Parliamentary Assembly
Assemblée
parlementaire

For debate in the Standing Committee — see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure

Doc. 10842
27 February 2006

Working migration from the countries of Eastern and Central Europe : present state and perspectives

Report
Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population
Rapporteur: Mrs Hoffmann, Germany, Socialist Group


Summary

The report examines the evolving trends in labour migration in Western Europe, new and complex patterns of migration in Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS countries. It looks at migrant profiles and root causes of emigration in Central and Eastern Europe, and considers the effects of East-West labour migration on the European labour markets.

The Assembly calls for better co-ordination in terms of collection of data on the volume and changing nature of labour migration flows; for increased co-operation between countries to better regulate migratory flows and to reduce pressures of irregular migration; for effective protection of migrant workers’ rights in order to avoid exploitation, social dumping and unfair competition; and for more resources and innovation in co-development projects, thus making sure that in turn migration and other accompanying measures contribute to the development of countries of origin.

A.       Draft resolution

1. In global terms, migrants today represent 2.9% of the world population. The UN Population Division estimates the migrant population in 2005 to be around 185-192 million people, compared to 175 million in 2000, and 82 million in 1970. This rise in international migration is inevitably linked to the effects of globalised economies on international labour mobility.

2. For more than two centuries most countries in Western Europe have been countries of emigration. The only exceptions were France and Switzerland, both having started recruiting foreign labour already in the 19th century. Over the last 60 years, the remaining countries in Western Europe, and more recently in Southern Europe, gradually became destination countries for international migrants. Several of the new EU Member States in Central Europe now also follow that pattern.

3. In Western Europe there were about 10 million registered foreign workers in 2002, representing an increase of 38% compared to the figure in 1995 of about 7.3 million. This increase is in part due to the entry of new foreign workers to some countries such as Ireland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The overall increase is however largely due to the regularisation of irregular workers in Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece. Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom host between them almost two thirds of the total foreign labour force in Western Europe.

4. Contrary to the public debate and fears of massive immigration flows to Western Europe, east-west migration turned out to be relatively modest, representing less than 1% share of the labour force. Germany, Austria and to some extent Italy, Spain and Portugal attract most migrant workers from Central and Eastern Europe. The majority of migrants are young, between 18 and 44 years of age working mainly in agriculture; construction; transport; hotel industry; catering; and in household service sector. Their stay is less permanent, may involve circular migration or regular returns to home country, and varies in nature.

5. While the economic situation and labour markets differ across Europe, a number of countries display a dichotomy between relatively high unemployment, particularly for long term unemployed, and short term work shortage. The reasons are manifold and are in part due to the fact that work cannot be found for many unemployed people owing to their lack of qualifications or limited occupational or spatial mobility, or else because the work available is unattractive.

6. Examples of the United Kingdom and Ireland, which opened their labour markets to nationals from new EU member states, show that migrants from Central and Eastern Europe can indeed help to fill the gaps in labour markets contributing to the success of the economy, whilst making very few demands on the welfare system.

7. As the host countries in Western Europe will increasingly benefit from young, dynamic and skilled work force, countries of origin, particularly non-EU countries are faced with serious effects of youth and brain drain. Current, rather complex, migratory movements across Central and Eastern Europe - involving emigration, immigration and irregular transit - are consequent to the enlargement of the European Union eastwards and to the sustained economic growth in a number of countries which in turn attract foreign labour and irregular migration from further east (Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, Moldova), South Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa.

8. Employers’ strive for cutting labour costs and migrant workers’ willingness to take on more precarious and less well paid jobs, may seriously erode the acquired labour standards in Europe and more generally worldwide. Employment of undocumented workers, without set wages, regulated working conditions or social security payments, not only undermines the principle of fair competition but also creates conditions for “modern slavery”.

9. The Parliamentary Assembly insists on the strict implementation of international labour standards and the respect of equal rights for migrant workers, in addition to applying effective and persuasive sanctions for employers who resort to recruitment of undocumented workers.

10.       Europe needs more structured policies to prevent irregular immigration in cooperation with countries of origin and transit. Such policies go in hand with better and more transparent management of regular migration. Countries in Central and Eastern Europe are particularly in need of guidance towards better migration management.

11.       In the light of the above, the Assembly recommends to the member states :

11.1.        with regard to orderly labour migration management :

11.1.1. to harmonise data collection on the volume and nature of migratory flows, so as to improve the comparative overview of migratory flows in Europe and to allow for a better insight to their changing nature;

11.1.2. to develop proactive migration policies in line with the guiding principles of the migration management strategy, adopted by the European Committee on Migration (CDMG);

11.1.3. to link proactive immigration policies with labour market needs through a regular dialogue with social partners;

11.1.4. to develop managed migration for employment purposes, including bilateral and multilateral agreements between host countries and countries of origin, in compliance with international labour standards;

11.1.5. to establish recognition and accreditation of migrant workers’ skills and qualifications, as appropriate, in order to improve their employment chances;

11.1.6. to promote guidelines for ethical recruitment;

11.2.        with regard to prevention of irregular labour migration :

11.2.1. to raise awareness in the countries of origin on the conditions of entry to the respective host countries;

11.2.2. to establish recruitment and training centers in the countries of origin for specific skills which are needed at the labour markets in the host countries, in order to make sure that people do not migrate without a good prospect for a job;

11.2.3. to harmonise visa arrangements so as to prevent discrepancies if change of status occurs (tourist, employment or education purposes);

11.2.4. to apply effective sanctions for employers who employ undocumented migrant workers;

11.3.       with regard to the protection of migrant workers rights :

11.3.1. to sign, ratify and implement the European Convention on the legal status of migrant workers (ETS 93);

11.3.2. to sign, ratify and implement the relevant provisions of the (revised) European Social Charter, concerning the rights of migrant workers and their families;

11.3.3. to implement the ILO “Plan of Action for migrant workers in a global economy”;

11.3.4. to licence and supervise recruitment and contracting agencies for migrant workers in accordance with ILO Convention N° 181 and Recommendation N°188;

11.3.5. to improve labour inspection and ways for migrant workers to lodge complaints and seek remedy without intimidation;

11.3.6. to promote decent work for migrant workers and raise awareness of migrant workers’ rights;

11.4.       with regard to co-operation between host countries and countries of origin :

11.4.1. to improve the conditions for direct foreign investments in countries of Central and Eastern Europe;

11.4.2. in co-operation with social partners, to develop European traineeship exchange programmes for young people to enhance their skills and possibilities for employment;

11.4.3. to develop policies to encourage return migration, reintegration into the country of origin and transfer of capital and technology by migrants;

11.4.4. to facilitate the transfer of social security entitlements through bilateral regional or multilateral agreements.

B.       Draft recommendation

1.       The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution………..on “Working migration from the countries of Eastern and Central Europe : present state and perspectives”, and recommends that the Committee of Ministers :

1.1.       ask the relevant intergovernmental committees to:

 1.1.1.       in cooperation with other European and international organisations, develop common criteria for harmonisation of data (the volume and dynamic nature of migration);

1.1.2.       facilitate the exchange of information on labour migration policies and good practice;

1.1.3.       assist the member states, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, to develop proactive migration policies, including labour migration policies;

1.1.4.       assist the member states to improve the legal basis for bilateral agreements with regard to labour migration;

1.1.5.       assist the member states to develop European traineeship exchange programmes for young people to enhance their skills and possibilities for employment;

1.2.       give its full support to establishing the theme of labour migration and co-development for the 8th Ministerial Conference for European Ministers responsible for migration and integration affairs, as discussed in the European Committee on Migration (CDMG).

C.       Explanatory memorandum, by Mrs Hoffmann

I.       Introduction

1. Profound political changes in Western as well as Eastern Europe, such as the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the enlargement eastwards of the European Union and the Globalization process, give people more possibilities to move. These changes make people more mobile.

2. Labour migration from countries of Central and Eastern Europe raises new issues that increasingly require the attention of policy-makers and the relevant and competent Authorities. The Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population of the PACE is therefore asking for increased attention to be given to the question of East-West working migration.

II.       Global perspective

3. In global terms, migrants today represent 2.9% of the world population. The UN Population Division estimates the migrant population in 2005 to be around 185-192 million people, compared to 175 million in 2000, and 82 million in 1970. Nearly half of migrants worldwide are female (48.6%).

4. Migration flows have shifted in recent years with changing poles of attraction for labour migration : 75% of all international migrants are in 12% of all countries. In 2000, two thirds of migrants lived in developed countries. This rise in international migration is inevitably linked to the effects of globalised economies on international labour mobility.

5. Greater Europe (including the European part of Russian Federation) hosts 56.1 million international migrants, accounting for 7.7% of the population. United States with 35 million, the Russian Federation with 13.3 million and Germany with 7.3 million migrants are the top three immigration countries worldwide. Leading sending countries are China, India and the Philippines1.

6. This rather rough sketch of the volume of world migration has nevertheless to be seen in the context of increasingly complex nature of migratory flows. They are no longer a one way process leading to permanent settlement from A to B, but are rather dynamic and increasingly involve temporary, circular and pendular movements as well as return.

7. Globalisation, particularly the growing linkages and interdependency between markets and economies, has added new dimensions to some of the old migration issues, just as it has profoundly influenced both the context and the consequences of contemporary migration.

III.       Evolving trends in labour migration in Europe

8. For more than two centuries most countries in Western Europe have been countries of emigration. The only exceptions were France and Switzerland, both having started recruiting foreign labour already in 19th century. Over the last 60 years, remaining countries in Western Europe gradually became destination countries for international migrants. And several of the new EU Member States in Central Europe now also follow that pattern.

9. According to the Council of Europe annual publication “Current trends in international migration in Europe”2 it is still surprisingly difficult to monitor migration flows in the region, as a result of differentiated methods and criteria for data collection. The concepts of migration used as a basis for collecting statistics do not reflect many of the realities of current migratory movements such as short-term movements (including seasonal, pendular, transit, or circular movements), status changes (between tourist, education, resident or work permit holders) and most obviously, there is lack of data on illegal (irregular) migrations.

i.       Labour migration to Western Europe

10. Figures from table (12)3 (see appendix) suggest that in Western Europe in 2002, there were about 10 million recorded foreign workers, representing an increase of 38% compared to the figure in 1995 of about 7.3 million (excluding foreign workers from EU countries). In some countries – Ireland, Sweden and the United Kingdom – there have been significant increases in foreign labour stocks, owing to the entry of new foreign workers. But the overall increase is largely due to regularisation of illegal workers in Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece. Elsewhere, stocks of recorded foreign labour have gone down (Germany) or remained relatively stable (France). Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom contained between them 6.32 million, or 62.8% of the total foreign labour force in Western Europe. Among the countries with 2003 data, Austria, Greece, Luxemburg, Spain and the UK recorded increases compared to 2002, Germany remained stable, while the stock of foreign labour in Switzerland fell.

11. Eurostat data4 in table (11) (see appendix) show percentage of total immigration by previous residence, distinguishing between EU-15 and EFTA states, countries of Central and Eastern Europe, other countries in Europe and the rest of the world. Scandinavian countries have migrant workers mainly from EU and EFTA states as well as Turkey and former Yugoslavia with only small percentage from Central and Eastern Europe. Immigration flow to Germany is strongly European, and along with Austria, Finland and Liechtenstein it receives a high proportion of immigrants from Central and Eastern Europe. In contrast, almost three quarters of immigrants in the United Kingdom come from outside Europe. The Mediterranean countries also tend to look beyond Europe, as do the Netherlands and France.

12. Most migration from Central and Eastern European countries is at present limited in time and irregular. A phenomenon of return migration has started to develop. In addition, several countries of Central and Eastern European, traditionally countries of working emigration, are themselves increasingly becoming destination countries for migrants from Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

13. When looking more closely at the proportion of foreign labour from Central and Eastern Europe, OECD data5 indicate the following :

14. There were 334 000 foreign workers in Austria in 2002 accounting for 10.6% of total employment in that year, continuing the very gradual increase in recent years. The largest share was taken by citizens of Serbia and Montenegro although at 35.8% of foreign labour their proportion has been declining (from nearly 50% in 1992). The proportions of Croats and Bosnians remain small but are gradually increasing to 3.2% and 7.6% respectively in 2002. In comparison, Germans accounted for 7.9% of Austrian foreign labour market. The share taken by Turkish nationals continues to decline and was 16.8% in 2002. Foreign labour from other countries in Central and Eastern Europe included: Hungary (4%), Poland (3.6%), Romania (2.6%), Slovenia (2.5%), Slovak Republic (2%), the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (1.8%), Czech Republic (1.7%) and Bulgaria (0.4%).

15. Inflows of foreigners into Finland in 2002 have slightly decreased for the first time since 1999. At the end of October 2003, there were up to 106 000 foreign nationals in Finland, accounting for about 2% of the total population (Russian Federation 22%; Estonia 13%; Serbia and Montenegro 3.3%; and CIS countries 2.6%).

16. Majority of immigrants to France are from outside Europe (63% from Africa; 18% from Asia) and only a small proportion come from Central and Eastern Europe and CIS countries (9%). Following the increase in unemployment rate over the last few years (9.5%) and stricter immigration policy, the overall number of entries of permanent wage earners fell, particularly for African immigrants, while in contrast there was a sharp increase in working migrants from South-East Asia, India and Poland. Seasonal immigration for agricultural work (fruit and vegetable picking and grape harvesting) rose by 25%, originating mainly from Morocco and Poland.

17. Immigration flows to Germany substantially decreased in almost all categories of entry in 2002. At the same time, the number of foreigners residing in Germany remained at nearly the same level amounting to over 7.3 million (8.9% of the total population). Nationals of Poland (12%), Turkey (9%), the Russian Federation (6%) and Serbia and Montenegro (4%) were the most numerous amongst foreigners arriving to Germany in 2002. Inflows of ethnic Germans mostly from the former Soviet Union continued in 2002. Under bilateral agreements, Germany hosted around 300 000 seasonal workers and around 45 500 contract workers in 2001. As in previous years, nationals of Poland represented the largest proportion of both groups (85% and 47% respectively).

18. Immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon in Greece and it is directly related to geopolitical changes in Eastern Europe and to the economic crisis in Albania. While there is no reliable data, it is nevertheless thought that most immigrants are entering the country for work purposes. The largest immigrant groups are from Albania, Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania and Ukraine. Male foreign workers were employed mainly in the building sector (35%) and the agriculture and fishing sectors (20%), whereas most women workers were employed in the household service sector (52%) and catering (20%). In 1998 and 2001 Greek government successively regularised around 400 000 irregular migrants.

19. Ireland continues to be a net immigration country which it became in the mid 1990s. The number of foreign residents has increased to 4.8% of the total population. While all sectors have recorded increases in foreign employment, the most rapid growth has been in agriculture (mainly from Baltic States) from under 100 in 1998 to 7 200 in 2003; and in hotels and catering, from 600 in 1998 to over 10 000 in 2002. Overall, the Baltic states, other new EU member states and other Eastern European states accounted for about 26 600 of the work permits issued, 55% of the total, compared to 21% in 1999. The 2003 Irish Employment Permits Act codifies requirements related to work permits and working visas. It was designed to facilitate free access to the Irish labour market to the citizens of the new EU (accession) states with effect from May 2004.

20. The number of immigrants entering Italy and receiving permits has been increasing over the past four years. The main countries of origin are from Central and Eastern Europe (42.2%), with a sharp rise in immigration from Romania, Albania, Poland and Ukraine. The Ukrainian population increased by 60% in just two years. Irregular migration remains a thorny issue in Italy. Between 30 000 and 40 000 persons are stopped annually trying to enter Italy without valid documents. In 2002 around 37 700 were turned back at the border while 24 800 undocumented foreigners were expelled and accompanied to the border, 17 000 were repatriated and 2 500 accepted voluntarily the order to leave. The 2002 law offered the possibility to regulate the status of foreign domestic workers which was then extended to undocumented workers whose firms were willing to offer them a contract. Over 700 000 applications were filed.

21. While Portugal has traditionally been an emigration country (estimated 4.9 million expatriates), the country has been attracting foreign labour since 1993. Legal immigrants are mainly from Portuguese-speaking African countries (Angola, Cape Verde and Guinea-Bissau), Spain, United Kingdom, Germany and Brazil, accounting for 4% of resident population. In order to tackle irregular economic migration, the government has introduced amnesty programme (2001-2003) for undocumented foreigners with employment contracts. Most of regularised migrants were Eastern Europeans from Ukraine, Moldova, Romania and Russia in particular. East Europeans now represent about one-quarter of the whole foreign population and Ukrainians have become the major group (62 000).

22. A recent phenomenon in Spain, immigration has grown substantially over the past few years. According to residence permit statistics, over 1 650 000 foreigners were legally resident in Spain in December 2000, around 4.7% of the total population. Immigration flows in 2002 show an increase from Eastern Europe (Romania, Ukraine, Bulgaria and Lithuania) amounting to 93 000 in 2002 (20%). Half of all legal migrants were between 25 and 44 years of age working mainly in agriculture, hotel industry and catering. While the last two regularisation programmes (2000 and 2001), together with bilateral agreements, have helped to improve the socio-economic situation of immigrants, they have at the same time created an open signal for many irregular migrants to enter Spain and live there illegally.

23. About a quarter of foreign-born immigrants to the Netherlands are from EU countries and 56% from non-Western countries. There was a decline in immigration from Eastern European countries, which can be explained by a sharp fall in immigration from the former Yugoslavia. Nonetheless, inflows of foreign workers on temporary work permits continued to grow. The highest number of labour migrants came from Poland (6 600) and the former Soviet Union (3 600) due to a change in government policy on recruitment of seasonal workers in the agricultural and horticultural sectors.

ii.       Labour migration in Central and Eastern Europe

24. While the labour immigration flows to the countries of Western Europe seem to be generally stabilizing as a result of stricter immigration management in these countries, migration patterns in Central and Eastern European countries on the other hand, have been changing considerably over the last decade. Current, rather complex, migratory movements across Central and Eastern Europe are consequent to the enlargement of the European Union eastwards, to the applied principle of “burden sharing” with regard to refugees and asylum seekers entering the enlarged EU, and are also consequent to the sustained economic growth in a number of countries which attract foreign labour and irregular migration from further east (Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, Moldova), South Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa.

25. By the end of 2003, the number of foreigners in Czech Republic had reached 237 00, accounting for 2.3% of total population. One third of the foreign population were permanent residents whereas two-third were long term visa holders (over 90 days). Both figures grew during 2002, by 3.4% and 2.3% respectively. The largest national groups holding permanent permits included those from Vietnam, Poland, Slovak Republic and the Ukraine, with nationals from Vietnam growing by 50% since 2001. As in previous years, citizens of the Slovak Republic and the Ukraine dominated among long-term visa holders (44% of long term visas were granted for employment; and 39% for business purposes). By the end of 2002, 161 710 economically active foreigners were registered in the Czech Republic, which represents 3.1% of the total labour force.

26. The number of foreigners residing legally in Hungary is relatively low, 116 000 holders of long-term residence permit (1.1% of the population). Amongst registered foreign workers Romanian nationals accounted for 57%, Ukrainians 11.6%, EU-15 citizens 8.8% (mainly Germans) and smaller proportion of Slovaks and Chinese. There are thought to be significant numbers of irregular foreign workers. According to some estimates, the number of irregular workers during the summer period can be twice that of workers with a valid work permit.

27. It is estimated that 280 000 persons emigrated from Lithuania between 1990-1999, an average of 25 000 annually. The major destination countries were the Russian Federation (27%), Belarus (12%), Germany (12%), the United States (10%) and the Ukraine (8%). In 2002, officially only 730 Lithuanian nationals were legally employed abroad on the basis of bilateral agreements, mainly in Germany (46%) and Sweden (38%). In the same year 950 Lithuanians were recruited by private employment agencies to work abroad, principally in Ireland (57%) and the United Kingdom (32%). At the same time it is estimated that around 150 000 Lithuanians are involved in short-term irregular work abroad each year. This illustrates the inability of official statistics to record the whole range of emigration from Lithuania.

28. Over the past ten years Bulgaria has lost 1 million citizens to emigration and only 19 000 have returned in the period 1995-2001. In 2001 and 2002, the number of Bulgarians residing illegally abroad rose substantially. This may be linked to the liberalisation of entry requirements into the Schengen area. From April 2001, when visa requirements were lifted, until October 2002, approximately 6 500 Bulgarians were expelled from European countries, the United States and Canada. Most of these migrants were of the Rom minority.

29. Provisional Population and Housing Census data for 2002 in Romania indicated that 361 000 Romanian citizens are living abroad, with 213 000 in employment. Almost half of them went to the EU countries (Italy, Germany, Hungary). Majority of emigrants were of working age, nearly 55% women, and over a quarter had high education. Around 25 500 Romanians left to work abroad as a result of bilateral agreements : 19 700 to Germany for agricultural work, hotels and catering; and another 2 400 (mainly men) who went to Spain to work in agriculture and construction. A further 3 300 Romanian staff worked in Germany for Romanian companies with contracts in that country - predominantly in construction, food processing, mining and quarrying. Approximately 7 000 Romanians sought asylum in Ireland and the United Kingdom. In 2002, almost 14 000 Romanian citizens were found in irregular situation and returned from Italy, France, Belgium, Spain and Hungary - the vast majority as a result of readmission agreements.

30. As a result of a high unemployment rate (18.5%) in the Slovak Republic approximately 57 000 Slovaks work in the Czech Republic, 18 000 in Germany, 5 000 in Austria and 2 800 in Hungary. There is also additional substantial flow of temporary, seasonal, cross-border or contractual migration to these host countries. Slovakia is also a country of irregular transit migration from former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Romania. The number of asylum seekers has grown spectacularly since 1999 from 1 600 to 10 300 in 2003 (applicants from Afghanistan, China, India, Iraq and Bangladesh).

iii.       Migration flows in the CIS countries

31. According to the IOM study6 - which covers data on migration flows in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan – population movements remain largely within the region (90%) repeating similar patterns to those during the communist times in the former USSR. The largest migration flow is to Russia (360 000 for year 2000), to a great extent representing the return of Russian expatriates. Emigration to countries outside CIS, is particularly pronounced in the western region - namely Russia (42%), Belarus (46%) and Ukraine (45%).

iv.       Example of Belarus

32. By its geographical location, Belarus has been traditionally a transit country, connecting Asia to Europe, and the Baltic sea with the Black sea regions. Following the political changes in the Soviet Union and the opening of its borders during the period 1989-1992, approximately 80 000 people emigrated according to the official data. They were mainly Jewish people who left to Israel, USA, Canada, Germany, Poland and Australia7.

33. In recent years around 20-30% of persons who left Belarus, moved to the countries of the European Union : Germany having the largest share of 80%, and 10% departed to Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, France and Belgium.

34. It is important to note that the figures mentioned concern only registered legal emigration. Many people however have been living abroad on a legal basis (obtaining work contracts, pursuing education, or through marriage), but have never officially registered their departure from Belarus. According to several surveys, the volume of such emigration is impressive, involving significant percentage of highly educated people.

35. Majority of migrants are young people (20-24 years) and people of working age (30-49 years). Over 90% emigrants for permanent residence in Western Europe have higher and special professional education, with 5% representing the scientific and technological elite. While the initial flow of emigration (1989-2002) was a result of ethnic or political motivation, recent emigration flows are closely connected to economic and social hardship and the desire to seek better living conditions.

36. According to the Research Institute of Statistics in Minsk, migration flows with the countries in the region (Baltic states, Poland, Czech Republic, Ukraine and Russia) are balanced and reciprocal, without significant population loss. However, stricter border control after the EU enlargement have had consequence on the short-term commercial circular migration to Poland – the so called “chelnok business” – which was wide spread in mid-1990s, and which represented considerable and sometimes exclusive income for poor households, especially in border regions.

37. Apart from brain and youth drain to countries of Western Europe and the United States, Belarus is also strongly affected by illegal transit migration from Asia and Africa. Irregular migrants arrive to Belarus using tourist or transit channels, refugee claims, visa-free entrance for business purposes, or simply by violating entry regulation. As a result of immigration restrictions in the enlarged European Union, foreign citizens who fail to emigrate further to the West, stay in Belarus and their number is rapidly increasing.

38. According to the very rough estimates of the law enforcement agencies, there are between 150 000 to 300 000 irregular migrants, mainly from Sri-Lanka, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Afghanistan and Vietnam. Many irregular migrants find themselves “stuck” in Belarus as they have practically no possibility to regulate their stay, neither to move further to a country of destination nor to return to their home country for lack of funds. According to the survey among detained persons, the final target destinations for irregular migrants are Germany (65%), France (9%), Belgium (6%), the Netherlands (5%) as well as Italy, Scandinavian countries and USA (15%)8. The growing numbers of illegal migrants in Belarus seriously aggravate the criminal situation.

IV.       Migrant profile and root causes of emigration in Central and Eastern Europe

39. Significant wage differences between countries, lack of employment prospects and general population poverty in home countries are known to be strong incentives towards emigration.

40. In Europe today, minimum wages vary between 72 euros in Romania to 1 500 euros in Luxemburg9. Figure 1 in the appendix10 depicts three distinct groups of countries with different levels of minimum wages : Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Estonia, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Turkey have below 240 euro minimum wage; Portugal, Slovenia, Malta, Spain, and Greece are in the middle bracket of 400-650 euro minimum wage; and the remaining EU countries which do apply the minimum wage system are in the 1000-1500 euro bracket. If looking at the GDP per capita, the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia, Belarus, Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Serbia and Montenegro, and Moldova are all below the GDP level of Romania.

41. Seen from a regional perspective, poverty and income disparities are nevertheless more widely spread across Europe. To give an example, several regions in Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Belgium and the United Kingdom have below 75% of EU-25 average GDP per capita, levelling up with certain regions in Central and Eastern Europe.

42. While the unemployment rates remained stable in the enlarged Europe, the old member states have 8.2% average rate and new member states 14.3%. Youth unemployment rates are significantly higher at 31.6% average rate for new member states, compared to 18.5% in old member states. Slovakia and Poland have almost 50% youth unemployment.

43. Hopes for the future with regard to better living, income and employment conditions are, according to IOM, often an even stronger drive to emigrate than the dissatisfaction with present economic conditions. In addition, inclination to emigrate varies significantly according to age, level of education, employment status, income level, marital status, and the degree of contact with social networks abroad.

44. Generally, the highest willingness to migrate in Central and Eastern Europe is amongst people with the highest and the lowest income or education levels. On the one hand, command of resources - intellectual and financial - is in line with a higher mobility. And on the other hand, there is a sustained demand in many countries in Western and Southern Europe for migrant workers who are willing to take low skilled jobs, often on a temporary or seasonal basis (agriculture, construction, tourism, catering, household services, etc). In terms of illegal migration, criminal networks continue to recruit young people from the poorest parts of Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, Romania, Bulgaria, etc) for purposes of human trafficking. Such “irregular” migrants face grim prospects of “modern slavery” and are extremely vulnerable to human rights abuse.

45. On a more positive tone, a study of the European Foundation for the improvement of Living and Working Conditions11 forecasts that the profile of likely migrants from new member states and acceding countries will be people who are young, single, better educated or students in third level education. Increasing numbers of potential migrants are female. The countries of origin face the prospect of a major “youth drain”. In Bulgaria and Romania, the outflow from the youngest age group may be nearly 10% in the next five years. The potential youth drain is combined with potential “brain drain”. The countries of origin may lose 3-5% of people with third level education and more than 10% of their students. However, two thirds of the people interviewed would like to migrate temporarily in order to acquire job experience and earn sufficiently to have better living and working prospects at home.

V.       Current trends in the European labour market and the effects of labour migration from countries of Central and Eastern Europe

46. While the economic performance in the European Union is steadily improving, supported by strong world GDP and trade growth, the labour market performance remains weak. Liberalisation of European economies and successive job transfers to countries outside Europe where labour is cheaper - not just in manufacturing but also in services – further aggravates the situation in specific sectors of the European labour market.

47. Popular concerns that labour immigration is harmful to the position of resident workers have therefore been a major theme in many recent election campaigns across Europe.

48. The example of the United Kingdom12 which opened its labour market to nationals from 8 new member states13 shows that migrants from Central and Eastern Europe indeed contribute to the success of UK economy, whilst making very few demands on UK welfare system or public services. In total there were almost 300 000 applicants to the Worker Registration Scheme between 1 May 2004 and 30 September 2005. Migrant workers from new member states helped to fill the gaps in the UK labour market, particularly in administration, business and management (29%), catering (23%), agriculture (13%), manufacturing (8%) and food, fish and meat processing (5%). Over 4000 people registered as bus, lorry and coach drivers and almost 7 500 as care workers. There were 700 teachers and researchers; almost 400 dental practitioners; and over 500 general practitioners, hospital doctors, nurses and specialists. The vast majority of workers are young and single, 82% of workers are aged between 18 and 34. However, most registered workers (80%) were earning £4.50-£5.99 per hour (gross rate before deductions).

49. The above example illustrates that gaps in the labour market generally exist both for high skilled jobs and very low paid unskilled jobs, and that the share of more “flexible” types of employment, such as part-time and fixed-term employment is also growing.

50. While the economic situation and labour markets differ across Europe, a number of countries suffer from a dichotomy between relatively high unemployment, particularly for long term unemployed, and short term work shortage. In Germany for example, there are 5.2 million people registered as unemployed representing 12.6 % of the working age population, but at the same time there is a significant number of vacancies in the high and low wage brackets which are not being filled. The reasons are manifold and are due, among other things, to the fact that work cannot be found for many unemployed people owing to their lack of qualifications or limited occupational or spatial mobility, or else because the work available is unattractive.

51. Hence there are growing demands for the recruitment of foreign workers for occupations and branches in which is it proving difficult to fill vacancies. In addition, the employers’ strive for cutting labour costs and migrant workers’ willingness to take on more precarious and less well paid jobs, seriously threatens the acquired labour standards. Employment of undocumented workers, without set wages, regulated working conditions or social security payments, not only undermines the principle of fair competition but also creates conditions for “modern slavery”.

52. The Rapporteur therefore insists on the strict implementation of international labour standards and the respect of equal rights for migrant workers, in addition to applying effective and persuasive sanctions for employers who resort to recruitment of undocumented workers.

i.       ILO “Plan of action for migrant workers in a global economy”

53. The International Labour Organization (ILO) has recently launched the initiative to develop, in co-operation with other international partners including the Council of Europe, a “Plan of action for migrant workers in a global economy” with a view to promoting policies that give priority to economic growth and employment; and to encourage regular labour migration. These goals will require strong political commitment to adopt national policies aimed at equal treatment of migrant workers with nationals in respect of national labour laws and access to social protection; combating the exploitation which is often associated with migrants in irregular status; and to promote basic human rights for all migrants.

54.       The Plan of Action will include guidelines with regard to :

55.       The Rapporteur strongly encourages member states of the Council of Europe to provide a leading example by implementing the Plan of Action nationally, within Europe and through co-operation with countries of origin outside Europe.

VI.       European labour migration policies : towards more harmonisation ?

56       Given the strongly divergent views on the admission and integration of migrants, the governments of the European Union have launched a political discussion in order to reach consensus on the objectives of future European policies in the field of migration.

57. At the Tampere European Council in 1999, they have agreed to establish in the short term a coordination procedure between countries in order to manage migration flows better, taking into account the economic and demographic situation (needs in labour markets; population ageing) and in the medium-long term, to develop a common legal framework concerning the conditions of admission and stay of third-country nationals.

58. The governments of the European Union have also agreed to base their future migration policies on four main principles :

59. In January 2005, the European Commission adopted a “Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration”14 which addressed the main issues at stake : the degree of harmonisation the European Union should aim at; admission procedures for paid employment and for self-employment; applications for work and residence permits; possibility of changing employer or sector; rights of the third-country nationals; “accompanying measures” (integration, return and cooperation with third countries). A public hearing took place in June 2005.

60. Given that access of foreign workers to the labour market is a particularly complex and sensitive issue in each country, the Rapporteur’s view is that any European policy on economic migration would have to be put progressively: first of all, by laying down common definitions, criteria and procedures for admission of economic migrants, while at the same time leaving to each member state to respond to specific needs of its labour market. As the governments would continue to decide on the volume and quotas of immigration, this information however needs to be shared between them in order to assess the overall needs of the European labour market.

61. The example of Ukrainian nationals entering Germany on tourist visa in order to proceed to Portugal where they can obtain temporary work and hence finding themselves in “irregular” position on their way back home, shows that there is an urgent need for closer cooperation to avoid such discrepancies under the Schengen agreement.

62. The Rapporteur therefore welcomes the most recent proposal of the European Commission for a Policy Plan on legal Migration15 which takes into account results of the public hearing in June 2005 and over 130 written contributions from Member States and Acceding countries, social partners, non-governmental organisations, national parliaments, third-countries, academia, and regional and local authorities. The specific objective of the policy plan is to develop common admission procedures, capable of responding promptly to fluctuating demands for migrant labour (i.e. filling in labour and skill gaps), while leaving to the Member States to decide on the volume of immigration. The Commission proposes to develop a framework directive, guaranteeing a common framework of rights to all third-country nationals in legal employment. In order to limit abuses and to fight against illegal employment, the financial responsibility of the employer could be engaged.

63. The intention is also to strike a balance between the interests of certain EU Member States, more inclined to attract highly skilled workers, and of those needing mainly seasonal workers. As a result, the framework directive will be initially followed up by four specific directives regulating the conditions of entry and residence of highly skilled workers; seasonal workers; Intra-Corporate Transferees; and paid trainees.

64. Regulating the circulation and exchange of paid trainees would allow non-EU nationals to acquire skills and knowledge through a period of training in western Europe, encouraging brain circulation, which would be of benefit for both sending and receiving countries. Safeguards will be necessary to avoid abuses (i.e. trainees who are in reality underpaid temporary workers).
65. Other specific objectives of the policy plan are to improve the exchange of information and data on different aspects of migration; to improve the integration of immigrants; and to increase cooperation with countries of origin in order to achieve better management of the migration flows at the advantage of all actors involved (migrants, host countries and countries of origin).

66. The Rapporteur considers that Europe needs, in addition, more structured policies to prevent and combat irregular immigration in cooperation with countries of origin and transit. Such policies go in hand with better and more transparent management of regular migration.

67. Moreover, countries in Central and Eastern Europe are particularly in need of guidance towards better migration management, with the exception of Czech Republic which provides one of the rare examples of proactive migration management in the region.

i.       Czech republic : example of proactive migration management

68. Recognising the country’s potential as a destination for labour migration from poorer non-EU European states, the Czech Government has initiated a labour-recruitment programme. In 2003 the Ministry of Labour set a quota for 300 labour migrants from Bulgaria, Croatia, and Kazakhstan. In 2004, the Government has allowed for another 700 highly skilled migrants to enter and work legally16. The guest worker programme estimates that by 2030 the Czech labour market will have a shortage of 420,000 workers. Facing the same demographic problem as many countries in Western Europe – an ageing population and declining birth rate – the Czech Government is attempting to address the problems of labour shortage before they become critical for its social policies.

69. It is indicative for the future of East-West migration that Czech experts have already taken into account losses of qualified labour that has migrated to Western Europe. Czech labour markets have opened towards the West and created gaps in the internal market which will, in turn, be filled by labour from the East. The Government has implemented a point system for granting visas to migrants, scoring factors such as age, knowledge of the Czech language, education, and work experience. The maximum number of points is 66, and in order to be considered for a work permit, a migrant candidate has to collect at least 25 points.

70. Public opinion remains to evolve in support of a pro-active immigration policy. In fact, the Czech immigration policy is largely based on the premise that it will create a beneficial trade-off. Economists have estimated that every job opening given to a foreigner, would create two open positions for Czech nationals.

VII.       Cooperation between host countries and countries of origin

71. Any policy on labour migration, requires that migration flows are managed in cooperation with the countries of origin and transit, taking into account their reality and needs.

72. Over the past decades, many countries in Europe have resorted to a wide variety of labour recruitment schemes to help address labour shortage problems. For example, western European countries including Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland, have in the past concluded a series of bilateral agreements with Ireland, southern Europe (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain), Turkey, the former Yugoslavia and North Africa. Today, a number of southern European countries are in turn developing bilateral agreements with countries of Central and Eastern Europe in order to regulate better the migration flows and to combat irregular migration.

73. Most common categories of bilateral labour agreements cover: seasonal work; contract workers and project-linked worker agreements; guest workers schemes in Germany which have more recently shifted from general recruitment mechanisms to skilled professional training schemes; trainee agreements for young workers or students; and cross-border worker agreements. The above categories reflect the increasingly temporary nature of labour migration in Europe.

74. In terms of impact assessment, OECD17 research shows that seasonal workers do not necessarily have a job when they return back home and in most cases rely on the next contract abroad. Project-related migration on the other hand has very positive outcomes both for the immigration and emigration countries as it facilitates the exchange of know-how, increases knowledge of standards in the EU markets and competitiveness, and it maintains the link between workers and the local employer once the contracts abroad are completed.

75. While bilateral labour agreements are by far the most widespread method of recruiting mostly low skilled workers or trainees, other forms of labour recruitment have emerged to fill in the gaps in specific sectors of the labour market (sector-based schemes) or to attract the highly skilled individuals and entrepreneurs (skill-based schemes). According to the OECD18, such schemes allow for more flexibility within existing administrative immigration systems in order to adapt quickly to labour market needs.

76. The Rapporteur insists on involving social partners in this process on both receiving and sending side in order to make sure that such cooperation is beneficial for all parties, and in particular, that it applies the effective protection of workers’ rights and ethical recruitment (minimising youth and brain drain), while avoiding social dumping and unfair competition.

77. The involvement of employers, NGOs, trade unions, private recruitment agencies and other related groups in the design and implementation of labour recruitment schemes also helps to speed up the recruitment process, to increase efficiency and lower administrative costs. On the other hand, the example of Romania shows that by maintaining the overall responsibility of government authorities for the recruitment scheme, such mechanism guarantees better protection of workers, lower cost for the beneficiaries (workers and employers) and greater control over the performance of employers (limiting abuse and exploitation)

78. Non governmental advocacy organisations (NGOs) can play a very important role both in receiving and sending countries, by organising language training, helping out with selection procedures, and providing migrants with information on the destination country (e.g. culture, labour market, migrants’ rights). In Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, and Romania, such organisations protect the interests of migrant workers and provide information to recruitment agencies, foreign employers and migrant workers. Some organisations have also opened offices in the receiving country (mainly in Germany). In Hungary, advocacy NGOs go as far as to assist national companies engaged in contractual work abroad in verifying that they operate in a fair competitive environment in the host country.

79. In recent years, employer organisations have begun to support and conduct training programmes in countries of origin, in order to better prepare migrant workers for employment abroad. In Italy for example the employers were involved in funding vocational training for nurses in Romania. In some cases, regions can have more autonomy in recruitment co-operation in the absence of bilateral agreements. For example, to ensure support of its regional tourist sector, the Trento-Alto-Adige region in Italy posted its staff in Italian consulates in Central Europe to monitor administrative procedures in distributing seasonal work permits. Certain regions in Italy provide a leading example in merging regional and rural development with immigration goals.

80. Another innovative example, the Agricultural Workers Solidarity Foundation based in Barcelona recruits seasonal workers directly in the sending country (Romania) for selected employers in Spain. In addition, the organisation promotes the development in the country of origin by educating seasonal workers on entrepreneurship and management and in some cases by supporting development-oriented work upon their return.

81. The above illustrates that the nature of bilateral agreements has been evolving over the years, through a broadening of their scope, implementation and institutional frameworks, to become a very useful tool for international co-operation. They have potential of helping to better regulate migration flows, to combat illegal employment and to protect human rights. They address a broad spectrum of economic and political issues. Some labour recruitment agreements between sending and receiving countries, have even been introduced as an incentive for emigration countries to improve the management of migration outflow pressures.

82. Yet in terms of poverty reduction, unemployment and development prospects, such recruitment schemes alone can not be expected to significantly alter the socio-economic situation in the emigration countries. The rapid outflow of skilled workers, with the risks of a brain and youth drain, seriously undermines coherence between migration and development policies.

83. In recent years, co-development policies have emerged in response to such challenge in Europe, and worldwide, with the view to reduce the development gap and pressures of migration outflows by making sure that migration and other accompanying measures contribute to the development of countries of origin. Emigration countries have the potential to benefit from the increased mobility of workers; from new business relations between regions or at the level of small and medium enterprise (SMEs); from the economic investments and better use of remittances; through brain gain of skilled persons, retirees and seasonal workers.

84. However, this potential could be only achieved if there is a sustained political will and cooperation at all levels. The emigration countries in Central and Eastern Europe have on the one hand the responsibility to create conditions for investment (more transparency in administration and the effective rule of law; macro-economic conditions, infrastructure, etc.). Countries of the European Union could in turn, through bilateral and multilateral co-operation or EU neighbourhood policy, provide adequate technical and financial assistance to facilitate the necessary reforms.

85. To give an example, most countries of origin do not have specific policies in place for returning migrants (voluntary and non voluntary return). The Rapporteur considers that countries of origin should help the returnees to re-integrate in the local labour market by certification of skills gained abroad and recognition of foreign diplomas; governments should also encourage entrepreneurship by providing financial and technical assistance regarding business opportunities. In order to improve the overall economic prospects and to succeed in such re-integration programmes, countries of origin would need the financial and technical support from former host countries with which they are signing readmission agreements.

86. The issue of co-operation between host countries and countries of origin merits to be developed further through research and political action. The Rapporteur refers to Resolution 1462 (2005) and Recommendation 1718 (2005)19 of the Parliamentary Assembly and to the ongoing work of the European Committee on Migration (CDMG)20, and would warmly welcome the decision to focus the theme of the next European Ministers Conference on Migration (scheduled for 2007/2008 in Ukraine) on labour migration and co-development.


VIII.       Perspectives

87. Through increased investment and trade over the medium term, living standards in Central and Eastern Europe should gradually approach Western European levels, therefore diminishing the economic incentive for emigration. Experience shows that significant emigration comes to a halt once the country of origin reaches 60-70% of the living standards in the destination region. Slovenia already achieves more than 70% of the average per capita income in Western Europe, while Czech Republic has more than 60%. Hungary is expected to reach that level by 2010 and Slovak Republic by 2012. Only Poland will take longer, until 2015 to reach 50%21.

88. Moreover, the demographic situation in Central and Eastern Europe is similar to that of the Western Europe. Fertility levels are in some cases even lower than the EU average, while mortality has increased especially in Eastern Europe, with a consequence of a decreasing population trend in the next 30 to 40 years. As a result, the employment chances for younger and better-educated people will increase. Based on this trend IOM research studies22 predict a decrease in the potential for emigration.

89. However, in the short-medium term, countries of Central and Eastern Europe will have to cope with the negative effects of youth and brain drain. The survey of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions23 indicates radical changes in the migrants’ profile over the last decade. Migration from acceding or new EU member states is made up of young, well-educated people, students still in third level of education, and single people below 40. In Bulgaria and Romania, youth drain may represent 5-10% of the youngest age group in the next five years. The same study also indicates an increasing feminisation of migration.

90. In addition, two thirds of all working migration from Central and Eastern Europe is likely to be temporary, and significant return migration might be expected if the economic and social conditions improve in the countries of origin.

91. If living conditions and wage disparities are no longer strong incentives to move and the principle of free movement of persons will be applied, an important factor for working migration will be the level of mobility of people. The experience of EU-15 shows that only 5.5 million citizens (1.5% of the total population) have opted to settle in another country. Even at national level most European countries do not demonstrate geographical mobility: in Italy and Spain, migration rates average about 0.5% of the regional population. In the Netherlands and Germany, migration is almost three times as high, but it is still considerably lower than in the United States, or Australia24.

IX.       Conclusion

92. Contrary to the public debate and fears of massive immigration flows to Western Europe, east-west migration turned out to be relatively modest, representing less than 1% share of the labour force. Germany, Austria and to some extent Italy, Spain and Portugal attract most migrant workers from Central and Eastern Europe.

93. Though low skilled migration persists, the profile of migration is changing compared to past migration flows from South Europe. Working migrants are increasingly well-educated, young and single, therefore representing less welfare burden for the host countries. Their stay is less permanent (only one third registers for permanent settlement), may involve circular migration or regular returns to home country, and varies in nature (study, employment).

94. While the host countries in Western Europe will increasingly benefit from young, dynamic and skilled work force, countries of origin, particularly non-EU countries are faced with serious effects of youth and brain drain.

95. Given the application of stricter and more selective immigration policies in Western Europe, Central and Eastern European countries are confronted with an increasingly complex situation with regard to migration, having to manage youth and brain drain as well as pressures of illegal immigration from outside Europe (Asia, Africa). With the exception of Czech Republic, where selective immigration policy has been introduced to respond to economic needs, other countries in the region are struggling to cope with the new and complex situation often lacking knowledge and resource for effective migration management.

96. It would be therefore crucial to set up assistance programmes helping countries in Central and Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, particularly non-EU members, to develop proactive migration policies in order to effectively respond to the current migration trends. The migration management strategy developed by the European Committee on Migration (CDMG) could be of great benefit if elaborated and implemented in those countries in conjunction with financial assistance programmes from the European Union (neighbourhood policy) and from individual member states through bilateral or regional co-operation.

97. Finally, in order to develop comprehensive forward looking labour migration policies at national level and to co-ordinate them at European level, it is necessary to develop harmonised data which would reflect more accurately not only the volume and regional distribution of labour migration, but also different types of labour migration and migrant profiles. Governments would also need to work more closely with social partners and NGOs, and conduct surveys in order to have a better insight to the nature and estimated volume of irregular migration. The above data is necessary to take into account when developing future policies with regard to economy, employment, migration, social welfare and integration.


Appendix 1

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

Source : Eurostat

Appendix 4

Source :        Council of Europe “Current trends in international migration in Europe”

CDMG (2005)2, January 2005

* * *

Reporting committee: Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population.

Reference to committee: Doc. 10059, Ref. 2954, 26.4.2004.

Draft resolution and draft recommendation unanimously adopted by the Committee on 23 January 2006.

Members of the Committee: Mr Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu (Chairperson), Mrs Tana de Zulueta (1st Vice-Chairperson), Mr Doros Christodoulides 2nd Vice-Chairperson), Mr Jean-Guy Branger (3rd Vice-Chairperson), Mr Pedro Agramunt, Mrs Lale Akgün, Mr Gulamhuseyn Alibeyli, Mr Akhmed Bilalov, Mrs Mimount Bousakla, Mr Paul Bradford, Mr Ivan Brajović, Mr Márton Braun, Lord Burlison, Mr Christopher Chope, Mr Dessislav Chukolov, Mr Boriss Cilevičs, Mrs Minodora Cliveti, Mrs Elvira Cortajarena, Mr Franco Danieli, Mr Joseph Debono Grech, Mr Taulant Dedja, Mr Nikolaos Dendias, Mr Abilio Dias Fernandes, Mr Karl Donabauer (alternate: Mr Ewald Lindinger), Mr Mats Einarsson, Mrs Lydie Err, Mr Valeriy Fedorov, Mrs Daniela Filipiová, Mr Karl Theodor Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg, Mrs Margrét Frimannsdóttir, Mrs Gunn Karin Gjul, Mr John Greenway, Mr Andrzej Grzesik (alternate: Mr Piotr Gadzinowski), Mr Andrzej Grzyb, Mr Ali Riza Gülçiçek, Mr Michael Hagberg, Mr Doug Henderson, Mrs Jelena Hoffmann, Mr Ilie Ilaşcu, Mr Tadeusz Iwiński, Mrs Corien W.A. Jonker (alternate: Mr Ed van Thijn), Mr Oleksandr Karpov, Mrs Eleonora Katseli, Mr Tibor Kékesi, Mr Dimitrij Kovačič, Mr Petr Lachnit, Mr Geert Lambert, Mr Jean-Marie Le Guen, Mr Younal Loutfi (alternate: Mrs Iliana Yotova), Mr Tito Masi, Mr Jean-Pierre Masseret, Mrs Ana Catarina Mendonça, Mr Morten Messerschmidt (alternate: Mr Morten Østergaard), Mr Giuseppe Naro, Mr Xhevdet Nasufi, Mr Gebhard Negele, Mr Pasquale Nessa, Mr Kalevi Olin, Mr İbrahim Özal, Mr Cezar Florin Preda, Mr Alojz Přidal, Mr Gabino Puche, Mr Milorad Pupovac, Mr Martin Raguž, Mr Anatoliy Rakhansky, Mr Marc Reymann, Mr Branko Ružić, Mrs Katrin Saks, Mrs Naira Shakhtakhtinskaya, Mr Luzi Stamm, Mrs Terezija Stoisits, Mr Michael Stübgen, Mrs Elene Tevdoradze, Mr Tigran Torosyan, Mrs Ruth-Gaby Vermot-Mangold, Mr Akhmar Zavgayev, Mr Vladimir Zhirinovsky (alternate: Mrs Vera Oskina), Mr Emanuelis Zingeris, ZZ………., Netherlands, (alternate : Mr Leo Platvoet).

N.B. The names of the members who took part in the meeting are printed in bold.

Secretaries of the Committee: Mr Halvor Lervik, Mr Mark Neville, Ms Dana Karanjac


1 World Migration Report 2005, International Organization for Migration (IOM)

2 Council of Europe, “Current Trends in International Migration in Europe”, CDMG (2005)2, January 2005

3 Council of Europe, National Statistical Offices, OECD SOPEMI Correspondents

4 reference year 2001 or latest year available

5 OECD, Trends in International migration 2004, data mainly for the period 2001-2003.

6 “Migration trends in Eastern Europe and Central Asia : 2001-02 review”, IOM, Geneva

7 Research Institute of Statistics, Minsk

8 Case study paper “Belarus – EU: migration trends” presented by Mrs Shakhotko, Deputy Director of the Research Institute of Statistics, Minsk, Belarus

9 Differences in the levels of the minimum monthly wages are however markedly reduced when expressed in purchasing power standards (PPS), removing differences in price levels between the countries.

10 Eurostat data for 2005.

11 “Migration trends in an enlarged Europe”, European Foundation for the improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Dublin, 2004.

12 “Accession monitoring report : May 2004 – September 2005”, a joint report by the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions, the HM Revenue & Customs and the Office of the Deputy PM, United Kingdom, 22 November 2005

13 New EU member states with transition agreements on restriction of labour mobility (2004 Accession countries except Cyprus and Malta).

14 Commission of the European Communities : COM(2004)811 final.

15 Commission of the European Communities : COM(2005) 669 final, 21.12.2005 and annex SEC(2005)1680.

16 Elena Gelovska, Dnevnik Daily Online edition, 18 April 2004 : http://www.dnevnik.bg/show/Default.asp?storyid=116491

17 “Migration for employment : bilateral agreements at a crossroads », OECD publication, 2004.

18 Idem.

19 PACE Resolution 1462 (2005) “Co-development policy as a positive measure to regulate migratory flows”; Recommendation 1718 (2005) “Co-development policy as a positive measure to regulate migratory flows”.

20 “Towards a management strategy for migration flows – taking more account of emigration countries’ interests and improving co-operation between immigration countries and countries of origin », MG-PE (2005)24, Select Committee of Experts on countries of emigration MG-R-PE.

21 International Centre for Migration Policy Development ICMPD, Vienna.

22 “EU enlargement and future east-west migration”, H. Fassmann and R. Muenz in IOM (ed) New challenges for migration policy in Central and Eastern Europe, Geneva, 2002.

23 ”Migration trends in an enlarged Europe”, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2004.

24 OECD working paper N°438, “the effects of EMU on structural reforms in labour market and product markets”, July 2005.