MIPEX: policy indicators and a joined-up approach to policy evaluation in Europe • 27 February 2008 • Prague Presentation ...
Poll question <ul><li>Which of these two options would you recommend to the European Commission? </li></ul><ul><li>  </li>...
Contents 1) Confronting stereotypes, understanding family life 2) Right to family reunion: dynamics between EU law & natio...
Contents <ul><li>Today’s online seminar: </li></ul><ul><li>Family reunion in EU Member States </li></ul><ul><li>EU Directi...
Poll question Non-EU family reunion is how most immigrants come to my country. True False Don't know
Is non-EU family reunion how most immigrants come to your country? False Calculated from Eurostat Family reunion in EU
Is non-EU family reunion how most immigrants come to your country? False Eurostat Family reunion in EU
Are most reuniting non-EU families from Morocco and Turkey? No. Calculated from Eurostat Family reunion in EU
Are most family permit holders spouses? No.  Family reunion policy affects children as much as husbands or wives. Family r...
EU Directive 2003/86/EC &quot;Family reunification is a necessary way of making family life possible. It helps to create s...
Standards in EU Directive 2003/86/EC
Past impact in old and new MS, potential impact? Directive
Unclear future… New restrictions from 2007-2010 on eligibility and conditions in 9 may delay or discourage family reunion ...
… but fewer problems today Average country far beyond Directive’s minimums, some use several ‘may’ clauses In most of 24 w...
From MIPEX 2011 (see briefing 2 annex) 1) Long-term & registered partners largely ignored 2) Many conditions for other adu...
Green Paper: EU wide problems <ul><li>From EC Application Report 2008 (see briefing 2 annex) </li></ul><ul><li>Incorrect t...
<ul><li>Family reunion mentioned in 2008 French Presidency Pact </li></ul><ul><li>Promised since 2009 Stockholm programme ...
Which type of proposals do you think your national government would support? More restrictive conditions More flexible con...
<ul><li>To cut immigration by 50%, Geert Wilders requires minority govt. to </li></ul><ul><li>pursue his plans for NL and ...
<ul><li>1) Status quo </li></ul><ul><li>Individual cases before ECJ (e.g. EP 2006) but hard to use </li></ul><ul><li>Reque...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 1 What is the best way to determine who is a potential sponsor to reunite with their family...
Most need any legal residence permit of  ≤ 1 year   Pink =  ≤ 1 year’s residence Blue = > 1 year Black = ≥ 2 years Pink = ...
Poll question Should newly arrived immigrants have to wait 1-2 years and have prospects for permanent residence before the...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 2 Is it legitimate to have a minimum age for the spouse which differs from the age of major...
Most married couples over 18 treated like adults Pink = No Age Limit or 18 years Blue = 21- age limit with wide exceptions...
In all European countries, 18 yr-olds can marry. Should a migrant have to be older than 21 to reunite with his/her spouse?...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 4 Are rules adequate & broad enough to take into account the  different definitions of fami...
Other dependents have some right, but few come in practice Pink = Full right Blue = Some right Black = No right Either/or:...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 4 Are rules adequate & broad enough to take into account the  different definitions of fami...
EU-wide problem: Registered & long-term partners largely ignored Pink = For registered & long-term partners Blue = For onl...
Poll question All immigrants have the right to apply for their nuclear family. Is that adequate? Yes, nuclear family is mo...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 5 Which integration measures are efficient and effective?  Would you recommend pre-entry me...
XXX No integration or pre-entry tests for family reunion Dark pink = ‘Slightly favourable’ for language learning Light blu...
XXX Ineffective test, quality & accessible course needed Evaluations find minimal effect on language knowledge & none on s...
Poll question Which integration measures do you think are effective for immigrant families’ language learning and integrat...
Green Paper Questions QUESTION 5 Do these measures efficiently promote integration? How can this be assessed in practice? ...
Only basic housing & income required Pink = No housing requirement Blue = General health & safety standards Black = Furthe...
Only basic housing & income required Any legal means to prove basic housing (17/24) & income (18).  AT, FR, IT, SK add mor...
Green Paper Questions Qs 12 & 13 Should fees be regulated? Is the administrative deadline laid down in the Directive for e...
Procedure limited to 6-9 months, but fees high Pink =  ≤ 6 months Blue = > 6 months but max defined in law Black = Not def...
Green Paper Questions Q14 How could the application of these horizontal clauses be facilitated and ensured in practice?
XXX Authorities must make some individual assessment <ul><li>Pink =  All elements defined in law </li></ul><ul><li>Blue = ...
Conclusions Most restrictions, whatever their integration objective, will likely limit the number of reuniting families, c...
Conclusions Conditions should be flexible so that authorities can make an individual assessment.  Sponsors need all legal ...
www.migpolgroup.org Subscribe to our newsletter Acting on equality and mobility
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

How to Respond to the EU Family Reunion Consultation - Webinar slides of 7 December 2012

6,648 views

Published on

Thomas Huddleston, MPG Policy Analyst presenting the Migration Policy Group Briefings on Family Reunion to assist organisations in their responses to the European Union consultation on Family Reunion at the 7 December 2011 Webinar 'How to Respond to the EU Family Reunion Consultation'

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
6,648
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5,101
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Researchers and policy actors better understand how law, implementation, and other factors affect citizenship acquisition rates and how citizenship affects integration processes; Policymakers and civil society organisations use evidence to design more effective citizenship laws and implementing measures; New policies and practices increase the share of immigrants who are acquiring citizenship of their country of residence; New citizens are better able to participate in society and the democratic process.
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • Few cases, survey sources over- Sample national language speakers, naturalisation rate not perfect measure of citizenship acquisition
  • How to Respond to the EU Family Reunion Consultation - Webinar slides of 7 December 2012

    1. 1. MIPEX: policy indicators and a joined-up approach to policy evaluation in Europe • 27 February 2008 • Prague Presentation by Thomas HUDDLESTON MPG Briefing for Green Paper on Family Reunion • 7 December 2011 • Brussels, Belgium • Webinar for stakeholders Thomas HUDDLESTON, Policy Analyst, MPG Strategic thinking on equality and mobility
    2. 2. Poll question <ul><li>Which of these two options would you recommend to the European Commission? </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Member States should better implement the existing Directive </li></ul><ul><li>European Commission should propose changes for negotiation </li></ul><ul><li>Don't know </li></ul>
    3. 3. Contents 1) Confronting stereotypes, understanding family life 2) Right to family reunion: dynamics between EU law & national policy change 3) Impact of new family reunion tests and requirements on integration process 4) Restrictions ‘in name of integration’ separate families
    4. 4. Contents <ul><li>Today’s online seminar: </li></ul><ul><li>Family reunion in EU Member States </li></ul><ul><li>EU Directive 2003/86/EC, impact, and today’s politics </li></ul><ul><li>Overview for specific questions in Green Paper </li></ul>
    5. 5. Poll question Non-EU family reunion is how most immigrants come to my country. True False Don't know
    6. 6. Is non-EU family reunion how most immigrants come to your country? False Calculated from Eurostat Family reunion in EU
    7. 7. Is non-EU family reunion how most immigrants come to your country? False Eurostat Family reunion in EU
    8. 8. Are most reuniting non-EU families from Morocco and Turkey? No. Calculated from Eurostat Family reunion in EU
    9. 9. Are most family permit holders spouses? No. Family reunion policy affects children as much as husbands or wives. Family reunion in EU Calculated from Eurostat
    10. 10. EU Directive 2003/86/EC &quot;Family reunification is a necessary way of making family life possible. It helps to create sociocultural stability facilitating the integration of third country nationals in the Member State, which also serves to promote economic and social cohesion, a fundamental Community objective stated in the Treaty.“ Preamble 4 to Directive 2003/86/EC
    11. 11. Standards in EU Directive 2003/86/EC
    12. 12. Past impact in old and new MS, potential impact? Directive
    13. 13. Unclear future… New restrictions from 2007-2010 on eligibility and conditions in 9 may delay or discourage family reunion Limited rights to work in Ireland and Malta delays families’ labour market participation
    14. 14. … but fewer problems today Average country far beyond Directive’s minimums, some use several ‘may’ clauses In most of 24 where applies: Residence of ≤1 year No age limits over 18 Some entitlement for other dependent adult family Basic housing & economic resource requirements No language and integration conditions or pre-entry tests SEE BRIEFING 2 ANNEX
    15. 15. From MIPEX 2011 (see briefing 2 annex) 1) Long-term & registered partners largely ignored 2) Many conditions for other adult dependents 3) Some impose restrictive family definitions & burdensome conditions 4) Income required often higher than social assistance 5a) Few imposing integration conditions are extending them to spouses in countries of origin, with high costs & less support 5b) Hardly any integration condition abroad sets favourable conditions 6) Vague grounds for refusal & withdrawal like public policy, security & health 7) Major waiting periods and conditions for autonomous permit Green Paper: EU wide problems
    16. 16. Green Paper: EU wide problems <ul><li>From EC Application Report 2008 (see briefing 2 annex) </li></ul><ul><li>Incorrect transposition in areas like: </li></ul><ul><li>Visa facilitation </li></ul><ul><li>Access to autonomous permits </li></ul><ul><li>Best interest of child assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Access to legal redress </li></ul><ul><li>More favourable provisions for refugees </li></ul><ul><li>'Too broad or excessive' requirements on age limits, income, integration measures </li></ul><ul><li>Integration measures can be 'questioned' as to admissibility under Directive if courses and tests not accessible, not well supported, discriminatory e.g. based on age, disproportionately burdensome (e.g. high fees, insufficient free preparatory materials and courses, hard-to-reach venues), and if impact serves other purposes other facilitating integration of family members </li></ul>
    17. 17. <ul><li>Family reunion mentioned in 2008 French Presidency Pact </li></ul><ul><li>Promised since 2009 Stockholm programme </li></ul><ul><li>Pressured from Dutch government </li></ul><ul><li>Few questions but long time for response (1 March 2012) </li></ul><ul><li>Public hearing to follow </li></ul><ul><li>Who can respond? </li></ul><ul><li>EU & intergovernmental institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Authorities & other political parties (national, regional, local) in EU & candidate countries </li></ul><ul><li>Authorities & partners in third-countries </li></ul><ul><li>All state actors for families </li></ul><ul><li>All NGOs, social partners, & private service-providers for families </li></ul><ul><li>Academics </li></ul><ul><li>Individuals </li></ul>Green Paper: Background
    18. 18. Which type of proposals do you think your national government would support? More restrictive conditions More flexible conditions Don’t know Poll question
    19. 19. <ul><li>To cut immigration by 50%, Geert Wilders requires minority govt. to </li></ul><ul><li>pursue his plans for NL and for Europe. Based on DK policies, supported </li></ul><ul><li>By Danish People’s Party, even though new govt. may cut many: </li></ul><ul><li>Non-EU family of EU citizen lose favourable family reunion rules </li></ul><ul><li>Higher age limit from 21 to 24 </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Sufficient’ level of education </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Attachment requirement’ </li></ul><ul><li>Higher income requirement (e.g. 120% min. wage) </li></ul><ul><li>Lose permit if integration conditions not completed </li></ul><ul><li>Deposit bond for any costs that family incurs for state </li></ul><ul><li>Only 1 partner every 10 years </li></ul><ul><li>Exclude sponsors convicted of certain violent crimes </li></ul><ul><li>No public support yet from other MS, suspected from AT, FR, DE, UK… </li></ul>Green Paper: Dutch government proposals
    20. 20. <ul><li>1) Status quo </li></ul><ul><li>Individual cases before ECJ (e.g. EP 2006) but hard to use </li></ul><ul><li>Requests for preliminary rulings (so far little used at national level) </li></ul><ul><li>Infringement proceedings for improper transposition (none yet) </li></ul><ul><li>2) Status quo + Technical guidelines </li></ul><ul><li>MS Committees </li></ul><ul><li>Commission Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Priority for funding & technical cooperation (existing and/or new) </li></ul><ul><li>3) Open Directive for renegotiation </li></ul><ul><li>Amend </li></ul><ul><li>Recast/revise </li></ul>Green Paper: 3 options for Commission
    21. 21. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 1 What is the best way to determine who is a potential sponsor to reunite with their family? Should they need to have ‘reasonable prospects for permanent residents’ or wait for 1-2 years?
    22. 22. Most need any legal residence permit of ≤ 1 year   Pink = ≤ 1 year’s residence Blue = > 1 year Black = ≥ 2 years Pink = Any residence permit Blue = Certain permits excluded Black = Only permanent residence **Note: SI recently removed both restrictions OECD concludes family reunion should be facilitated as soon as possible (PISA data)
    23. 23. Poll question Should newly arrived immigrants have to wait 1-2 years and have prospects for permanent residence before they can reunite? Yes No Don't know
    24. 24. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 2 Is it legitimate to have a minimum age for the spouse which differs from the age of majority in a Member State?
    25. 25. Most married couples over 18 treated like adults Pink = No Age Limit or 18 years Blue = 21- age limit with wide exceptions Black = 21+ age limit for all **Note: 21 for all now in BE & NL, but UK repealed limit as disproportionate Evaluations find age limit not effective to raise education or economic integration or fight forced marriages (DK SFI, NL WODC, UK Hester et al) Disproportionate effect: young people may not apply or marry Few have luxury to resettle in another country (‘EU route’)
    26. 26. In all European countries, 18 yr-olds can marry. Should a migrant have to be older than 21 to reunite with his/her spouse? Yes, it helps fight forced marriages and promote integration No, it does not help Don't know Poll question
    27. 27. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 4 Are rules adequate & broad enough to take into account the  different definitions of family other than the nuclear family?
    28. 28. Other dependents have some right, but few come in practice Pink = Full right Blue = Some right Black = No right Either/or: 12 of 24 Both fully: 6 like CA & AU None: 6 like US Few reunite in practice, even where possible
    29. 29. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 4 Are rules adequate & broad enough to take into account the  different definitions of family other than the nuclear family?
    30. 30. EU-wide problem: Registered & long-term partners largely ignored Pink = For registered & long-term partners Blue = For only one of these groups Black = For neither Only 10 of 24 recognise one or both cases for family reunion, similar to AU or CA
    31. 31. Poll question All immigrants have the right to apply for their nuclear family. Is that adequate? Yes, nuclear family is most important No, should include dependent parents, grandparents, adults No, they should have the right to all other dependents Don't know
    32. 32. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 5 Which integration measures are efficient and effective? Would you recommend pre-entry measures?
    33. 33. XXX No integration or pre-entry tests for family reunion Dark pink = ‘Slightly favourable’ for language learning Light blue = ‘Halfway favourable’ Dark green = ‘Slightly unfavourable’ Dark blue = ‘Unfavourable’ ** Updated for new UK & AT tests abroad German or English abroad is expensive & inaccessible for several countries and families. Little support for learning Danish – even less for Dutch. Only FR 'slightly' favourable: pass free test or attend free & largely accessible course
    34. 34. XXX Ineffective test, quality & accessible course needed Evaluations find minimal effect on language knowledge & none on socio-economic integration. Instead, limits family reunion & disproportionately impacts most vulnerable (“self-selection”): Elderly, young, less educated, people in certain–often unstable—countries &—to some extent—women are less likely to apply or pass. Attending quality & accessible course for effective than test.
    35. 35. Poll question Which integration measures do you think are effective for immigrant families’ language learning and integration? Only courses in the EU country Courses in the EU country or non-EU country of origin Tests in the EU country Tests in the EU country or non-EU country of origin Don’t Know
    36. 36. Green Paper Questions QUESTION 5 Do these measures efficiently promote integration? How can this be assessed in practice? Which are most effective?
    37. 37. Only basic housing & income required Pink = No housing requirement Blue = General health & safety standards Black = Further requirements Pink = No or income at level of social assistance in country Blue = At level of minimum wage Black = Linked to job/no social assistance
    38. 38. Only basic housing & income required Any legal means to prove basic housing (17/24) & income (18). AT, FR, IT, SK add more housing conditions, while AT, BE, CY, FR, GR, NL restrict income largely to legal job contract. Level of income required in many is vague & unrelated to individual circumstances DK & NL studies find no effect on jobs schooling: long-term trend, short-term compliance, other factors, unintended effects
    39. 39. Green Paper Questions Qs 12 & 13 Should fees be regulated? Is the administrative deadline laid down in the Directive for examination of the application justified?
    40. 40. Procedure limited to 6-9 months, but fees high Pink = ≤ 6 months Blue = > 6 months but max defined in law Black = Not defined in law Pink = Free Blue = Similar to regular fees & duties Black = Higher costs
    41. 41. Green Paper Questions Q14 How could the application of these horizontal clauses be facilitated and ensured in practice?
    42. 42. XXX Authorities must make some individual assessment <ul><li>Pink = All elements defined in law </li></ul><ul><li>Blue = Some elements defined in law </li></ul><ul><li>Black = Not defined in law </li></ul><ul><li>** Recent BE law introduced all elements </li></ul><ul><li>At least 7 of 24 require that authorities’ decisions to reject or withdraw take into account: </li></ul><ul><li>Solidity of family relationship, </li></ul><ul><li>Duration of sponsor’s residence, </li></ul><ul><li>Existing links with origin country </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence of physical or emotional violence. </li></ul><ul><li>Some—but not all—elements exist in 11 others. They are absent in 6 in Central Europe </li></ul>
    43. 43. Conclusions Most restrictions, whatever their integration objective, will likely limit the number of reuniting families, creating separated or broken families. Restrictions disproportionately impacts on family reunion, especially for vulnerable groups. If these measures cannot be proven as effective for integration, then they are not justified for family reunion. Very strong correlation for 22 cases: .733 (Spearman’s rho), p<0.001
    44. 44. Conclusions Conditions should be flexible so that authorities can make an individual assessment. Sponsors need all legal means to prove that they meet the basic general requirements that are expected of all people in society who want to live together in a family. Reuniting families need all legal means to show that they are willing to learn & participate in society.
    45. 45. www.migpolgroup.org Subscribe to our newsletter Acting on equality and mobility

    ×