Myths, Stereotypes, and Migrants: “Benefits Tourism”

Source: blogs.channel4.com

It all started with one Romanian women, Elisabeth Dano.

Ms. Dano sued a German employment centre in Leipzig, as she believed they were refusing to grant her unemployment benefits to her and her son. Yet, according to German news agency DPA, Ms. Dano was receiving a child allowance and support benefits totalling 317 euros per month by the time the case was brought. And just yesterday, the European Court of Justice ruled in Germany’s favour, a move that has been heavily condoned by Prime Minister David Cameron, calling the decision “simple common sense.”

Contradictions, Back-Tracks, and the EU Referendum

By now, it’s no secret that our Prime Minister has promised that, if his party is reelected in the upcoming General Elections (only six months away), a referendum regarding our membership within the EU will be held in 2017. And the reactions have been mixed.

Source: blogs.spectator.co.uk

While many are happy with this stated pledge, others are protesting. After speaking at the Confederation of British Industry’s (CBI) conference yesterday, the Prime Minister faced terse reactions from British business leaders following his claims that leaving the EU and tougher immigration controls would destabilise our economic recovery.

“In light of the fact that irregular migration is not a crime and irregular migrants are not criminals per se, the use of the expression ‘illegal migrant’ should be avoided at all costs. The UN General Assembly Resolution No. 3449 of 9 December 1975 recommended that stakeholders avoid using the term ‘illegal’ to describe migrants in an irregular situation.

Using incorrect terminology that negatively depicts individuals as ‘illegal’ contributes to the negative discourses on migration, and further reinforces negative stereotypes against migrants. Moreover, such language legitimates a discourse of the criminalisation of migration, which in turn, contributes to the further alienation, marginalisation, discrimination and ill treatment of migrants on a daily basis.”

– UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, François Crépeau, during the Panel Discussion on International Migration and Development, June 25th, 2013, New York

The Big Debate on Immigration: Have We Been Unfair This Whole Time?

Another week has gone by, with another report released on the effects of immigration. As we continue to gear up for the 2015 General Elections, the issue of immigration grows even more pressing and, not to mention, more politicised. So, you ask, what’s so great about this new report?

UNHCR Mid-Year Asylum Trends Report: Removing the Politics From It All

So I know my recent posts have been quite “politics-heavy,” so to speak. It is strange to think of how when I first started this blog, I was too scared to even mention a political party, or their views on immigration, but as time went on, we can all agree that politics and migration have somewhat become my central focus. The two have now become heavily intertwined: people in politics have made immigration a key issue in their platforms, while the way in which people will move around Europe is becoming increasingly dictated by the policies made by those in power.

But in the end, the mobility of people in this world is not all about politics, or perhaps when studying said mobility, one needs to be able to take a step back, once in a while, and take a look at the overall picture.

That is why I am choosing to highlight this recent report from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) detailing asylum trends for the first half of 2014 in this post. Reading it has not only help to further my understanding of asylum seekers and how they move, but it helps to bring me and this blog back down to earth: it removes the politics from migration, and helps me to see the bigger picture of mobility in this world nowadays.

Source: UNHCR

Migration is NOT a crime

One of my readers from Berlin kindly sent me this picture, and I just could not resist putting it up. Thanks so much V!

#MigrantsContribute

Some of you may have noticed this hashtag floating around the “Twittersphere” during the past few weeks. A social campaign meant to raise awareness on the benefits of migration and dispel myths concerning mobility, #migrantscontribute has been making the rounds on Twitter, spearheaded by the International Organization for Migration. Just yesterday, Laura Thompson, Deputy Director General of IOM, delivered a speech at a conference in Brussels titled “A World on the Move: The Benefits of Migration.”  In my opinion, it is brilliant and highly worth a read-through. Click on the title to read the full speech, but until then, let me leave you with my favourite tidbit that I feel sums up the direction of mobility in this world, a direction which seems to scare many people, when it should not.

“The XXI Century is the century of human mobility and migration. We can no longer think about our economies, societies or cultures without thinking about human mobility.”

 

The Big Debate on Immigration: Labour Speaks Out

Source: http://www.chuka.org.uk

Hello all! By now, most of you have probably been wondering about the radio silence on my end, for which I do apologise. I have been travelling for the past two weeks, and while I might have missed posting some of the going-ons in the world, I am back and ready to dive right into what is happening now in the debate on migration and the EU.

So let’s get to it, shall we?

Switzerland’s Domino Effect After Announcement of EU Immigration Quotas

It all started with the announcement that EU net migration in Switzerland hit a record high in the year 2013. This, coupled with an energetic billionaire spearheading the right-wing populist People’s Party of Switzerland with a Swiss initiative called “Against Mass Migration,” thrown in, eventually led to a referendum this past February. The people voted, and 50.3% of the country desired to start imposing EU immigration quotas starting 2017. The decision was immediately followed by a fews bangs and shuffles, starting with tangible anger emanating from the EU as this was in direct violation of a bilateral treaty pact that allows the free movement of people between the Union and the country. This, in turn, was followed by a potential “promise,” from Swiss President Didier Burkhalter to hold a new referendum on its immigration policy after it failed to reach an agreement with the EU.

Time has passed since all this took place , and 2017 seems so far away, but the effects of the future quotas are happening now – and they spell trouble for this famously neutral country.

Source: http://www.postcarbon.org

Frontex Program will “not” replace Mare Nostrum?

Source: http://europedecides.eu/features/commitments-malmstrom/

Cecelia Malmström, the EU home affairs commissioner, seems to be causing a bit of confusion and commotion right now.

According to this article from Malta Today, the commissioner stated that “Frontex plus, or whatever it will be called, is going to be framed as it is still being drafted and tasks and responsibilities have yet to be spelt out. It however will be a bigger operation than Frontex and different from Mare Nostrum.” This arrives as a sort of sequel to last week’s announcement by Malmström that the EU had agreed to spearhead a new program in order to alleviate the strain being put on the Italian navy, in its efforts to control irregular migration within the Mediterranean Sea. It was never specified, however, that the program would fully take over the navy’s efforts, despite the unspoken assumption that it would.

While I am sure that confusion is raining down upon those in Italy who pleaded with the EU to step in and help out, Malmström does make a particularly astute point when she goes on to say “Rather than burden sharing we should be talking about responsibility sharing…with 28 member states we should be dong much more, but there is no legal mechanism to impose this.” This is a point that has come up, time and time again. As a Union, if we are trying to create a smaller “democratic deficit” within our government, then shouldn’t all member states share a part in alleviating Italy’s struggles? It has been reported that countries France and Germany have pledged their support for this new program, but when a country, such as Italy, tends to act as a way-station for these irregular migrants who tend to enter by sea, and then leave to journey further up north, would it not then be mutually beneficial for all countries to become involved? Especially when these aforementioned northern European countries keep imposing all kinds of restrictive policies in order to crack down on undocumented migrants within their country?

The EU might seem to be taking half a step back, but in my opinion, most member states have refused to take their first step forward.

What are your thoughts on this new statement by Malmström? Think I’m being too harsh on EU member states, or maybe not harsh enough? As always, you can email me at thetransitnational@gmail.com or tweet me @transitnational.