Strategic thinking on equality and mobility
description
Transcript of 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?