1.4.
to bring the issue to the
attention of the general public and of national and local

administrations. It issued a final declaration, and led to the
involvement of the CLRAE Plenary Assembly which, on the
basis of the report submitted by the Apulia region, approved a
resolution (No. 69/98) and recommendation (No. 50/98)
which it forwarded to the Council of Europe’s Committee of
Ministers.

1.5.
These papers stressed the grave and complex nature of
the phenomenon, and noted that it was likely to continue for
a long time. They also put forward a full-scale strategy for
addressing a problem that would ultimately affect the whole
of Europe, although its most immediate effects would be felt
on the northern shores of the Mediterranean. If not handled
properly, the phenomenon could generate intolerance and
xenophobia and fuel organised crime, with serious implica-
tions for public order.

1.6. More specifically, in its recommendation No. 50/98,
the CLRAE appealed to the European Union ‘to contribute
towards establishing common rules concerning migration
flows in the Mediterranean Basin and to recognise Mediterra-
nean local and regional authorities as border authorities when
they engage in transfrontier or interterritorial co-operation to
promote practical schemes for the reception of immigrants
and the development of their countries of origin’.

The severity of the problem is aggravated by the far
1.7.
from accurate picture given by the statistics in this field. Here
there is a large grey area as regards the figures for illegal
immigration. Clandestine immigration exists in all Member
States. Improved border controls backed by stronger police
action against people in the Member States who profit from
illegal
immigration are essential short-term measures. The
scale of illegal immigration seems to be far greater in the
southern Member States, partly because of their proximity to
the heavily populated Maghreb countries and the crisis-ridden
Balkans and partly because of geographical difficulties in
protecting their borders.

C 57/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

29.2.2000

2. General comments

2.1.
Given that immigration-related issues come under the
responsibility both of the Member States and of local and
regional authorities, depending on the particular aspects
considered, the Committee of the Regions intends to play a
more active part in the EU’s decision-making processes.

The changes and additions brought in by the Amster-
2.2.
dam Treaty have equipped the European Union to play a
significant role in terms both of studies and research and of
legislation. This should enable it
to draw the unilateral
migration measures of individual Member States together to
establish a European system for the fair and equitable sharing
of asylum seekers between countries, first distinguishing as a
matter of principle between refugees who are covered by the
Geneva Convention and those who are not. With this in mind,
the Committee of the Regions welcomes the Action Plan of
the Council and the Commission for the implementation of
the provisions of
the Treaty of Amsterdam, which was
approved at the European Council meeting held in Vienna on
11 and 12 December 1998. This action plan provides, inter
for the development of a comprehensive migration
alia,
strategy. Furthermore, the COR explicitly supports the recent
decisions taken at the Tampere European Council on 15 and
16 October 1999, which give prominence to the development
of a common EU asylum and migration policy

2.3.
Swift action to manage migratory flows in Europe is
needed in order to safeguard basic human rights and pave the
way for the fight against racism, xenophobia and social
marginalisation. Migratory flows within and to Europe are a
normal and desirable phenomenon from which the host
countries and regions can profit for a number of reasons
(especially cultural, demographic and economic. Consequently,
the European Council notes quite rightly in its decisions of
15 and 16 October 1999 that the management of these
migratory flows is a matter for the whole Union, which must
be tackled jointly and must include the following elements:

— partnership with the countries of origin

— common EU asylum system

— fair treatment of third country nationals.

2.4.
The migration issue must be tackled from an overall
perspective, taking care not to confuse the root problem with
the symptoms.

persecution, inadequate public safety resulting from unstable
public institutions, and the all-pervading nature of organised
crime.

2.6.
All these problems combine to fuel migratory flows.
Destabilising factors such as the Balkan crisis and population
growth, affecting in particular the inadequately developed
south coast of the Mediterranean, then aggravate the situation
further.

To make a real impact in this area, the European Union
2.7.
must
intervene, using all appropriate financial and other
resources, not just with support schemes to step up security in
the Member States but also with carefully designed measures
to tackle the above-mentioned root problems.

2.8.
The objective should be to break the vicious circle that
lies behind many of the modern-day scourges affecting the
European Union, such as adult and child prostitution, trade in
human organs and the spread of dangerous drugs.

Only by fighting the root problems will it be possible

2.9.
to cut the resulting migratory flows down to normal levels.

3. Specific comments

3.1.
Clearly, the migration phenomenon must be approa-
ched from two angles. The first is that of the host countries
and the second that of the countries of origin.

3.2. Host countries

These countries need:

a)

b)

reception policies, not least to face up to the emergency
sparked by the Balkan crisis (Kosovo); the need to step up
reception facilities is particularly urgent
in bordering
regions;

integration policies, to help immigrants escape from the
clutches of organised crime into a virtuous circle; this type
of policy is needed throughout Europe and should be based
on agreements between the European Union, national
governments and local and regional authorities.

2.5. Migratory flows are without doubt the manifestation
of complex problems such as endemic poverty, economic and
social decline, ethnic tensions, political and gender-specific

To gauge these policies correctly, it is first necessary to
3.3.
define the various categories of refugee in detail, for subsequent
reference.

29.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 57/69

— Asylum seekers

These are people who either are waiting for a response to their
asylum request or have registered as asylum seekers with the
host government or with the UNHCR (Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees).

— Refugees with humanitarian status

These are people who are seeking protection, who do not
satisfy refugee status criteria as provided under the conventions
on refugees, but who have been granted a temporary residence
permit. The objective should be to decide on a single mecha-
nism for the fair treatment of refugees in this category, to
replace the many varied rules on humanitarian status currently
applicable in the EU Member States.

— Internally displaced people

Internal displacement of people is rare in the Member States.

— Illegal immigrants

These are people who are not covered by official statistics,
who are easy prey for criminal organisations, and who
represent a massive ‘clandestine’ phenomenon.

3.4.
In view of the complex nature of migration and of the
various factors fuelling it, rather than acting independently
and presenting an idea to the Commission, the Council and
the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions should
ultimately set up a working party of representatives and
experts from the COR’s Commissions 5 and 7, which could
liaise on an ongoing basis with the European Commission and
make a specific and useful contribution to the existing
decision-making process.

3.5. Countries of origin

3.5.4.
All the stops must be pulled out to buttress local
government systems and back up democratic processes, in
order to create the right climate for development policy to
take root, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

3.5.5.
The aim should also be to establish proper social
control and prevent the international community’s develop-
ment support schemes from benefiting criminal organisations.

3.5.6.
Numerous initiatives set up by European Union
bodies have confirmed that this phenomenon is complex and
widespread and a major cause for concern, and that it demands
an appropriate response, possibly using the new opportunities
offered by the Amsterdam Treaty.

3.6. European Union action

3.6.1. More specifically, the Committee of the Regions
notes the following recent EU initiatives:

— the proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Commu-
nity action programme to promote the integration of
refugees (1);

— the Joint Action adopted by the Council on the basis of
Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union and the
related Commission proposal establishing measures to
provide practical support in relation to the reception and
the voluntary repatriation of refugees, displaced persons
and asylum applicants (2);

— the establishment of a high-level working group on asylum

and migration (7 and 8 December 1998);

— the draft Joint Action adopted by the Council on the basis
of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union on the
creation of an early warning system for the transmission
immigration and facilitator
of
networks (3);

information on illegal

— the immigration and asylum initiatives and debate on these
issues at the European Parliament plenary session in April
1999;

3.5.1.
Development plans must be made for the countries
of origin, in addition to the urgently required reception and
integration policies mentioned above.

— current research into how the procedural and substantive
aspects of dealing with asylum and refugee issues can be
harmonised.

3.5.2.
Cooperation policies must be applied to spur local
and sectoral measures, involving those European businesses
which have closer contact with these areas.

3.6.2.
Although these initiatives highlight the urgency of
the situation, they focus on just a few aspects and seem to lack
overall vision. The COR welcomes the Tampere decisions on a

3.5.3. Master programmes for local development are nee-
ded to promote micro-enterprises, set up health services and
develop education systems.

(1) COM(1998) 731 final — 98/0356 (CNS).
(2) COM(1998) 733 final.
(3) 99/0909(CNS).

C 57/70

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

29.2.2000

new common European asylum policy, new measures to
combat organised crime, and the renewed call for, on the one
hand, the creation of the right climate for a new migration
strategy, and on the other, the practical implementation of the
most important features of the strategy. Active dialogue in the
joint working party involving COR Commissions 5 and 7 and
EU Commission representatives could pave the way for the
framing of such a strategy.

3.6.3.
Once again, emergency action must make way for
an emphasis on planning, (which should also involve assessing
the scope of action to be taken following unforeseen events
and providing a sufficient fund for emergencies), as suggested
in the Commission communication of 23 February 1994 (1)
on immigration and asylum policies. In this communication,
the Commission states the need for a comprehensive approach
based on three distinct but related elements:

— addressing migratory pressure;

— keeping migratory flows under control;

— and bolstering integration policies for legally resident

immigrants.

3.6.4.
This would set the scene for various possible multip-
lying effects between the various cooperation operators: go-
vernments,
local authorities, NGOs, businesses, universities
and, importantly, civil society organisations.

3.6.5.
It would further the above-mentioned aim of redu-
cing migratory flows to normal levels by helping the countries
of origin to reach an adequate level of development, addressing
the roots of problems rather than just the symptoms.

3.6.6.
To promote stability in the Balkans, the Committee
of the Regions believes that the actions taken by the United
Nations, the European Union and the Organisation for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which will certainly have
a positive impact on the situation, should be followed up, for
instance, by financing schemes for completing Corridor No. 8
and other similar measures. The aim should be to launch a
process of development in the area to make this axis the focus
for a policy to integrate the Balkan countries into the European
Union. Such a move would certainly have a welcome effect on
current migratory flows.

3.6.7. Were the international community or the European
Union to estimate the cost of taking too little or no action to

(1) COM(94) 23 final.

overcome the causes of the migratory flows, they would
have further grounds to devise and launch an investment
Ideally, therefore,
programme for the countries of origin.
‘border policies’ should be strengthened and border regions in
particular given the chance to take part in defining and
implementing development policies.

3.6.8.
The Committee of the Regions is certain that a firm
policy of solidarity could transform migratory flows from a
problem into a resource for Europe.

4. Conclusions

4.1.
The above comments show how complex migration-
related issues are. They are often of considerable relevance to
regional and local authorities, which almost always end up
having to implement the migration decisions taken at national
level. Consequently it is essential that the Committee of the
Regions should be consulted by the Commission and the
European Parliament on the subject of migratory flows and on
related Commission proposals that affect the interests and
responsibilities of local and regional authorities. Furthermore,
the Committee of the Regions believes that the following
specific objectives should be pursued,
in order to control
migratory flows:

a)

the Commission, preferably, should take the initiative and
host a conference of representatives of national and
regional authorities, local bodies and NGOs, with a view
to drawing up useful guidelines and specific measures, as
part of an overall strategy; the aim should be to design a
programme to back reception and integration projects in
the host countries and development projects in the count-
ries of origin;

b)

the Commission should draw up a programme to improve
information flows, in part by holding ad hoc seminars on
the multiple causes of emigration, while paying particular
attention to health care and social security systems in the
Member States;

c) an information network covering the European Union, the
accession countries and the countries of origin should be
set up to study and monitor migratory flows, by tightening
the links between existing centres and the future observato-
ry, recommended by the Apulia Region and the CLRAE —
Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe —
(Resolution No. 69/98) as a means of devising specific
intervention policies; reference should also be made to
positive measures launched by the Commission, in con-
junction with Eurostat in particular;

29.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 57/71

d) a working party, made up of members and experts
from COR Commissions 5 and 7, cooperating with the
Commission where appropriate, should be established in
the longer term to furnish a link between local/regional
authorities and Commission and Member State initiatives,
partly so as to prepare properly for the conference
mentioned under point a);

e)

the potential of the Euro-Mediterranean agreements should
be tapped and cross-border cooperation policies stepped
up, with the establishment of a reserve fund for emergency
action to defend the EU borders and provide initial
reception facilities;

f) within the framework of on-going efforts to harmonise
procedures for dealing with asylum and refugee issues, the
Council and the European Parliament should recognise the
importance of the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child when addressing these matters.

Brussels, 18 November 1999.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Decision establishing a
Community action programme to promote the integration of refugees’

(2000/C 57/11)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Community action
programme to promote the integration of refugees (COM(1998) 731 final) (1);

having regard to the decision of the Council of 6 July 1999 to consult the Committee on the subject in
accordance with the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 15 September 1999 to direct Commission 5 ‘Social Policy,
Public Health, Consumer Protection, Research and Tourism’ to draw up the relevant opinion;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 347/99) adopted by Commission 5 on 6 September 1999
(rapporteur: Mr von Plüskow, D/PSE),

adopted the following opinion by a unanimous vote at its 31st plenary session (meeting of 18 November).

1. Background

the initial results have been published and, according to the
Commission, are positive.

Since 1998 the general budget of the European Union
1.1.
has contained three interlinked budget headings for measures
to help asylum seekers, displaced persons and refugees. So far
these measures have been implemented by the Commission in
the form of pilot projects. For this purpose the European
Parliament provided EUR 10 million in both 1997 and 1998.
The pilot projects have been fully assessed by outside experts;

(1) OJ C 36, 10.2.1999, p. 20.

At the suggestion of the European Parliament, the
1.2.
Commission is now presenting a proposal for a comprehensive
plan, based on the measures that already exist. This plan,
which comes under the general heading of EU social policy,
includes the present proposal for an action programme to
promote the integration of refugees in the European Union,
based on Article 235 EC Treaty.