The mayor of Rotterdam, Ahmed Aboutaleb, gave a speech at the Integrating Cities Conference on March 9, 2012. In the speech, he discussed three main topics: 1) the current state of integration in Rotterdam, noting its diverse population of over 600,000 people from 174 nationalities, with 60% expected to have foreign roots in 10 years; 2) key requirements for successful local integration, including respect for fundamental rights, personal responsibility, and government collaboration; 3) recommendations for the EU, including clear integration frameworks, addressing legal statuses, harmonizing laws, and prioritizing respect for rights and personal responsibility.

1. Integrating Cities Conference 9 March 2012,
contribution Ahmed Aboutaleb, mayor.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
My speech for today consists of three parts.
First, I will comment for a bit on the current state of Rotterdam.
Where are we at? Where do we stand when it comes to diversity
and integration?
Next, I will list a number of requirements or conditions for
integration on the local level. This will, in truth, be a short
summary of the experiences I have had and insights I have
gained in this area over the more than three years I have by now
served as mayor of Rotterdam.
Finally, I will offer a number of recommendations for integration
policy on the European level. Recommendations which, I hope,
you will follow up on.
Let's start with a few statistics on Rotterdam. Rotterdam has
some 600,000 inhabitants and serves as the core of a wider area
with a population of well over 1.2 million. An additional 7 million
people reside within one hour's commute.
In fact, Rotterdam is situated in a densely-urbanised area
incorporating highly diverse landscapes and residential
environments. Consequently, the population composition is also
highly diverse.
Rotterdam, like all other cities in Western Europe, is
characterised by change. An old city, with a new city centre and a
young population.
Over the last 150 years, we witnessed remarkable growth, due to
migration from the countryside. At first, from different parts of the
Netherlands, later on from the whole of Europe and the overseas'
territories.
Rotterdam is a multi-ethnic society, harbouring more than 174
different nationalities. Population forecasts predict that ten years
from now some 60% of the inhabitants will have foreign roots.
Rotterdam is a city made up out of minority populations, which is
what grants the city its special dynamism.

2. And it raises the question what a city is able to cope with. My
view would be that a city can cope with a great deal. As a city's
absorption tolerance is very high. But we do need to be aware of
the feelings such an influx generates in the current residents. We
should not trivialise or deny the existence of these feelings, but
take them into account where the pace of this influx and the
manner in which the new entrants merge with the old population
are concerned. Nonetheless, the influx is necessary and good for
the city.
Cities are attractive to people wanting to get ahead. Cities are
where people are able to climb a few rungs on the social ladder.
This applies to Rotterdam, and also to Amsterdam. Though we
do notice a difference. In Rotterdam, people start out a bit lower
on the social ladder than they do in Amsterdam, and jump off
earlier as well.
We may look at cities as places where people develop their
talents, as workshops in which the rough diamonds are cut. One
may perhaps think it a bit of a shame to then see them leave to
sparkle somewhere else, but one may also rejoice in the newly
arriving rough diamonds. In fact, one may be proud that the city
in this fashion brings a new light into the world. What's more, all
those diamonds are the ambassadors for one's city.
The statistics show that this process of social advancement does,
in fact, take place. Over the past ten years, Amsterdam saw the
percentage of people having received secondary or higher
education rise from 66% to 74%. In Rotterdam, the figure rose
from 51% to 60%. Here, too, we can see that both cities are
doing well, albeit with a phase difference.
This forms an important conclusion from the report 'De Staat van
de Integratie', in English, the 'State of Integration', which was
presented this week by Han Entzinger, of Rotterdam, and Paul
Scheffer, of Amsterdam. We are we are pleased with the
analyses of both scientists for their analyses, and we can really
put them to use. As we should.
2

3. Because the statistics show that the upward movement is coming
to a standstill on some rungs of the ladder. It has become clear
that some groups miss their connection and stay behind. We
need to be on high alert for this. This, as such conditions of
slowdown and standstill are dangerous to a city, may give rise to
disintegration and crime.
To use the metaphor of the acceleration lane, in order to merge
you have to speed up and floor the accelerator. 'Flooring' here
means: develop yourself, go to school, learn a language, take
courses. If you don't do this, if you step on the brake, you are a
danger to yourself and to others.
If you don't learn new things, you're standing still.
To continue the acceleration lane metaphor, this also means that
those on the highway should have a regard for those trying to
merge. They need to make way. Sometimes, this will even call
for zip merging. But this, too, is easier if those trying to merge are
going at the same speed as those on the highway.
It is every metropolis's task to enthuse and stimulate people to
expand their knowledge and range of skills. Our goals are: higher
Cito standardised test results, a better command of spoken and
written Dutch, a higher educational level, higher basic
qualifications, more attention to healthcare and a higher
employment rate.
We, the city government, have a duty to make it clear to all
'Rotterdammers' that education and the development of talents
are number one priorities. Rotterdam is a learning city.
***
Next, I will list a number of requirements or conditions for
integration on the local level.
It's been six years since we held the first Integrating Cities
Conference. Politicians, policy makers and practical experts got
together to find ways to boost the integration process.
3

4. It was launched in 2006, in Rotterdam. The then Euro
Commissioner Frattini desired that collaboration be more
permanent. He took the initiative to organise an annual
conference, held first in Rotterdam and next in Milan, resulting in
the Milan Declaration, containing agreements between the
European cities and the European Commission on improved
collaboration in the field of developing integration policy. The
European Commission also launched the European Integration
Fund. The following year, in Berlin, relationships were solidified,
and in 2010, in London, a Charter was drawn up, which
Rotterdam co-signed. The Charter sets a shared vision for cities
all over Europe: 'Our vision of integration is one where all city
residents can develop their full potential and have an equal
chance of a life in safety and dignity.'
On the basis of six years' worth of debate, we are now able to
phrase a number of starting principles, of conditions for the
integration process.
I will list three:
Integration depends on the enforcement of the fundamental
human rights;
Integration will only succeed if people are themselves
responsible for making it happen;
Integration means collaboration, co-creation.
I will briefly comment on these points:
(1)
We agree that cultural relativism is not an option. In the final
years of the previous century the view that we should not criticise
each other's cultural or religious backgrounds was widely held.
This was a strange form of tolerance. A lot of blind eyes were
turned to preserve the peace. The turn of the century
represented a marked change on this viewpoint. The traumatic
9/11 experiences certainly contributed. It was ever more
recognised that Western society is based on a set of universal
values which are worth defending. Those fundamental values
are: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, equality of men
and women, of homosexuals and heterosexuals, and combating
discrimination. New arrivals must accept the norms and values of
4

5. the rule of law. A great many things are subject to change, but
these are fixed, fundamental core values. Values we should
cherish. During every civic integration ceremony at city hall, we
say: 'Today, you will receive your certificate, but you may decline
to accept it. This is your own, free choice. Should you choose to
accept the certificate, you choose for Dutch society. You will
adhere to the rules we have agreed on together, you will speak
Dutch and will actively participate. That is all. Should you not
want to do this, should you choose not to do this, no offence
taken - but in that case, there are planes available every day to
return you to countries more in agreement with your views. It's
that clear.
(2)
The second requirement is for us to look, not at where we come
from, but where we are going to. This is a process involving both
parties, just like merging on the road. You give each other space
here, as well. The European New Agenda even speaks about a
process involving three parties, as transitions in the countries of
origin also play a part. I would like to emphasise that we need to
realise we're lucky to live in a world granting us opportunities. But
this comes with a duty for every person to seize those
opportunities present. There is no room here for unwarranted
victimisation. Everyone is tasked with developing themselves by
improving and making use of their talents. This is one's own
responsibility. Pointing towards others or the government doesn't
cut it. New arrivals are themselves responsible for their civic
integration. Should you come here, should you come to live here,
you will have to do your utmost to integrate into society, to find a
job, to follow education and to learn to speak the language. This
is why we put so much emphasis on talent development in
Rotterdam. We say to all students: finish school and find a
challenging job. Companies are in dire need of motivated
professionals. We also call on the first generation of new arrivals
to learn the language, together with their school-going
grandchildren. They are given a unique second chance.
5

6. (3)
Which brings me to the third requirement of integration: a
government that knows its place. A society of confident,
responsible citizens deserves a government that knows what to
do, but also where to stay its hand. A government strictly
enforcing the fundamental rights. A government listening to the
feelings of local residents, sounding out discontent and
employing the right measures when a neighbourhood needs a
break. A government providing the right stimuli for inter-cultural
dialogue, for talent development, for participation. The 'how' of a
government performing its duties becomes ever more important.
It's not about taking away the initiative from others, but about
providing support where needed. So, a government that inspires
trust.
We do so, for instance, through our 'the neighbourhood rules'
initiative. Every two weeks, the chief constable and I visit a
neighbourhood and talk with the residents about issues of
security in the area. Together, we determine the main issues,
which then become leading priorities for the police and the
municipality. But we also make agreements about what residents
and entrepreneurs themselves will do to improve the
neighbourhood. Because it's their game as well.
These are the three main requirements for a form of integration
which no longer allows for cultural relativism and unwarranted
victimisation. Integration is based on the fundamental values of
the democratic rule of law. Integration is something one does
oneself. The government then only has the responsibility to
provide support, opting for co-creation. That is integration in the
year 2012.
***
6

7. Ladies and Gentlemen,
I'd also like to make a few critical comments today.
Europe launches Charters and Conferences. That's great, but
what we really need are results. Not that there's a reason to have
something against declarations and memoranda, but, as a former
politician once said: 'You cannot live in them.' Problems require
solutions and that is why we ask Europe for help. And we say:
'Don't just talk, act!'
What would the EU be able to do? I'll list six points of attention.
1) Arrange for clear frameworks and preconditions for successful
integration, but do realise that integration policy, in its
implementation, is predominantly a local matter. It is on the local
level that social cohesion may be enhanced. Continue to facilitate
local governments, both by providing information and funds and
by exchanging best practices.
2) Be aware of the currently uncertain legal status and rights of
third-country residents. Local governments are particularly
affected by this when it comes to integration policy. With regard
to asylum seekers who have exhausted all appeals, all Member
States and Europe must coordinate their laws and regulations. In
current practice, that particular group often falls between two
stools, the cities having to carry the burdens (crime, education of
the children).
3) Strive for a level playing field. Member States implement EU
regulations differently. Legislation needs to be harmonised, as
some Member States pursue a stricter policy than others do
('Poland debate'). Further harmonisation of legislation is
necessary. The debate needs to be held. Primarily, of course, by
the European Parliament and the national parliaments. And
during city debates (though preferably not over the Internet...).
4) Broaden European integration policy to encompass not only
'third nationals', but all new arrivals. In practice, the
city/Rotterdam does not differentiate between new arrivals. It's
inconsequential whether they come from third countries or from
other EU Member States.
7

8. Rotterdam thus advocates involving 'integration of EU citizens' in
the European Integration Agenda and using European Integration
Fund funding not only for the integration of third-country
nationals, but also to remedy integration issues involving new
arrivals from Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic States.
5) Support and facilitate city debates, dialogue, language
education, civic integration courses, employment projects,
emancipation projects, anti-discrimination projects, etc. Arrange
for a systematic exchange and monitoring of experiences,
innovations, successes and failures on the local level. Make ESF,
Progress and INTI funding available for these types of initiatives.
6) Establish priorities. Europe currently proceeds from the ten
Common Basic Principles. That's nice, but it is too vague. We
need to make clearer choices. I propose making the three
requirements I mentioned in the first part of my speech into
starting principles:
Respect for fundamental rights, personal responsibility and co-
creation. These, to me, are the three cornerstones of a common
European integration policy.
I hope we'll set to work on making this happen!
8