Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community immigration policy"
Date: 2001-07-12
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU Member State, employment policy, immigration, occupational migration, rights of aliens, social policy

C 260/104

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

and safety policies has, at
the period
mentioned, influenced the ratification behaviour of Member
States.

for part of

least

4.2.
Improving the current state of affairs is in the interest
of employers and workers not only in the EU, but also in
developing countries, whose Governments now withhold
ratification, using the false argument that if highly developed

Brussels, 11 July 2001.

countries such as the EU Member States cannot meet the
standards set by the ILO, they certainly cannot be expected to
do so.

4.3. With a view to the above, the Committee requests the
European Commission to discuss this issue with the Member
States in the near future. It hopes that this initiative will
contribute to an improved ratification of the relevant Conven-
tions in the next few years.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community immigration policy’

(2001/C 260/19)

On 1 February 2001 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 June 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Pariza
Castan˜ os and the co-rapporteur was Mr Mengozzi.

At its 283rd plenary session (meeting of 12 July 2001), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion by 61 votes to two with 16 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

A number of principles need to be restated if immi-

1.1.
gration issues are to be tackled effectively:

1.1.1.
UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (1).

Emigration is a basic right recognised as such in the

1.1.2.
Sometimes, emigration is a venture freely embarked
upon by individuals in order to fulfil their own personal goals,

family, economic or
whether they be of a professional,
other nature. Often, however, it is a necessity dictated by
unacceptable living conditions and bleak prospects.

1.1.3.
The public authorities are therefore duty-bound to
enable this right to be exercised, promoting consensus among
the host population; they must also manage migratory flows
in a responsible manner.

(1) Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states
that (1) everyone has the right to freedom of movement and
residence within the borders of each state (2) everyone has the
right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his
country.

The history of

1.1.4.
the last 250 years in particular
demonstrates that migration happens regardless of the some-
times violent hostility of those who — convinced that they are
safeguarding their own well-being and identity — reject
integration with others, even when a variety of
factors,
including economics, make integration useful or even essential.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/105

1.2.
For these reasons, many EU countries are in need of a
wide-ranging and thorough-going political and educational
campaign by political, economic, social and religious groups
to explain that immigration is a right. Clearly, in exchange for
rights, immigrants have a duty to comply with the written
laws of the countries in which they wish to live, work and
establish families.

Moreover, it does so by adopting a new and comprehensive
approach to the immigration policies of the EU Member States
over the last 30 years. This new approach of Community
immigration policy is urgently needed. In general terms, the
present opinion welcomes the Commission’s communication,
although it suggests some fine-tuning of a number of specific
aspects.

1.3.
Community immigration policy covers humanitarian
immigration (refugees, persons enjoying temporary protection,
etc.) as well as immigration for family reunification, economic
or labour reasons. The present Commission communication
focuses on economic and labour immigration, although the
other types are mentioned a number of times.

1.4.
There is a developing body of Community law concern-
ing immigration for humanitarian reasons. Some measures
have already been implemented, such as the establishment of
a European Refugee Fund (1); others are in the process of being
adopted, including a directive on temporary protection (2), a
directive on common minimum standards on procedures for
granting and withdrawing refugee status (3), and a communi-
cation on a common asylum procedure (4).

2. Summary of the Commission communication

2.1.
The Commission explains why a new approach to
immigration is necessary. The key factor is the EU’s new
economic and demographic context. Firstly, the importance of
immigrant labour to meet existing demand on the labour
market is becoming increasingly clear; secondly, the demo-
graphic outlook suggests that immigration, although not a
miracle cure for all the problems generated by Europe’s ageing
population, can certainly help to alleviate them.

Family reunion is also being covered by legislation, in
1.5.
the form of a directive on the right to family reunification
which now only awaits final approval by the Council (5).

The Commission emphasises that the demand for
2.2.
labour applies not only to skilled jobs, as in the new
technologies, but also to unskilled vacancies.

1.6.
It is appropriate for the immigration policy communi-
cation to focus on labour immigration, although it should not
lose sight of the existence of other types. The present opinion
therefore concentrates mainly on economic and labour immi-
gration.

1.7.
The Commission communication lays the foundations
on which a Community immigration policy can be built: such
a policy was previously impossible, as it was not a Community
competence before the Amsterdam Treaty came into force.

(1) Cf. the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee in OJ

C 168, 16.6.2000.

(2) Cf. the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee in OJ

C 155, 29.5.2001.

(3) Cf. the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee in OJ

C 193, 10.7.2001.

(4) Cf. the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the
Communication from the Commission to the Council and the
European Parliament: Towards a common asylum procedure and
a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted
asylum [COM(2000) 755 final].

(5) Cf. the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee in OJ

C 204, 18.7.2000.

2.3.
The communication points out that over the last
30 years, Member State immigration policies have been based
on the assumption that Europe did not require economic or
labour immigration, and legal entry for migrants has become
very difficult. At the same time, there is a real labour shortage
in certain sectors of the economy. The result has been that
immigration has been diverted into illegal channels, increasing
the trafficking of human beings and exploitation of undocu-
mented workers.

2.4.
The communication’s central proposal is that the need
for economic and labour immigration be recognised, and that
the proper channels be re-opened for legal immigration. This
is the best way of keeping immigration under control and
clamping down on illegal immigration and exploitation of
migrants.

2.5.
The Commission places its proposals within the frame-
work of the decisions adopted at the Tampere European
Council, which speak of partnership with countries of origin,
progress towards a common European asylum system, fair
treatment of third-country nationals and working towards
common management of migration flows.

C 260/106

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

2.6.
Cooperation with countries of origin must have a
positive effect on their economic and political development.
European immigration policy must benefit both countries of
origin and host countries, cushioning the former from the
negative impact of emigration, particularly in terms of the
costs they incur in training people who subsequently use their
skills elsewhere. The Commission also refers to the need to
facilitate mobility for migrants between countries of origin
and host countries, in order to encourage them to participate
in the economic life of their country of origin.

2.11.
The communication pulls no punches in arguing
that immigration policy must be backed with wide-reaching
measures to encourage the integration of immigrants into
society. It calls for the necessary resources to be earmarked,
and for specific integration programmes to be implemented at
national, regional and local
level. Integration programmes
must involve national, regional and local authorities, the social
partners and other civil society organisations.

In order to open up new legal channels for economic
2.7.
and labour immigration, the Commission asks the Member
States to adopt a new approach, based on acknowledging the
positive value of immigration and the benefits of a more open
policy that abandons the current restrictive approach.

2.8.
The mechanism it proposes for setting annual ceilings
for labour immigration involves each Member State drawing
up periodic estimates of their needs, and cooperation and
information exchange across the Community regarding these
estimates. The Commission views annual quotas as inappropri-
ate, because they are inflexible. In order to implement a flexible
admission system, the Member States are to prepare reports
on both existing admissions and their intentions on immi-
gration. The Council will use these reports as a basis for
adopting an overall admission policy for the European Union.
Close cooperation with the social partners will be required
throughout the process.

2.9.
Admission procedures will also have to be harmonised,
clear and straightforward in order to allow migrants to enter
legally for work purposes. The Commission suggests that these
procedures might include the introduction of a job-seeker visa.

The Commission recognises that for integration to
2.12.
succeed, majority attitudes in host societies must be favourable.
This affects the message conveyed by politicians and the mass
media in their role as opinion-formers.

3. General comments

3.1.
The starting point in formulating a new Community
immigration policy must be a clear recognition of the personal
right to migrate. The Community countries and institutions
can and must regulate migratory flows by fixing criteria and
procedures to channel them in a controlled way. This implies
laying down rules on the admission of
immigrants and
managing the right to emigration responsibly. It is incumbent
upon all public authorities, social players and the media to
counter the current unfavourable view of economic immi-
grants, who are not seen as people exercising their right to
emigration: this view encourages racism and xenophobia.

3.2.

Immigration and the labour market

3.2.1.
It is very important for the Commission to acknowl-
edge that the EU suffers a deficit not only of skilled, but also
of unskilled workers. The Member States look favourably upon
highly-skilled immigrants, especially in the new technologies
sector, where they recognise a labour deficit, but fail to
appreciate the economic and social contribution made by the
immigration of less-skilled workers.

2.10.
The Commission unequivocally favours granting
admitted persons similar rights to those enjoyed by EU citizens,
and argues that these rights should be incremental, matching
the length of stay granted. It therefore proposes long-term
residence permits and permanent work permits, which would
be held by persons who have lived in an EU country a certain
number of years (to be determined). It views the proposed
concept of civic citizenship as worthy of development, with
the aim of putting Member State nationals and long-term third
country residents on a similar citizenship footing.

3.2.2.
The restrictive labour-immigration policies practised
over recent decades by the Member States have gone hand in
hand with rising demand for unskilled immigrant labour in
some economic sectors (agriculture, domestic service, hotel
and catering, construction, certain industries,
loading and
unloading of goods, and other services). This demand has been
met to a large extent by illegal immigrants. The communication
ought to acknowledge this more clearly, indicating the factors

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/107

which have led to unskilled immigration occurring through
illegal channels. There are two main causes of labour migration:
firstly, the lack of prospects for many people in their own
countries and secondly, the availability of work for immigrants
in host countries. Keeping legal immigration channels closed
at the same time as such work is available only encourages
illegal immigration.

3.2.3.
Immigration of both skilled and unskilled workers,
including those without legal status, has positive effects which
should be highlighted.

3.2.3.1.
Immigrants can help prolong the current phase of
economic growth. In many geographical areas and sectors of
the economy, businesses need labour which they cannot find
on the employment market.

3.2.3.2.
Immigrants can help certain activities to survive
where workers are no longer available locally, thereby support-
ing the continued economic and social vitality of some areas
of the Union.

The future of

3.2.3.3.
largely
depends on the growth of the economy and employment, as
well as on demographic trends (1). Legal immigration can make
a positive contribution in all these areas.

social security systems

3.2.4.
The most important ‘pull’ factor in non-Community
immigration has been the existence of an available labour
market. The most noteworthy aspect is that a labour market
specifically geared to illegal immigrants has been able to exist.
The competitiveness of some businesses has been based on the
low wages they pay their workers, exploiting their illegal and
vulnerable status.

The vast majority of businesses are concerned to
3.2.5.
comply with employment
legislation. The existence of a
minority of non-compliant employers undermines compe-
tition rules and damages the legitimate interests of the majority
of businesses which abide by laws and collective agreements
and pay the appropriate taxes and social security contributions.
Exploitative employment of illegal immigrants also jeopardises
other workers, whose working conditions are pushed down.
The state and its social security system are also affected by the
missing tax revenue and social security contributions.

3.3.

Legal immigration

A new immigration policy,

including legal entry
3.3.1.
channels for immigrants, must have a twin-track approach:
firstly, to combat the black economy which provides work

for illegal
immigrants, and secondly, to overhaul existing
mechanisms in order to ensure that legal entry is from now
onwards more accessible.

Combating the black economy, which profits from
3.3.2.
illegal immigration, requires practical legal measures and social
agreements. One objective must be met: immigrants already
here must convey to those thinking of coming the message
that unless they enter legally, they will find it difficult to secure
employment. If this message is conveyed, then an effective
means of regulating migratory flows will have been put in
place. Exchange of information between immigrants living in
the EU and other people in their countries of origin is an
the
important
former should have a proper knowledge of the procedures for
legal entry into the EU and should encourage legal entry while
discouraging illegal immigration.

influencing factor in migratory processes:

3.3.3.
Over recent years, many European countries have
introduced new criminal sanctions to tackle the organised
criminal gangs engaged in smuggling immigrants; however,
the same vigour has not been displayed in bringing the
criminal law to bear on the minority of employers who exploit
them. The Commission’s communication should call for this
to be done.

a

worldwide

3.3.4.
The fight against illegal trafficking networks must be
stepped up. These networks have mushroomed in recent years,
controlling
some
US $ 13 000 million a year (2). Measures against these organis-
ations remain inadequate and uncoordinated. Unlawful associ-
ation for the purpose of trafficking in human beings must be
made a specific criminal offence in those countries where this
is not already the case.

operation

worth

3.3.5.
The communication is clear in its intention to open
the new
up existing legal channels for entry. However,
mechanisms need to be more clearly identified and defined. In
terms of labour migration, it is apparent that entry can occur
in two main ways: firstly, when a person still in the country of
origin has an offer of employment in an EU Member State;
and secondly, by obtaining legal permission to come and seek
work. At present, only the former channel exists in most EU
countries — the second exists only under Italian law. The
second procedure, for legal emigration, merits backing.

(1) Information Report of the Economic and Social Committee on

(2) United Nations Conference on Transnational Organized Crime,

the demographic situation in the EU and future prospects.

Palermo, 12-15 December 2000.

C 260/108

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

Experience would appear to suggest that restricting
3.3.6.
entry to migrants only if
they already have an offer of
employment inevitably leads to a substantial proportion of
immigration taking place illegally. This is because many
employers will only take on individuals they have been able to
interview in advance — many jobs are therefore only available
to migrants who have already crossed EU borders. A job-
seeker visa is the best way of avoiding this stumbling block,
and should be more clearly advocated by the Commission.

It must be accepted that a number of legal immi-
3.3.7.
gration procedures exist. The individual
immigrant’s own
‘migration plan’ should be taken into account. Such a plan
might consist of setting up a business, seeking a job, enhancing
vocational skills, etc. The plan should be looked at in a positive
light by the immigration authorities (1).

3.4.5.
ment for both Member State nationals and immigrants.

The guidelines will promote higher quality employ-

The new approach to immigration policy requires
3.4.6.
the social partners to take a more active part. They must be
consulted, and be involved in defining migration objectives.
The authorities will be backed by the social partners in
combating any exploitation of illegal immigrants. Using their
collective independence, the social partners must work in the
field of labour relations to encourage the social integration of
immigrants and to combat all forms of discrimination.

3.4.

Immigration and employment policies

3.5.

Illegal immigration

3.4.1.
Unemployment in the EU is falling, in the wake of
years of economic growth, macroeconomic policy-making,
structural reforms and active job-creation policies. There are
no grounds to suppose that a new immigration policy might
have a negative impact on falling unemployment. The facts
suggest the opposite:
immigration will facilitate economic
growth and, consequently, job creation.

3.4.2.
This new immigration policy should form part of
Europe’s employment strategy, and must under no circum-
stances serve to tone down policy-making or water down
employment policy decisions taken at either Community or
Member State level. Action to enhance employability by means
of training for job-seekers should be stepped up, as should
equal opportunities policies.

3.4.3.
The national employment action plans must include
criteria which are helpful in managing migratory flows. With
the necessary flexibility, national employment plans must give
consideration to immigration forecasts in order to ensure that
the labour market functions properly.

3.4.4.
The employment guidelines, drawn up annually on
the basis of the four ‘pillars’ (employability, entrepreneurship,
adaptability and equal opportunities), should embrace the new
immigration policy.

(1) Appendix to the Information Report of the Economic and Social

Committee.

3.5.1. While working to open up legal channels for
migration,
it is necessary to address the present situation
whereby large numbers of illegal immigrants are present in the
Member States, as a result of decades of restrictive policies. It
is desirable that their situation should be legalised: not only
the immigrants themselves, but also the labour market as a
whole and the welfare state could benefit, sectors of the black
economy would be brought out into the open.

3.5.2.
The communication mentions that some countries
have legalisation procedures, but the Committee believes the
Commission should adopt a positive stance on this, and
propose flexible legalisation procedures. The Commission
should undertake research into the social and economic impact
on both host societies and immigrants of the legalisation
procedures which have been completed. All the research
suggests that legalisation procedures are beneficial for social
integration, tax receipts, social security contributions and the
functioning of the employment market.

immi-
Gradually legalising the situation of illegal
3.5.3.
grants must be an element in a process including opening up
legal immigration channels and intensifying measures against
the criminal organisations involved in trafficking human
beings. It should be made clear to public opinion that if
approached in this way,
legalisation will not boost illegal
immigration, but rather will reduce it significantly.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/109

4. Specific comments

4.1. Cooperation with countries of origin

4.1.1.
The communication rightly argues that migration
must also be of benefit to countries of origin. The brain drain
is probably the worst aspect of emigration, as countries of
origin receive no return on the investment they make in
training. However, we must be more explicit: European host
countries must make substantial investments in cooperation
and development programmes in the countries of origin,
including training and research activities. Aid for training and
education has so far represented only a minor element in
development cooperation: it should be increased, as should
exchange programmes for students and researchers.

4.1.2.
Support for economic and human development in
the countries of origin should be on a much higher level than
at present. Such support should focus on stimulating high-
quality locally-generated development, especially of human
resources.

Point 2.1 of the communication discusses increasing
4.1.3.
immigrants’ mobility between the receiving countries and
countries of origin, so that migrants can act as a factor for
development in their home countries. This concept of mobility
should be elevated into one of the key aspects in managing
migratory flows. People who have already obtained a residence
permit in an EU Member State must not lose their residence
rights, even if they spend lengthy periods of time outside the
relevant Member State (not only for visits, as suggested in the
communication).

4.1.4. Mobility is taken to mean not only those with
permanent residence permits, but also others who come for
temporary work. Such people must be able to return to their
countries in the certainty that they will be able to come back
for further seasonal work if they so wish.

4.1.5.
Political and official support for voluntary return
must be forthcoming if the benefits for the country of origin
are to be maximised. This involves supporting employment or
business start-up projects with economic or training assistance.

4.2.

Fair treatment of third-country nationals

4.2.1.
The communication suggests that immigrants should
enjoy rights ‘comparable’ to those of Member State nationals.

The Committee believes the term ‘same’ rights should be used,
while taking account of the differing legal nature of the
situation of illegal immigrants, legal immigrants with tempor-
ary permits, and long-term residents.

4.2.2.
As a minimum, the acknowledged rights of immi-
grants present in the EU should be those enshrined in the
European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, which states
that all persons enjoy basic rights. These include: right to
family life;
freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
freedom of assembly and association; right to education;
freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work;
non-discrimination; employment rights and social security;
right to effective access to courts and to legal aid.

4.2.3.
The communication does not view illegal immigrants
as persons whose rights should be guaranteed. The final aim is
for these people, who are present in European society, to enjoy
the fundamental human rights laid down by international
treaties covering the Member States, and by the European
Convention on Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms.
The same applies to the social rights enjoyed by Member State
citizens: health care, children’s education and appropriate
social benefits.

4.2.4.
Those resident on temporary permits must enjoy the
same employment and social rights as nationals of the host
country. The Commission quite rightly argues that their legal
status, and that of their families, must be improved.

4.2.5.
Immigrants with five years’ residence must be given
a permanent permit, including the right to free movement
within the EU, under the same conditions as EU citizens, and
the right to vote in local and European elections, as also
applies to EU citizens living in another Member State.

4.2.6.
The Commission advocates forced return in order
to protect European immigration policy. The Committee
considers that there should be no discussion of repatriation
unless two conditions are met: firstly, any humanitarian factors
must be looked at before proceeding to repatriation; secondly,
in each case all the possibilities for legalisation of status offered
by legislation must have been exhausted prior to repatriation.
However, voluntary repatriation should always be sought. A
comprehensive approach to voluntary repatriation requires a
series of measures and types of assistance to make it attractive
to those concerned.

C 260/110

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

4.3. Management of migratory flows

4.3.1. Management of migration flows,
the subject of
point 2.4, needs to be carried out both in the host countries
(here, the EU Member States) and in the countries of origin.
The communication points to the need for intensive dialogue
with countries of origin, but the Committee considers that the
role of EU Member State consular representation in these
countries should also be broached. Specialist immigration
departments in consulates should be strengthened so that they
can deal with applications for entry, whether for work or
family reunification, carry out the necessary procedures, act as
a conduit for offers of employment, introduce mechanisms for
cooperating with social players, etc. These departments could
also run appropriate information campaigns, and would carry
out the important preliminary work which is essential to
ensure that migration occurs through legal channels.

4.3.2.
The role of consulates in migration affairs must be
transparent, with no room for arbitrary decisions on granting
of entry visas (not only for work). This new policy should
boost harmonisation of Community consular procedures.
National employment services in the countries of origin must
report
job vacancies and facilitate job seekers’ access to
immigration offices. This will make procedures more trans-
parent.

4.3.3.
This work would be facilitated by an information
system of the Eures type, to be run by the social partners and
NGOs and making use of data on job opportunities and
conditions.

The new approach to immigration should include
4.3.4.
steps to legalise the situation of immigrants who do not
currently have the right papers. If the communication wishes
to facilitate entry, in the interests of the Community’s economy
and future demographic balance, then the initial focus should
be on undocumented migrants already living within the
EU. Point 3.2 of the communication emphasises combating
irregular work and exploitation of immigrants: this would be
facilitated by legalising the situation of undocumented
migrants. Forthcoming Community legislation should call for
this explicitly in a separate point following point 3.2, based on
an acknowledgement of the link between restrictive policies,
illegal immigration and employment. The Commission must
launch initiatives to encourage flexible legalisation measures.

There is no reason why regularisation should be
4.3.5.
effected through extraordinary procedures (or amnesties);
it should take place progressively, determined by
rather,

conditions such as employment status, family links, degree of
integration into society, humanitarian reasons, etc. What is
important is to open up ways for undocumented migrants to
regularise their situation, in the same way as the communi-
cation suggests opening up legal entry channels for new
immigrants.

4.3.6.
Legislative and fiscal measures, and contractual agree-
ments, are needed to bring companies operating in the black
economy gradually into the legal sphere. Employers who
persist in exploiting immigrant labour and who do not enter
into such agreements should be punished appropriately. These
measures must, however, be supplemented by sympathetic
treatment of migrants who are being exploited, with the aim
of legalising their position. This could encourage the workers
themselves to report the exploitation they are subjected to.

The cooperation of the social partners is needed in
4.3.6.1.
the fight against illegal employment and the exploitation of
illegal immigrants. Employers’ associations and trade unions
at all levels have a very significant role to play in tandem with
the employment authorities and, where appropriate, the courts.
Positive measures should be adopted to bring ‘hidden’ work to
the surface, offering incentives where workers and businesses
are put onto a legal footing.

4.3.7.
Point 3.4.1 of the communication proposes a process
for determining the numbers of immigrants to be admitted to
each of the Member States, based on periodic forecasts and
indicative targets. Annual quotas are described as ‘impracti-
cable’. The Committee believes that annual national quotas
should not be ruled out entirely, although they must be set
and implemented in a flexible way. Quotas could be tied to
job-seeker visas, or ‘migration projects’; with the aim of
meeting a degree of demand for labour in sectors where it is
difficult to establish accurate estimates.
In this way each
Member State should set a prior number of entry permits to
be granted for job-seekers, but could adjust the number
in response to periodic analyses and forecasts, with the
involvement of the social partners. Regarding quotas, the
Committee would argue that admission of
third-country
nationals to the employment market must remain quite
distinct from admission on humanitarian or family reunifi-
cation grounds. Quotas would be entirely unacceptable in
these two cases.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/111

4.3.8.
In keeping with the general comments of the present
opinion, more clear-cut support should be given to the job-
seeker or migration project visas mentioned in point 3.4.2. It
seems unlikely that the ‘economic needs test’ referred to in
point 3.4.2 could be applied to lower-skilled types of work:
another means of legal access to such jobs is necessary.

political figures are not enough, however: there is a need for a
practical and determined action programme involving political
authorities, the education system and the media in order to
convey the proper information and values.

4.4.6.
Preparing public opinion for granting equal rights to
immigrants and integrating them into society is a major
challenge for European societies. It should be pointed out in
the communication that all the Member States need to make
serious efforts in this direction.

4.4.7.
Immigrants’ participation in public life is a key aspect
in their integration. Voting rights are of great importance in
this regard. The Committee would recall a relevant long-
standing, but largely ignored, Commission recommendation,
which has been transposed into the legislation of only a few
Member States. The Commission should assess the effects of
exercising the right to vote in local elections, where this has
been tried.

4.4.8.
The Committee welcomes the Commission’s pro-
posal for civic citizenship for third-country nationals, but
European citizenship should be advocated for long-term
residents. This would require amendment of the Treaty on
European Union.

4.4.

Social integration

4.4.1.
The Committee fully agrees that specific programmes
are needed at national, regional and local level to encourage
the social integration of migrants, as discussed in point 3.5 of
the communication, but stresses that
integration policies
must be strongly backed with the necessary resources, since
accomplishments to date have proved clearly insufficient.
Member State and/or EU integration programmes must focus
on clearly defined objectives allowing for assessment of results
and comparison of the Member States’ efforts.

Integration is to be understood as the insertion of
4.4.2.
the immigrant population into the shared system of rights and
obligations established by the Member States’ democratic
machinery, with due respect for the individual beliefs of all.

4.5.

Public opinion

4.4.3.
Equality of opportunity must be ensured in providing
access to employment and housing for immigrants. A major
objective in this area is for individuals to gain rapid entry to
the jobs for which they are qualified. Active policies should be
introduced to ensure that qualified individuals do not remain
for lengthy periods in unskilled jobs.

4.5.1.
It will not be easy to persuade public opinion to take
a favourable view of the more open immigration policy now
being proposed, but far-reaching work to this end is now
urgently required.

4.4.4.
Education is vital in building civic coexistence for all
and the social integration of the immigrant population, and in
preventing and combating racism and xenophobia.

4.5.2.
The greatest possible amount of information on the
employment situation, and on the benefits of immigration for
economic growth and job creation should be promoted, to
counter the view that immigrants take away nationals’ jobs.

Fighting social discrimination of all kinds requires a
4.4.5.
commitment by political authorities, the social partners and
the media. Debate, and well-meaning declarations by leading

The demographic trends reported in the communi-
4.5.3.
cation should also be more widely published for the general
public.

C 260/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

4.5.4.
The European population must be better informed
on the negative impact of ‘black’ or illegal work and the
benefits, for the welfare state, of legalising the position of
illegal immigrants.

4.5.5.
Public bodies, at European and national level, must
devote more work and resources to mobilising public opinion
in favour of social integration and against racism and xeno-
phobia.

Brussels, 12 July 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council and the European Parliament: Towards a common asylum procedure and a
uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted asylum’

(2001/C 260/20)

On 1 February 2001 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 June 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Mengozzi.

At its 383rd plenary session (meeting of 12 July), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion with 67 votes in favour, no dissenting votes and 14 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

Points 13, 14 and 15 of

the
1.1.
European Council in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999
state that:

the conclusions of

‘13.
The European Council reaffirms the importance
the Union and Member States attach to absolute respect of
the right to seek asylum. It has agreed to work towards
establishing a common European asylum system, based on
the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Conven-
tion, thus ensuring that nobody is sent back to persecution,
i.e. maintaining the principle of “non-refoulement”.

14.
This system should include, in the short term, a
clear and workable determination of the State responsible
for examining an asylum application, common standards
for a fair and efficient asylum procedure, common mini-
mum conditions of reception of asylum seekers, and the

approximation of rules on the recognition and content of
refugee status. It should also be completed with measures
on subsidiary forms of protection offering an appropriate
status to any person in need of such protection. To that
end, the Council
is urged to adopt, on the basis of
Commission proposals, the necessary decisions according
to the timetable set in the Treaty of Amsterdam and the
Vienna Action Plan. The European Council stresses the
importance of consulting UNHCR and other international
organisations.

15.
In the longer term, Community rules should lead to
a common asylum procedure and a uniform status for
those who are granted asylum valid throughout the Union.
The Commission is asked to prepare within one year a
communication on this matter.’

The communication which the Commission has issued
1.2.
pursuant to this mandate is short, dense and ambitious. It sets
the scene for more specific proposals which will be the subject