Today, the European Community faces a difficult choice: either to become a "fortress" with doors closed to these who must need protection and support, or on the other hand to remain an oasis of asylum in conformity with the principles that the EC has advocated over the decades. In spite of being an economic giant, will the EC remain a dwarf on human rights questions and in respect of support for the poorest in the world ?

Given the growing needs of eastern and central Europe, will the EC yeld to pressure for national selfishness and shut its frontiers both to goods and people from countries escaping 50 years of totalitarian communism ?

We publish hereunder an article on these burning issues of immigration and rights of asylum, thus giving our contribution to the debates that are currently taking place in all of our countries and notably in view of the discussion on racism and xenophobia that will take place in the European Parliament during its plenary session on 28 October.

The role of the European Parliament on the issues of immigration and asylum is not negligible, especially since 1987 onwards when the Vetter report was published. Amongst other things the Parliament underlined the need for a global and rapid procedure to handle asylum seekers.

There is, however, here as in many other places, a problem of democratic deficit. Most of the work home takes place on an intergovernmental level using ad hoc committees principally made up of civil servants, and without any control by the European Parliament, nor with any possibility of appeal to the Court of Justice.

Article 100C of the Maastricht treaty is the only "community" element in this question: in addition, this article does not handle much (visa policy only) and does not directly deal with the problem of rights of asylum.

However, a community asylum policy appears even more essential for procedural, material and social reasons, given the need to respect the Geneva Convention on humanitarian rights.

Immigrants, full citizens

One of the immediate consequences of the completion of the internal market is the speeding up of the process of economic and social integration of the Member States. In an EC without frontiers, workerrs will become more mobile in terms of seeking work and improving professional and social status. The approach adopted by any one Member State towards immigration will therefore have a knock-on effect on the other Member States. There is no denying that there are real differences on the labour market between Community workers and some of the immigrant workers. These differences are in many cases the result of the vulnerability of the immigrants, thanks to factors such as difficulties in adapting to culture and language, lack of vocational training and jobs with an uncertain future.

To a certain extent the problems also vary according to the state of the labour market in the country in question and the age of the workers. Each Member State has its own specific characteristics which are connected with the emplyment policy it pursues and the percentage of unemployed people. Nor should it be forgotten that well-integrated immigrants make a major contribution to the economy, not least by becoming self-employed.

As far as checks on the flow of immigration are concerned, the Community must assume its responsabilities and obligations in the light of full implementation of the principle of the free movement of persons. Furthermore, attempts to plan the flow of immigration must be based on an in-depth knowledge of the situation on the labour market; policies should not be aimed exclusively at providing the number of workers which the labour market claims it needs. For these reason, we are convinced that in the short term and with a view to the future, too, there is a need to harmonize policy measures on immigration in order to guarantee protection of immigrants from third countries through the security of Community law, without having to suffer from the changes to which national policy is susceptible.

Policy on asylum and refugees

The law on asylum is often used by asylum applicants as a means of entering the EC. In most European countries, 30-40 % of asylum applicants are tolerated because the conditions in their country of origin are often so uncertain or dangerous that deportation is inhuman or impossible. An individual asylum procedure is unnecessary for these people: it merely strains the system and reduces public willingness to accept them. The recommendation is, therefore, that separate status should be created for refugees from mass violence granting them temporary residence with an extension of rights and protection in the course of time.

Even in a period of great political instability in the countries surrounding us and, hence, increasing pressure from the influx of refugees to the EC, the Community must continue to exercise its responsability towards these refugies. The Commission must draw up an emergency plan for coping with refugees, which would involve distributing them amongst the twelve Member States and for setting up a European Fund for Refugees has also been looked into as means of coping with refugees when they first arrive.

New immigrants

In recent years these has been a specific but increasingly important wave of immigration from Central and Eastern Europe for ethnic and/or religious reasons and in some cases economic reasons. There are ethnic Germans ("Aussiedler"), Jews and Greeks.

"Aussiedler" immigration is a specifically German problem. German public opinion is becoming increasingly against them. Obviously, we do not deny the right of the German State to provide "Aussiedler" with accomodation and citizenship. The preferential treatment of these refugees compared with others and the priority given to integrating them reinforces the social divide towards legal immigrants. Moreover, on arrival in Germany, "Aussiedler" are given German nationality; in other words, once the Maastricht treaty comes into effect they will automatically acquire Union citizenship.

The "Hong Kong British" are a similar problem, and the Community as a whole will have to exercise its responsability towards these people.

In addition to these groups, ordinary Central and Eastern European immigrants are enterring the EC for purely economic reasons. Hitherto public opinion has accepted their presence, but criticism is increasing mainly in ex-DDR.

Finally, there are an estimated 2.5 to 4 m gypsies in Eastern Europe (mainly Romania and ex-Yugoslavia). They live a precarious existence in an unstable region. The pressure on this group to emigrate can only increase.

Illegal immigrants

The open and democratic nature of our society is such that as far as checks on our frontiers are concerned we endeavour to seek a balance between individual freedom and the interest of society as a whole. The fact is that we have to distinguish two categories of illegal immigrants: persons working illegaly and persons who are illegaly resident. This latter category often remains on EC territory for humanitarian reasons.

As far as illegal workers are concerned, the point needs to be made that the labour market does not function at its best. Supply and demand are not integrated, either qualitatively or quantitatively - even though there is substantial unemployment and even greater untapped pool of labour. There is the risk that in the long term illegal immigration and, in particular, illegal employment will undermine the labour market.

There are several possible ways of stemming illegal immigration: mainly, checks on illegal employment, deportation if possible and ban on illegal workers returning to the territory of the EC Member States; but also cooperation agreements with the countries of origin on taking back illegal workers.

Foreign policy

We share the Commission's conviction that to a certain extent the wave of immigration can be checked at source: in other words, we should help with the economic development of the countries of origin. This means financial and technical aid, trade and cooperation agreements and the transfer of technology. The Community must also assume its responsibility within the GATT negotiations.

Integration of immigrants

We, as open and democratic societies, have an obligation to give a proper place in our society to immigrants: this means equal rights and obligations. First and foremost is the principle of non-discrimination.

We need to tackle the question of integration of the first generation (the newcomers). What they need are reception programmes to familiarize them with the language, legislation and customs of the host country. After a period of five years any legally resident alien should have the opportunity of acquiring European citizenship. Bilateral agreements will have to be concluded with those countries of origin which do not allow their subjects to change nationality.

Mathilde van den Brink, MEP