Strategic thinking on equality and mobility

Strategic thinking on equality and mobilityMIPEX: policy indicators and a joined-up approach to policy evaluation in Europe • 27 February 2008 • Prague

Presentation by Thomas HUDDLESTON

Consulting immigrants to improve integration policies: key findings from MIPEXIII and EESC study

• 28 March • Tallinn, ESTONIA

Thomas HUDDLESTON, Policy Analyst, MPG

Huddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integrationHuddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integration

• Definition, standards, methodology

• Findings: Few migrants consulted on policies affecting them daily

• Strengths in new and old countries of immigration

• Conclusions

Contents

Council of Europe 1992 Convention on the participation of foreigners in public life at the local level (n. 144). • Foreign resident advisors in authorities’ committees;

• Consultative councils with immigrant or mixed membership

Convention signed by few, fewer over time, can serve as inspiration for national, European improvements

EU cooperation: (CBPs 7 & 9), Handbooks/Website, Commission, EP, CoR, EESC, Forum launch

Methodology: desk research, MIPEX, stakeholder questionnaires

Definitions

Huddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integrationHuddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integration

Key findings www.mipex.eu

● 15 countries at local level (3 not at national: AT, FR, GR)● 10 at regional ● 11 at national (recent ad hoc in IE...EE?; also DE & IT just legal framework)If exist, often national consultative system

Not yet positive trend: Opened (e.g. Lisbon) & closed (Antwerp, Copenhagen), often based on political will & powers.

Most not enough powers & independence to serve aim to give immigrants voice

● Oldest & strongest (Benelux, Nordics); ● Weaker & government-led in new immigration countries;● Absent in Central Europe (renew in EE)

Part of ‘best practice’, introduced in comprehensive integration law/strategy

National

Local

Consultative bodies meeting standardsStructural bodies, often based on national system (half)

Immigrants freely elected or nomrinated, especially older & local bodies (half)

Immigrant representative of at least nationalities or gender, often based on system

Immigrants have/share leadership, especially local, older, elected bodies (few)

All policies affecting immigrants addressed, not just integration (most)

Funds to engage and inform communities, few only strongest bodies, often based on national system of funds

Right to initiative from immigrants (most); but response from government (fewer, more common at local)

Huddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integrationHuddleston: Benchmarking in immigrant integration

ConclusionsAre we serious about opening & encouraging meaningful consultation among equal and serious partners?

Countries with strong consultative bodies……grant basic political liberties to all…support immigrant civil society…open voting rights and full citizenship…do more to promote full participation of all residents

How to create bodies to inform and improve policy?

• Structure in law• Free election/nomination• Right of initiative, response• Immigrant leadership• Representative criteria• Funding to engage and inform communities

What else?