True Blue…

For all the outrage it caused, particularly among German commentators, you would assume that EU Commission Vice-President, Franco Frattini, had proposed throwing open the doors and letting in half of the African sub-continent. Naturally, as has continually been the case since the idea of a common European immigration policy first emerged as a top policy priority at the Tampere Summit in 1999, the Commission's proposal is a much more reasoned, well-rounded approach to addressing some of Europe's most pressing problems: the effects of demographic change and a shortage of highly-skilled workers and specialists.

But let's backtrack for a second: Taking over from the German EU Presidency, Portugal mapped out a number of priority areas in the Justice and Home Affairs arena. Thus, since July at the very latest, interior ministers in the EU have known that major Commission proposals would be put on the table at the High-Level Conference on Legal Migration on September 13th and 14th. More than that – officials from all Member States have been working with the Commission toward a feasible solution to the problem of admission and residence status of highly-qualified migrants and the rights of so-called third country nationals (TCNs) living and working legally in the European Union.

Taking the podium (the full speech is worth reading) at the conference on Thursday, Frattini did as was expected of him and more. First – he called a spade a spade: “We have to look at immigration as an enrichment and as an inescapable phenomenon of today's world, not as a threat.” He also linked immigration to mobility, one of the four freedoms of the EU for the first time and for both of these points he is to be commended, because the truth is that in not embracing a modern system of labor migration, the EU is setting itself for major losses in this great game we call globalization. Frattini puts it in more political terms: “Migrants re a crucial part of the EU's competitiveness strategy, but it will not be possible to realize their full potential unless they are given opportunities to integrate into the host society and economy.” But let's look at other key themes in his speech:

• Frattini highlighted the need to consolidate existing legislation and working toward interlinked approaches and concepts toward strengthening the implementation of current policies on legal migration, illegal immigration, integration and cooperation with third countries
• He underlined that given the complexity and interwoven character of these issues, European citizens would see an added-value of a common EU approach (crucial, of course, to the act of 'selling’ the EU).
• The Commissioner highlighted immigration as one approach to tackling the looming demographic crisis in Europe, but underlined that it was ‘not on it's own the solution.’ Family-friendly policies had to be another part of this equation.
• He introduced the functions and remit of the new (and controversial) Centre for Migration Management in Bamako, Mali, but stressed that Member States would remain “solely responsible for the actual number of labor migrants admitted onto their territories.”
• Aside from announcing a number of future legislative proposals on basic socio-economic rights for TCNs and seasonal workers, he provided a look-ahead at his ‘Blue Card’ proposal, which is intended to allow Member States the flexibility to recruit highly-skilled migrants as their own labor market requires it [emphasis added]!!

On to the ‘Blue Card,’ the final proposal for which will come on October 23rd and could encompass the following:

• A fast-track procedure for the admission of highly qualified third-country workers based on common criteria: work contract, professional qualifications and a salary level clearly above existing minimum wages at national level.
• This should also apply to third-country nationals already legally resident in a Member State and fulfilling the criteria (students, etc);
• A specific scheme for “young professionals” should be built in;
• Workers admitted under these schemes would be issued with a special residence permit allowing them to work, called the ” Blue EU Labour Card”: this would entitle them to a series of rights;
• Access to the labour market in the first Member State of destination should be limited to an initial period of two years, renewable thereafter;
• Holders of an “Blue EU Labour Card” could move to a second Member State for work under certain conditions and after two or three years of legal residence in the first Member State.
• In order not to penalise potentially mobile highly skilled migrants, they should be allowed to add up periods of residence in different Member States so that they can obtain long-term EC residence status faster.

Again, looking at these proposals and the emphasis on flexibility, one cannot understand the public outcry these points drew in a number of Member States, particularly in Germany, where for weeks now, the lack of highly-skilled workers has been a key issue of debate. For all the far-sightedness of these suggestions, the fact that Frattini had to come out in a number of articles over the weekend not to correct anything he had said, but to re-emphasize points already made in his speech (on flexibility; on Member State responsibilities and sovereignty in admitting migrants; on how immigration is not the only solution to demographic change, etc.) simply highlights the key pitfall of European policy making.

The German government has been working on similar plans for years, one only has to think back to the failed ‘Green Card’ for IT specialists introduced by the Schroeder government in 2000. The pressure to solve the looming labor shortage for highly-skilled workers in the manufacturing industry is high and new ideas aren't exactly abundant. Instead of embracing the matter-of-fact tone set by Frattini toward explaining these proposals to their electorate and selling them as an advantage for Europe in general and Germany in particular, both the interior minister and the minister for economic affairs have been quick to criticize the ideas publicly, lest they be seen as giving away a slice of their sovereignty to Brussels.

As long as this type of defensive policy making, in which each Member State government needs to be seen as the ‘victor’ against the Brussels’ machinery, continues, we will not see any true, comprehensive, practical progress on these crucial issues for Europe in the 21st century.