Migrants, refugees, asylum seekers: who they are

Differences between people moving from their place to another

by Emanuele Bonini

Migrants are not all the same. When it comes to migration flows, words and definitions need to be accurate, because a refugee is not an asylum seekers and not all migrants are refugees. Sometimes these people are mixed up, but generalizations or inaccuracies are not allowed, as depending on the category of persons their legal status changes as well as their legal treatment. This is right the way national governments focus their attention on migration and their decisions on accepting foreign people. Here's a distinctions of categories, realized after a little reworking of the one realized by Amnesty International.

- Refugee. A refugee is a person who has fled from their own country because they have a well-founded fear of persecution and their government cannot or will not protect them. Under international law, being a refugee is a fact-based status, and arises before the official, legal grant of asylum. Asylum procedures are designed to determine whether someone meets the legal definition of a refugee. When a country recognizes someone as a refugee, it gives them international protection as a substitute for the protection of their country of origin. Refugee is generally a person with a legal status of protection recognised by governments, and he is entitled to remain in the country.

- Asylum seeker. An asylum-seeker is someone who has left their country seeking protection but has yet to be recognized as a refugee. Not all the asylum-seekers are refugees, but they all are entitled to stay temporarily in another country until their requests are not assessed. During the time that their asylum claim is being examined, the asylum-seeker must not be forced to return to their country of origin.

FACT SHEET/ MFF contributions for migration

(click to enlarge)

Europe in economic troubles with migrants

Not enough in the EU budget to deal with the current crisis. Adding money not an easy task

by Emanuele Bonini

Migration is not only a matter of political approach and will, it is also a matter of money. Despite the different political ideas, the European Union need resources which are not there. The EU in the sense of the Member States should revise the common budget in order to put new, fresh money with the aim of better addressing a situation otherwise impossible to solve. This is the only way out, and of course it is not an easy one. Far-right populist movements are rising up all across Europe, the European Union opted for strict fiscal rules, and amongst the governments there are those who neither can't nor don't want to invest on migration. There is still the possibility of changing the current Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF), the single EU budget for the 2014-2020 period, but it is unclear how such a possibility will be used by the Member States.

Resources made available
The EU can spend for migration €9,26 billion, which are the resources foreseen in the heading 3 («Security and Citizenship»). These money are mainly channelled through the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF, €3,1 billion), the Internal Security Fund (ISF, €3,8 billion) and the main EU Home Affairs agencies involved (Frontex, Easo, Europol, that got €2,36 billion). In addition, under humanitarian aid and development cooperation, the EU budget and EU Trust Funds, as well as, outside the EU budget, the European Development Fund (EDF), address migration and asylum both geographically and thematically. As a new element at the end of 2015, the €3 billion Refugee Facility for Turkey was set up under the EU-Turkey deal on migration, with €1 billion coming from the EU budget.

To beer or not to beer? The UK dilemma after Brexit

Beer operators asked Theresa May to keep the free movement principle alive in name of hops

by Emanuele Bonini

To beer or not to beer? That is the question. In time of Hamlet doubts every interrogative point is allowed, even for drinking. And when the national beer industry alone is worth £ 22 billion (about € 24,6 billion), the question is more than legitimate. Brexit poses a lot of challenges and even more interrogative points? To be or not be part of Europe? That was the question the British people answered the 23rd of June, 2016. Now, the future is totally uncertain and unpredictable except for one thing: the beer is endangered. With the United Kingdom out of the EU, malts and hops will be out of the single market. What to do, then? According to the British Beer and Pub Association, at least for beer the single market has to be preserved. In its The beer and pub manifesto, the association set out a political programme for the prime minister, who will have to negotiate the new relationships with the EU Member States. In name of the free movement of pints.

Four freedoms
The European single market is based on the so-called "four freedoms", the freedom of movement of goods, people, services and capital over borders. UK government said no concessions will be granted when it will come the moment of redefining the place of the United Kingdom in Europe. A political move related to the immigration issue. London would control people entering Britain, something against the idea of the economic area. The British Beer and Pub Association called the prime minister for «no changes to the rights of existing overseas workers in the industry and within the supply chain» and for «any quota system to take account of  the service sector and areas of  staff  shortages». At the same time an explicit request was made for «greater support for promotion of  British goods in the UK and overseas market» together with «a free trade deal with the EU as a priority with no tariffs or additional paperwork for beer exports». Isn't this a proposal for maintaining the freedom of movement of goods, people, services and capital over borders?

Immigrants are a resource, revealed data

EU statistical office showed children of asylum seekers perform better in school and in work

by Emanuele Bonini

Surprise! Immigrants are not a problem. On the contrary, they are a resource. Even precious, according to the latest figures released by Eurostat.  Second generation immigrants in the EU are generally well integrated into the labour market and have high educational attainment, even higher compared to the peers of the "hosting nation". That means people whose origins come from another country are more qualified and more skilful and, for such a reason, more competitive.

Criminal nature of immigrants is more and more used in internal political debates, making foreigners one of main social issues in most of the European countries. The United Kingdom linked the Brexit referendum to migration policies, and far-right parties all across the EU are acting against people from outside the EU and even from non-nationals.

In 2014, 82.4% (or 251.7 million individuals) of the EU population aged 15-64 were native born with native background, 11.5% (36.5 million) were foreign-born and 6.1% (18.4 million) were considered as second generation immigrants, as 4.4% (13.3 million) had at least one parent born in the EU and 1.7% (5.1 million) had both parents born outside the EU. Among the EU Member States for which data are available the highest proportions of second generation immigrants in the total resident population were registered in Estonia (21.4%), Latvia (19.1%), Luxembourg (16.2%), France (14.3%), Sweden (11.2%), Belgium (11.0%), Slovenia (10.6%) and Croatia (10.3%).

No time for back to Schengen, said Europe

The Europen Commission prolonged internal border controls for further three months. No restoration of free movement before 2017

by Emanuele Bonini

There will be no «Back to Schengen» for Europe by the end of the year, as originally planned. The European Commission gave green light to the extension of the internal boder controls reintroduced in some Member States as a consequence of the migration crisis. Temporary checks were re-established in Sweden until the 11th of November, and in Germany, Austria and Denmark until the 12th of November. These countries are now allowed to keep their borders closed in derogation to the EU free movements rules for further three months. This means internal borders will be kept closed until mid-February 2017, against the European Commission forecasts. As decided in its migration roadmap, December 2016 was supposed to be «the target date for bringing to an end the exceptional safeguard measures taken, if the overall situations allows». Cleary it is not the case.

The European Union therefore experienced a new failure in the migration policy. The idea of come back to the normal situation by the end of the year was swept away by the European Commission college meeting. Vice president Frans Timmermans recognized the insuccess. «The Schengen area without internal borders is a historical achievement which we must preserve. We are working hard to return to a normal functioning Schengen area as soon as possible, and we have made significant progress. But we are not there yet». The European Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs, and Citizenship, Dimitris Avramopoulos, expressed the change of political line by no setting new deadline for the restoration of normal conditions. «We have one clear priority and determination: to safeguard Schengen and to restore a normally functioning Schengen area as soon as the conditions allow for it».

EU at stake since there's no wish of Europe

From trade to migration, Member States are breaking ranks in the whole common rules

by Emanuele Bonini

It is not only about migration. The era of the European Union is over because no Member State recognise any longer what have been common rules until today. From fiscal policies to trade issues, passing through the Brexit, everything has been put in question. And once everything is put in question, anything can neither work nor, consequently, deliver. What is going on with CETA is just one a major proof of the implosion of the single project. Article 3, paragraph 1, of the treaty of the EU states that «the Union shall have exclusive competence» in common commercial policy, which means the EU-Canada free trade agreement (CETA) has been signed in respect of EU laws and with a full regular negotiating mandate received by the Member States. Now a regional Parliament in Belgium decided to block the ratification, posing a legal issue over the credibility of the European Union.

Trade
What is happening with CETA is not a first, isolated case. Even with TTIP, the free trade agreement that the EU is negotiation with the United States, Member States changed their mind declaring the dossier as «dead». This is another clear example of how national governments are delegitimizing to the European Commission, the EU body originally thought to replace nation States for acting on their behalf. Without legitimacy the European Commission is weaken, as well as the EU itself. In case of a failure of the EU-Canada free trade agreement, how the EU could negotiate the next commercial deal with third countries?

bLOGBOOK - The ox

A special section dedicated to special people and special memories. A book might not be enough, but collecting some words doesn't hurts

Chapter 3: Davide

Don't call him Davide. He is and he always will "the ox". Once a nickname is given, it is forever, and Davide doesn't make exception. Most of the people believe "the ox" comes from Davide's body size, not properly a thin one. It was Davide himself to explain the origin of his nickname: it come from the Chicago Bulls sweatshirt he was used to wear at the highschool. Apparently one day the gym teacher told him "you!, you with that ox, come here!" From that moment on, he became "the ox". And he still is "the ox".

When I met him he was already known for his nickname, of course. He introduced himself by his name just because customs and habits require so, but it was clear since the beginning such a name would never have been used. "ox-box, it rhymes" became soon the main way to refer to Davide and his capacity of drinking. He was able to assume huge quantities of alcohol. He could empty boxes of beer alone. That's why "ox-box". His origins don't lie: the inhabitants of the region he comes from are famous to be inveterate drinkers. With the right people reach the bottom is not a problem. On the contrary, it is the only possible option on the table. In each sense.

He has always been a great drinking buddy, this is undeniable. As well is undeniable that he was always with me in every important moment of my life. Considering we met when we both were university students, the important moments have been nothing but bloody stupid things, the kind of things you do when you are 20 years old and totally absorbed by the lightness of being. That kind of things you share with the people you know you will conserve for the rest of life. It was the age of irresponsibility, to put it other and simpler words, and Davide was there. He was comfortable in that world that he always acted with the declared goal of not having responsibilities. So he became the first (and perhaps) Chief non-Executive Officer in the world. Yes, a unique boss in leaving to other people the burden of taking decisions.

bLOGBOOK - Impressions from a sea town

 Back to Oostende


Sea towns are always magical. No matter where the urban centres are: although seas are never the same, they always create a unique atmosphere. That is true even for Oostende, certainly not one of the best cities in Belgium. 
Modern, perhaps too modern for the eyes. And empty. "For sale" and "for rent" notices are put up and down the town. Where are the people in Oostende? Seamen spend most of their time far from the mainland, but they make port, soon or late. So what? Maybe once demolitions and constructions will be over, the place will finally have its face. For the time being, Oostende appears to visitors as a huge construction site. In the harbour, in the city centre, in suburbs, along the seafront: works are everywhere in progress. Cranes and modern buildings make Oostende unattractive, compared to the rest of the country. But here the city opted for a different choice, compared to the rest of the kingdom.

Like the whole Belgium, Oostende was harshly hit during the II world war. It was hit even more harshly than other parts, as the town was razed to the ground. It paid the price of the strategic position on the North Sea coast and its advantages as a harbour. Like all strategic economic centres, Oostende became since the beginning of the hostilities a priority target. Instead of restoring the original town, it was decided to create a new one to symbolise a new life for Oostende. Now the new Oostende is still in search for an identity, but the waves, the saltiness, and seagalls with their chirps are still there. Oostende was and still is a sea town.

No full control in EU Commission spending, warned ECA

The European Court of Auditors found breaches in the governance of the Berlaymont. «The Commission diverges from, or does not fully adhere to, international best practice»

by Emanuele Bonini

There is a lack of control in spending activity of the European Commission, according to the latest report from the European Court of Auditors (ECA) published today. New rules have not been implemented, marking a difference between the actions foreseen on paper and those effectively in place. After the resignation of the Santer Commission, in March 2000 the Commission approved the «Reforming the Commission» White Paper, with the aim of modernising the governance of the Commission. After more than a decade improvements are still missing, as pointed out by the ECA. The Commission abolished the financial controller function in order to make the directors-general responsible for the legality and regularity of spending by their Directorate-Generals (DGs). DGs report annually on their management via the annual activity report. But «mechanisms to hold individuals to account for their contribution to internal control are relatively undeveloped». In other words, The Commission «has not put in place staff evaluation criteria linked to this objective». In practice all this means the European Commission «has not established a basis to determine whether the declarations made within annual activity reports are well-founded, or established a benchmark against which to hold DGs accountable». The European Commission expenditure is thus out of control.

Who is responsible for what?
New rules make difficult to establish who is responsible for what can happen in governing the European Commission, revealed the European Court of Auditors in the same report. In fact the distinction made between the political responsibility of commissioners and the operational responsibility of directors-general means that «it has not always been made clear whether ‘political responsibility’ encompasses responsibility for the directorates-general, or is distinct from it». Recent organisational reforms «are beginning» to address some of the risks of a silo culture, the typical mindset that occurs in organisations, which is inward looking and resists sharing information and resources with other people or departments within the same organisation. According to ECA in order to continue to address key risks, the Commission will need to further strengthen the governance structure across the institution.