Objectives
News 
The European Policy Centre Policy issued an update of European documents with an impact on migration
Carmen Munteanu - Communications Coordinator
26 June 2014
The European Programme for Integration and Migration (EPIM) through the European Policy Centre (EPC) launched in June the "EPC Policy Update for the European Programme for Integration and Migration". The report summarizes the main documents issued between 1 April and 31 May 2014 – reports, studies and European legislation – impacting on migration and integration.
From the legal migration perspective two important documents have been adopted: the Intra-Corporate Transferees Directive and the new Frontex Regulation. Two other documents of the Commission – the Report on Migration and Asylum and the Report on the impact of implementing the Blue Card Directive – are also of interest for legal migration.
The Intra-Corporate Transferees Directive (2014/66/EU) aims to contribute to the EU economic growth through setting up a framework for admission of up to 20,000 third country nationals, transferred between business units belonging to the same company. The Directive provides equal conditions for these transferred employees as for staff detached from the EU. In addition it provides equal treatment for these intra-company transferred staff with the nationals of the receiving state regarding certain protection and social security rights, such as: freedom of association and affiliation, recognition of diplomas, credentials and qualifications, access to goods and services.
The right to mobility of intra-corporate transferee workers was one of the issues disputed during the negotiations. The European Parliament would have wanted to introduce short-term mobility (90 days in any 180 days period) without other guarantees, whereas the Council introduced several safeguards which member states can include in their national legislation (notification, additional documents, possibility to object to the mobility of intra-corporate transferees). The European Parliament was concerned that this could lead to the re-examination of cases by the second member state, and these provisions will be included in the final form of the Directive. According to one of the authors, this instance indicates a lack of trust between member states.
The report on the implementation of the Blue Card Directive provides statistics related to the number of admitted applications, the main countries of origin of the applicants and family reunification for Blue Card holders. In 2012 a total of 664 Blue Cards were issued to workers coming mostly from India, China and Russia. During the same period, 1107 family members of highly qualified workers were admitted on the territory of the member states that issued the Blue Cards. The main receiving countries were Germany (2584), Spain (461), and Luxembourg (183).
According to the European Commission, the Directive set the minimum standards and left large margins of manoeuvre to member states. As a consequence, the national system for attracting highly qualified migrants compete with one other. There is still a low level of coherence in transposing the Blue Card Directive into the national legislation of member states, as well as difficulties encountered by the Blue Card holders willing to travel within the EU.
The European Commission Report on Immigration and Asylum also includes statistics on the immigrant composition of EU population: at the beginning of 2013, EU counted 503 million people, of which 20.4 million were third country nationals. In 2012 member states issued 2.1 million first-residence permits – most of them for family reasons, work and studies – to the citizens coming mostly from USA, Ukraine, China and India. In 2013 434,160 asylum applications were registered, significantly more than in 2012, as a result of the conflict in Syria. The main countries of origin for asylum seekers were Syria, Russia, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan and Kosovo. Despite the increase in the number of asylum applications, the issue of migrants dying at the Union borders remains urgent from a human rights perspective. In this line the collaboration between member states to find legal paths for admitting these migrants to the EU and integrating them on the labour market should be a priority.
The crisis in Syria is far from a predictable end. Syria continues to generate migrants in need of humanitarian assistance, but the main countries bearing the burden of Syrian refugees are the neighbouring one: Lebanon with 1,059,000, as compared to a population of 4 million, Turkey (740,000) and Jordan (590,000). Despite the desperate situation, 14 EU member states refused to resettle Syrian refugees, with the only exception being Germany, which volunteered to receive 10,000 refugees either by resettlement or by humanitarian admission procedures. This proved once again that rhetoric works very well with member states but when it comes to actions, individual interests have priority over any humanitarian cause.
Immigrants’ integration. In May the Migration Policy Institute published the report "Supporting Immigrant Integration in Europe? Developing the Governance for Diaspora Engagement" that outlines the benefits for the countries of origin, as a result of immigrants’ integration into the receiving societies, and the way how key actors in the countries of origin are involved in immigrant integration, through mobilizing the diasporas. The report provides for the first time a map of the institutional actors in the countries of origin who are involved in immigrants’ integration in the receiving societies. From a governance and international co-operation perspective, the actors from the countries of origin with key contributions to immigrant integration are difficult to identify, and the common co-operation areas – such as increasing the protection and social security measures for migrant workers through bilateral agreements and support programmes organised before departure and upon arrival in the receiving country – are not enough exploited with respect to the benefits they could bring to both origin and destination countries.
Sources:
http://www.epim.info
http://www.migrationpolicy.org
From the legal migration perspective two important documents have been adopted: the Intra-Corporate Transferees Directive and the new Frontex Regulation. Two other documents of the Commission – the Report on Migration and Asylum and the Report on the impact of implementing the Blue Card Directive – are also of interest for legal migration.
The Intra-Corporate Transferees Directive (2014/66/EU) aims to contribute to the EU economic growth through setting up a framework for admission of up to 20,000 third country nationals, transferred between business units belonging to the same company. The Directive provides equal conditions for these transferred employees as for staff detached from the EU. In addition it provides equal treatment for these intra-company transferred staff with the nationals of the receiving state regarding certain protection and social security rights, such as: freedom of association and affiliation, recognition of diplomas, credentials and qualifications, access to goods and services.
The right to mobility of intra-corporate transferee workers was one of the issues disputed during the negotiations. The European Parliament would have wanted to introduce short-term mobility (90 days in any 180 days period) without other guarantees, whereas the Council introduced several safeguards which member states can include in their national legislation (notification, additional documents, possibility to object to the mobility of intra-corporate transferees). The European Parliament was concerned that this could lead to the re-examination of cases by the second member state, and these provisions will be included in the final form of the Directive. According to one of the authors, this instance indicates a lack of trust between member states.
The report on the implementation of the Blue Card Directive provides statistics related to the number of admitted applications, the main countries of origin of the applicants and family reunification for Blue Card holders. In 2012 a total of 664 Blue Cards were issued to workers coming mostly from India, China and Russia. During the same period, 1107 family members of highly qualified workers were admitted on the territory of the member states that issued the Blue Cards. The main receiving countries were Germany (2584), Spain (461), and Luxembourg (183).
According to the European Commission, the Directive set the minimum standards and left large margins of manoeuvre to member states. As a consequence, the national system for attracting highly qualified migrants compete with one other. There is still a low level of coherence in transposing the Blue Card Directive into the national legislation of member states, as well as difficulties encountered by the Blue Card holders willing to travel within the EU.
The European Commission Report on Immigration and Asylum also includes statistics on the immigrant composition of EU population: at the beginning of 2013, EU counted 503 million people, of which 20.4 million were third country nationals. In 2012 member states issued 2.1 million first-residence permits – most of them for family reasons, work and studies – to the citizens coming mostly from USA, Ukraine, China and India. In 2013 434,160 asylum applications were registered, significantly more than in 2012, as a result of the conflict in Syria. The main countries of origin for asylum seekers were Syria, Russia, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan and Kosovo. Despite the increase in the number of asylum applications, the issue of migrants dying at the Union borders remains urgent from a human rights perspective. In this line the collaboration between member states to find legal paths for admitting these migrants to the EU and integrating them on the labour market should be a priority.
The crisis in Syria is far from a predictable end. Syria continues to generate migrants in need of humanitarian assistance, but the main countries bearing the burden of Syrian refugees are the neighbouring one: Lebanon with 1,059,000, as compared to a population of 4 million, Turkey (740,000) and Jordan (590,000). Despite the desperate situation, 14 EU member states refused to resettle Syrian refugees, with the only exception being Germany, which volunteered to receive 10,000 refugees either by resettlement or by humanitarian admission procedures. This proved once again that rhetoric works very well with member states but when it comes to actions, individual interests have priority over any humanitarian cause.
Immigrants’ integration. In May the Migration Policy Institute published the report "Supporting Immigrant Integration in Europe? Developing the Governance for Diaspora Engagement" that outlines the benefits for the countries of origin, as a result of immigrants’ integration into the receiving societies, and the way how key actors in the countries of origin are involved in immigrant integration, through mobilizing the diasporas. The report provides for the first time a map of the institutional actors in the countries of origin who are involved in immigrants’ integration in the receiving societies. From a governance and international co-operation perspective, the actors from the countries of origin with key contributions to immigrant integration are difficult to identify, and the common co-operation areas – such as increasing the protection and social security measures for migrant workers through bilateral agreements and support programmes organised before departure and upon arrival in the receiving country – are not enough exploited with respect to the benefits they could bring to both origin and destination countries.
Sources:
http://www.epim.info
http://www.migrationpolicy.org
Back