Policy recommendations

  • To address the internal push factors for migration, the EU should provide adequate assistance to developing countries and achieve the target of 0.7% of GDP for development cooperation. It should help developing countries to devise effective strategies to retain highly skilled workers, e.g. through development programmes aimed at improving local employment opportunities and working conditions. This is especially necessary in the health sector.
  • The EU should provide targeted investments to train, deploy and retain staff in developing countries who are working in sensitive sectors such as education and health. The EU should also provide long-term budgetary support to underpin the domestic financing of those sectors.
  • The EU should ensure that all its member states sign a legally binding commitment that includes the private sector in order to prevent active recruitment in developing countries. Such a code of practice should address country- or region-specific needs. Furthermore, in order to ensure compliance, the EU should set up a formally constituted body with an oversight and watchdog role in the EU and developing countries.
  • To prevent a negative impact on source countries, the EU should introduce concrete measures to encourage the permanent return of Blue Card holders. Within the EU the portability of social rights should be facilitated. In developing countries, migrants should be offered benefits in order to encourage their return.
  • If the EU attracts workers whose education and training have been provided by their home countries, then these countries of origin should be appropriately compensated for having provided these skills. 
  • The EU should encourage its member states to strengthen their own (national) workforce policies in all sectors in order to become less dependent on foreign workers from less developed countries.

Case: Blue Card

31-05-2010 MEPs Concerned about Unfair Migration Policies

At the heart of both migration and development are human beings who are entitled to human rights. The right to emigrate is a fundamental right embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. MEPs Helene Flautre (Greens/EFA) Ana Gomes (S&D) Rui Tavares (GUE/NGL) Gabriele Zimmer (GUE/NGL) and Sonia Alfano (ALDE) are concerned for the human rights of migrants that are violated by and in Europe.

Sonia Alfano calls attention to the human rights abuses in the detention centres for immigrants in Italy. According to her sources they are closer to prisons, where there are no guarantees of due processes than identification and expulsion centres or asylum-seeker centres. Italy receives large funds to manage its migration flows. Hence, Alfano asks the commission for transparency on the finances of these centres, to see where the money that should be going to migrants, ends up. She also calls on the commission to take action to prevent future demeaning situations which violate human dignity and the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

The other MEPs question the promises EU made within the Cotonou Agreement to respect human rights and fair treatment of ACP countries nationals. According to them the bilateral readmissions agreements with transit countries in a context of externalisation by Europe of the management of migration, do not guarantee these promises made. They therefore call on the commission to take all the necessary steps in the current negotiations of international agreements to guarantee the migrants rights will be truly respected.

Migration and development are closely linked both positively and negatively. Migration helps development through remittances and skills transfer and with development the push factors of migration are weakened, but migration also leads to brain drain in developing countries. Therefore, in order to be coherent with its own development policy, the EU needs a migration policy that does not cause brain drain and does not violate human rights. All these MEPs are acknowledged as fair politicians for raising their concerns with the role of the commission in insuring coherence and respect of human rights.

Monitor fair: Greens/EFA, S&D, GUE/NGL(2), ALDE

Parliamentary questions
3 May 2010
E-2960/10
WRITTEN QUESTION by Hélène Flautre (Verts/ALE) , Ana Gomes (S&D) , Rui Tavares (GUE/NGL) and Gabriele Zimmer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Revision of the Cotonou Agreement

On 20 January 2010, the Plenary Session of the European Parliament adopted a resolution, proposed by the Committee on Development, concerning the revision of the Cotonou Agreement(1). On that occasion Parliament affirmed that the scope of principles such as respect for human rights and fair treatment of ACP countries nationals is seriously compromised by bilateral readmission agreements with transit countries in a context of externalisation by Europe of the management of migration, which do not guarantee respect for the rights of migrants and which may result in cascade readmissions which jeopardise their safety and their lives.

The negotiations related to the revision of this agreement in general and to Article 13 in particular have not ended. On 9 February 2010 Parliament adopted a resolution on relations with the Commission(2) where it is clearly stated that the agreement concluded between the two institutions includes a commitment by the Commission for reinforced association with Parliament through the provision of immediate and full information to Parliament at every stage of negotiations on international agreements.
How will the Commission inform Parliament on the current status of these negotiations and on all steps taken by the Commission itself in order to guarantee that migrants rights will be truly respected?

Parliamentary questions
14 May 2010
E-3408/10
WRITTEN QUESTION by Sonia Alfano (ALDE) to the Commission

Subject: Violation of basic rights in detention centres for illegal immigrants in Italy

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has called attention to the issue of detention centres for immigrants in Italy, including identification and expulsion centres (CIE), reception centres for asylum seekers (CARA) and reception centres for newly arrived immigrants (CDA). Two successive inspections of these centres in 2008 and 2009 exposed their shortcomings. The CIE, for example, which were created by Decree Law 268/98 to hold immigrants arrested without papers within Italian territory for no more than 30 days, have quickly turned into prisons. A brief period of detention of up to 30 days has become a prison sentence of up to 180 days, but without the necessary guarantees of due process.

The 19th Caritas Migrants report for 2009 records that in 2008 10 539 migrants passed through CIE centres, of whom only 45 % were expelled. 40 % of residents of such centres are former detainees. They also included migrants seeking asylum, foreigners born in Italy, immigrants with expired permits, newly-arrived migrants and even Community citizens. The centres are cramped and the living conditions undignified. Protection of basic rights, healthcare, and legal, psychological or social assistance are scarce or non-existent. Thousands of persons with different backgrounds, languages and religions are forced to live in conditions of dangerous promiscuity. Those who are vulnerable and with no access to specific aid are the first to pay the price of this forced coexistence. Countless cases of self-harming have been recorded.

Italy has benefitted from many financial instruments under the framework programme on solidarity and management of migration flows. It received EUR 96 million from the European Integration Fund for the period 2007 13 (Decision 435/2007/EC(1)). It received EUR 2 821 520 in 2008 and EUR 4 470 815 in 2009 from the European Refugee Fund (Decision 573/2007/EC(2)), not to mention the specific measures for Lampedusa, which amounted to EUR 2.1 million between 2005 and 2007.

Has the Commission carried out detailed checks on the use of these resources by Italy? Was it given the necessary prior guarantees? What action will it take on any mismanagement of allocated funds? Will it enforce the necessary penalties? Has it already identified irregularities in the management of funds and, if so, has it enforced the relevant penalties? What will it do in future to prevent demeaning situations of the kind described, which violate human dignity and the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?