Political participation of migrants: Cities & regions in a European perspective.
-
Upload
annabella-brooks -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Political participation of migrants: Cities & regions in a European perspective.
Political participation of migrants: Cities & regions in a European perspective
15 years as an independent policy ‘think-and-do-tank’
Mission: lasting and positive change for open and inclusive societies • better informed European debate and action on migration, equality and
diversity;• greater European cooperation between & within sectors
4 activities: • Establish expert networks• Compare and analyse policies• Engage more stakeholders at EU level• Create new opportunities for dialogue and mutual learning
Migration Policy Group
MIPEX: Tool to compare, analyse, and improve integration policy
• Do all residents have equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities to help them improve their integration outcomes?
• Benchmark policies and implementation measures, according to European & international standards on Equal Treatment
• Public “Quick Reference Guide”
• Debate government objectives, progress, and results
Key Findings
50%: Halfway favourable Political will counts, more than traditionStronger laws with EU
Citizenship & political participation often similar & weak, esp. new immigration countriesAll policies often related
CoE Convention on Nationality 166 (1997)**9/100 ‘unfavourable for integration’
Convention **Among MIPEX countries, only in force for AT, BG, CZ, DK, FI, DE, HU, NL, NO, PT, RO, SK, SE (Few, mostly Central Europe)
Transformation from countries of emigration-to-immigration (DE, LU...)
3 principles from longer immigration (US,CA) & inclusive countries (FR,UK)• Short residence requirement (3-7 yrs total)• Some ius soli (15)• Dual nationality (18)
• Principles can give way when sovereignty fears or far right hold sway…
Access to nationalityEU Area of Weakness
Even so, discretionary procedures discourage many from being citizens.•Vague/high language•Uneven support for integration test•Half make conditional upon job/income•Only 10 limit discretion•Few ‘Hold-outs’ don’t yet tolerate dual nationality
CoE Convention on Participation of foreigners in public life at local level 144 (1992)**
37/100 not wholly unfavourable for integration
**Among MIPEX countries, only in force for DK, FI, IT, NL, NO, SEConvention
Despite renewed interest (e.g. PT, ES), major reform & political will needed.
Only half EU countries open non-EU voting rights
Few consultative bodies, often not strong or independent enough to serve aims (come & go)
Structural bodies in half; often based on national system
Free elections or nominations by immigrants or NGOs in half; especially national and older bodies
Representative of nationality or gender in most; both or more in few
Few immigrants hold/share Chair; more in local, older, elected bodies
All policies affecting immigrants addressed in most
Activities for bodies with greatest mandates
Right to initiative in most; right to response in only Norway, Spain
Consultative bodiesAreas of strength