Migration and groenlinks, 2007

The last meeting of the Kleurrijk Platform was about migration. What follows is my version of the “stand van zaken”

1) groenlinks position
2) EGP (non existing yet) position
3) Groenlinks MEPs position
4) KP position today
4.1) Our agreements with our MEP
4.2) Our disagreements with our MEP
4.3) Our internal disagreements
5) A way forward: questions to answer
6) Activities

1) In 2005 Groenlinks agreed in a visietekst migratie. In that text several dilemmas were presented, and tentative solutions were offered. The two most crucial issues were the tension between brain-drain and brain-gain and the possibility of foreign workers diminishing the labour condition of workers in NL. These two issues are dilemmas because an eventual opening of dutch borders to labour migrants might imply that there is a substantial brain drain in the countries of origin and a substantial impoverishment of labour conditions in NL, if facing a wave of cheap workers from abroad. But we also consider that migrants might produce brain gain, going back to their countries after a period of working abroad, and internal labour markets should be, in any case, open to more competition. The solution that groenlinks described in 2005 was to consider schemes of circular migration, in which people expend a time working abroad, but goes back to their country of origin.

2) The European Green Party (EGP) has agreed since several years ago in create a working group on migration. The problem is that at the european level the greens have no unified position on migration, which keep on growing as an issue of concern inside different countries of the EU. It is expected that this year the work group will finally assemble itself, and produce a debate on the matter. A principles declaration was agreed in the last EGP congress, and meetings of the “work-group to be” are scheduled for before the summer.

3) Our fractie in Brussels is also busy with the migration issue, and Kathalijne has taken the task of producing a discussion paper on migration, which is expected to fuel the discussion of the Green Group (that is the full set of parliamentarians that green parties have in the EP). This position is very needed, since the European commission has several initiatives on the way, in order to produce legislation on migration. So it is very desirable that the greens are able to produce a coherent answer, or position. The discussion paper of Kathalijne tackles the current discussions alive in the European Commission, and present the view points agreed back in 2005 by groenlinks. In broad lines, temporal migration schemes are offered as interesting solutions to the migration debate that rages across europe.

4) We at the Kleurrijk Platform have been acquainting ourselves with the discussion as it is today. We collaborated with the writing of the paper back in 2005, and today agree that 2007 is an important moment to concrete our position at the european level.

4.1) We certainly identify as positive that our people in Brussels are busy with the migration issue. And further we are happy to know that a standpoint discussed here is being broadly presented in the european context. With the actual contents of the position, we agree in that legislation is needed and it is going to happen, so the greens must have a clear position. Our fractie realizes that the legislation that the commission is intending to pass soon affects only the two extremes of the migration question. Legislation is prepared to regulate the movement of top employees in transnational firms, and to regulate the movement of seasonal workers. But a whole vacuum is left for the big group of migrants: people that able to compete in the european labour markets, having an education abroad, are prevented to migrate today to Europe by different sorts of restrictions. It is certain that we greens must develop a set of ideas to tackle this group of migrants, by far and large the most important, if only numerically speaking.

4.2) We as KP are less happy with the attention that Groenlinks and our europeans give to temporal migration schemes. We believe that they are not enough to tackle the migration pressure both from abroad and from inside. Migrants want to come to europe today, and the european labor market needs them. Temporal migration schemes are not enough to tackle this reality. We need more ideas and proposals.

4.3) As KP we don't agree with ourselves in what groenlinks, or our parliamentarians, should do. Some of us believe that temporal migration schemes are seriously flawed, implying very bad ethical and political positions. Some of us would like to see more attention to a policy such as the northamerican green card system, in which quotas of needed migrants are fixed and staying permits are given randomly to potential migrants. Others from us would like to see a “temporary visum plus” scheme, in which whoever that would like to find a job in europe, might try to do so, and if successful in a reasonable amount of months, should be granted a work-and-residence permit. So we have at least two alternative proposals to the current position of groenlinks.

5) The way to move forward, as the attendants to the last Kleurrijk Platform discussion on the matter agree, is to produce more sustained discussion. Migration is far from being a simple issue, and lots of expertise and research (outside the politician's realm) exist. The Kleurrijk Platform will, in the coming future, organize a round of discussions, with politicians and scientists involved in the matter. Faced with such a crucial issue as migration, and a diversity of opinions on it, we should expand the borders of our discussion club. And we will. Soon a dossier migration is to be compiled in our site (kleurrijker.nl) and open discussions will be announced. Questions that have to be sharpenly answered (among others) follow:

-In what differs a temporary migration scheme anno 2007 with the gastarbeider program from the '70s?
-Why green-card systems are not politically acceptable in europe? Should the greens go for them?
-Should a foreigner be able to compete with a dutch for any job?
-Should integration policy be linked to labour migration policy?
-Is brain drain (a collective phenomenon) reason enough to forbid migrants (individual people) to migrate?


6) Regarding our party groenlinks, we intend to organize a full discussion on migration in the summer, hopefully presenting a proposed updating of our current visietekts on migration. For that final discussion, several expert meetings will be organized before.
Regarding the EGP, groenlinks has chosen a trio of new representants to this federation. IN the short coming time, our contact with Bas Eickhout, Jos van Dijk and Lin Tabak will be reinforced, hoping that one of them, or even one of us groenlinksers, could participate in the EGP werkgroep on migration.
Regarding our people in Brussels, we hope to go on talking. We will participate in the conference to be organized in may, and offering our parliamentarians all the support (and criticism) from which we are capable. If we kleurrijkers agree in something unanimously, is that so far is a pleasure to talk with our european fractie, which has shown itself open to hear our ideas and criticisms.