WRITTEN QUESTION E-2986/03 by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission. Commission Communication on immigration, integration and employment — brain drain.
Date: 2003-10-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, brain drain, employment policy, foreign national, immigration, integration of migrants, labour market, manpower needs

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/171

(2004/C 70 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2986/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(9 October 2003)

Subject: Commission Communication on immigration, integration and employment (cid:1) brain drain

On page 16 of the Commission Communication COM(2003) 336, it is stated that ‘recourse to immigrants
to the brain drain’.
should not be detrimental
The emigration of high skilled workers from the developing countries to Europe therefore constitutes a
phenomenon that drives such countries into a vicious circle: the lack of a high skilled and dynamic labour
force (plant managers, professional employees, etc.) simply makes the situation there more difficult.

to developing countries, particularly with respect

However, earlier on in the document, reference is made to the problem of native unskilled or low skilled
workers being adversely affected by large-scale immigration of
low skilled labour from outside the
European Union. In our knowledge-based economy, the need for low skilled labour (certainly from outside
the Union) is small. What is more, further immigration of that type is undesirable, inter alia on social and
economic grounds.

On the one hand, the Commission is seeking to attract high skilled workers (although without causing a
brain drain), and, on the other, it acknowledges the problem of the uneven distribution of the burdens of
immigration in Europe (situation of the low skilled). How does the Commission think that it will be able to
reconcile these two considerations?

(2004/C 70 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3004/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Commission communication on immigration,

integration and employment (cid:1) franchise for

immigrants

Communication COM(2003) 336 repeatedly calls for immigrants in Europe to be granted ‘political rights’.
‘From the point of view of integration, it is obvious that local franchise should derive from permanent
residence, rather than from nationality. The Commission believes that granting long-term resident
immigrants political rights is important for the integration process and that the Treaty should provide the
basis for so doing’ (p. 24).

The issue of whether or not to grant immigrants the right to vote is a very controversial one for which
there is virtually no democratic support in most Member States: public opinion is set against such a move.

Does the Commission take the view that the democratic legitimacy of the European Union would be
strengthened by using the Treaty to impose the right to vote for immigrants in countries where there is
strong public opposition to such a move?

In practical terms, what does the Commission understand by ‘political rights’: only local franchise, or
franchise at other levels (district, provincial, national, European) as well?

As things stand, how does the Commission assess the likelihood that the Treaty will provide a legal basis
for granting immigrants the right to vote?

What is the basis for the suggestion that granting immigrants the right to vote will foster integration? In
fact, the reverse is likely to be true if certain rights (right to vote, nationality) are granted automatically, or
quasi-automatically, to the individuals concerned with no reciprocal concessions required. A practical
incentive to integrate will disappear if the willingness to integrate no longer has any bearing on the award
of such rights.