Minority Rights Now Issue 10 by Nicem Ni

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 1

Minority Rights Now ISSUE 10 2013 ISSN2042-3942

What is

citizenship?

JULIE LOTZ : "Snapshot Europe!" © Assembly of European Regions

Language is important: Our Mythbusters look at the language of ‘citizens’ – how it’s used and misused

Rhetoric vs. reality Migration and citizenship in a global age

European Year of the Citizens: dedicated to the rights of EU citizens, What the EU does for you and how you can get involved

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 2

Our Editorial Board Professor Tomoya Obokata, Keele University Tom Obokata is Professor of International Law and Human Rights at Keele University. His expertise lies in human rights aspects of migration, particularly trafficking of human beings. He has extensive research and consultancy experience on the subject and currently advises the Northern Ireland Assembly All Party Group on Human Trafficking.

Dr Rebekah Delsol, Open Society Justice Initiative Dr. Rebekah Delsol coordinates the Open Society Justice Initiative’s project on “Ethnic Profiling.” Rebekah completed her doctoral studies in sociology at the University of Warwick with a thesis examining the utility of the concept of institutional racism in explaining racial disparities in stop and search practice in four police forces in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Dr Rory O’Connell, Queen’s University Belfast Rory O’Connell is a senior lecturer in the School of Law / Human Rights Centre at Queen’s University Belfast. Rory teaches and publishes on human rights and equalitylaw, as well as constitutional law. In February 2013 Rory will be taking up the post of Professor of Human Rights and Constitutional Law at the Transitional Justice Institute / School of Law, University of Ulster.

Goretti Horgan, University of Ulster Goretti Horgan is a well-known activist and lecturer in social policy at the University of Ulster, Jordanstown. From 2005 – 2008 she was the Chair of the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network, and still sits on the board. Goretti is a campaigner for women’s rights, children’s rights and the rights of disabled people.

Kevin Doherty, Irish Congress of Trade Unions

Phil Mawhinney Phil is the Policy & Participation Officer at Community Action Southwark where he provides policy support to the 2,000 voluntary and community organisations in the ethnically diverse south London borough of Southwark. He was previously a researcher at the race equality think-tank the Runnymede Trust, where he investigated ethnic inequalities among older black and minority ethnic people. Phil is originally from Belfast, stuyding Human Geography at Queen's University and the University of Edinburgh.

Our Editorial Team Elizabeth Nelson, Parliamentary and Campaigns Officer, NICEM Sophie Romantzoff, Community Development Officer, NICEM Helena Macormac, Strategic Advocacy Project Manger, NICEM Patrick Yu, Executive Director, NICEM Karen McLaughlin, Legal Policy Officer, NICEM Jennifer McCurry, Policy Intern, NICEM Meriem Naïli, Policy Intern, NICEM

Kevin Doherty works for the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, Migrant Workers Support Unit, which provides advice and representation to migrant workers on employment relatd matters, exposes mistreatment of migrant workers, campaigns for legislative reform and improvement in the service to migrant workers from statutory bodies, challenges racist attitudes in the workplace and promotes inclusion.

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 3

From the Editor

his year is the European Union ‘Year of the Citizen,’ and we are celebrating this by devoting the summer edition of Minority Rights Now to the various notions, practices and ideas of citizenship. ‘Citizenship’ is a funny word. It’s one of those words that means different things to different people, at different times. And yet, it’s also a legal term, and has a very de!inite legal meaning, which in turn has an impact on legislation and policy-making. How is this word ‘citizen’ de!ined in our daily lives, and how do we practice it? Can we ‘do citizenship’ if we are not legally a citizen of a place – if we are an international student, a permanent resident, an asylum seeker? In this edition of Minority Rights Now, our authors and contributors try to answer these questions – and pose several more. Our interns take centre stage, with Jenny McCurry exploring how domestic workers have been !ighting for their rights in the UK, and rede!ining the notion of active citizenship in the process; and Meriem Naili examining the ins and outs of David Cameron’s recent speech on immigration, and how it could have deep impacts on a wide range of policy areas. Ms. Naili also had the opportunity to interview the European Commission’s Head of Of!ice in Belfast, and look at various cultural initiatives in Belfast. We are privileged to have an article from Dr. Rory O’Connell of the Transitional Justice Institute (and also of MRN’s Editorial Board)

examining the notion of participation in European Human Rights Law. NICEM’s Legal Policy Of!icer Karen McLaughlin also contributes several pieces examining the more technical side of European citizenship, and what rights EU citizens have, while Development Of!icer Felice Kiel looks at the changing notions of citizenship and globalization, and I look at how immigration rules affect family life in a changing global landscape. This edition is meant to be the start of a conversation around citizenship and participation. We hope you enjoy it, and we hope to hear more from you on our blog .

Elizabeth Nelson, Editor

‘Citizenship’ is a funny word. It’s one of those words that means different things to different people, at different times. And yet, it’s also a legal term, and has a very definite legal meaning, which in turn has an impact on legislation and policy-making. How is this word ‘citizen’ defined in our daily lives, and how do we practice it?

In this Issue

3 .............................................Editorial – Where are we now? 4..........................Community Focus: Agnieszka Luczak, Polish Abroad 5....................................................................News 6 ...............................................Citizenship, arts and culture

Features

8 ...................................Relationships with places: I am a citizen 9 ..........................................Human Rights and Participation 14 .............Immigration Hysteria: the Consequences of Cameron’s Speech Policy 18 ...........................................Citizenship and Globalisation

7 ..............Policy Focus:What does the European Union do for its citizens? Politics 16.......................................................Know Your Rights 19..........................................A Bird’s Eye View Of… Stormont 19......................................................News From the Hill 19 .......................................A Bird’s Eye View of… Westminster Next Issue: On 17 July, the UK government will face the Committee for the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). NICEM will be there as well, presenting our shadow report and highlighting the needs and concerns of black and minority ethnic women in Northern Ireland. The next edition of the magazine will focus on the intersectionality of being minority ethnic and a woman in Northern Ireland, exploring different facets and raising awareness of the issues involved, as well as what it’s like to make your voice heard at an international level.To get in touch, email elizabeth@nicem.org.uk, or head on over to our blog and get involved in the conversation there: http://minorityrightsnow.wordpress.com

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 4

CommunityFocus

Agnieszka Luczak, Polish Abroad

olish Abroad was established in October 2008 as a response to the lack of representation and support for Polish nationals living in the NorthWest of Northern Ireland. Members of the organisation come from Derry/Londonderry as well as Limavady, Strathfoyle, Eglinton, Dungiven, Strabane and County Donegal. From the very beginning the organisation has been run and supported by volunteers. Our aims… • Bringing together members of the Polish community, developing its identity as well as promoting inclusion with people from different ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds. • Raising awareness among the wider community of the socio-economic, environmental and cultural impact of the community in the region. • Contributing to community development • Promoting integration and good relations between minority ethnic people and the indigenous community through projects/events/initiatives. • Working towards identifying the needs of the community and responding to them accordingly.

Our projects…

Our main, longest running and biggest project is the Polish Abroad Saturday School (PASS) that has been running successfully for the last four years. The project is facilitated by Polish Abroad and primarily bene!its children with Polish roots. The rationale behind it is the fact that Polish children living in NI and attending local schools have little understanding of written Polish as well as Polish culture, history, geography and identity. We believe that in today’s world multiculturalism and nurturing identity are of immense importance, and therefore we believe that being able to read and write in one’s native language is crucial in order to keep communication with extended family and make sure they have skills for later employment or/and return visits to Poland. Apart from the school the organisation has developed and run English classes, a Solicitor’s Clinic, summer youth camps, information sessions and cultural events. We have also participated in a number of local initiatives organised by other organisations in the region as well as Derry City Council. Polish Abroad attends the All Party Group

Balloon modelling/decoupage workshops & Taste the World event at the Tower Museum, Derry on Saturday 19 May 2012. Event organised by Polish Abroad www.polishabroad.co.uk

We believe that through the implementation of various projects and the development of skills within the organisation and the community, a increasingly confident Polish community will create a stronger basis from which Polish Abroad will be able to tackle such issues as racism, discrimination, inequality and exclusion on Ethnic Minority Communities (APG on EMC) meetings in Stormont, having become a member of the Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minorities (NICEM) in 2012. Additionally, knowing how important good management of a non-pro!it organisation is, we are currently working with NICEM’s North-West Development Of!icer on the implementation of the quality assurance system PQASSO. We aim to be able to demonstrate the quality of our work in order to bid successfully for future funding.

We believe that through the implementation of various projects and the development of skills within the organisation and the community, a increasingly con!ident Polish community will create a stronger basis from which Polish Abroad will be able to tackle such issues as racism, discrimination, inequality and exclusion. The Polish School and various cultural events are key in being able to do this and to build the capacity, interest, understanding and community spirit within the Polish Community to meet these requests positively. If not us.... who? If not now... when? If not together... how?

You can !ind us on Facebook /www.facebook.com/polishabroad.derry or www.polishabroad.co.uk or you can contact us on info@polishabroad.co.uk or +44 (0)7955322122

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 5

News UK habitual residence test illegal, says European Commission

The UK is being taken to the Court of Justice of the European Union over the additional test it applies to EU migrants applying for bene!its. It is argued that this additional test breaches EU law. According to the Huf!ingtonPostUK and the BBC, Iain Duncan Smith has ‘vowed to !ight’ the European Commission. Adam Weiss, Legal Director of the AIRE Centre, who originally brought the complaint to the Commission, said on BBC Radio 4: "The problem is that there is an extra test which the UK applies. British and Irish citizens always pass this so-called right to reside test but other EU citizens do not always pass that test and as a result they are often refused certain bene!its in circumstances where British citizens and Irish

citizens would receive them. "What EU law says is that in relation to these bene!its, discrimination based on nationality is prohibited so it is not fair, it is not lawful, to discriminate, to favour British and Irish citizens on the one hand and to discriminate against citizens of other EU member states on the other hand." Peter Lilley, the former conservative minister who introduced the habitual residence test and is now a member of David Cameron’s policy board, said the Commission was ‘inserting itself’ into treaties beyond its competence. He said the new action by the Commission would ‘strengthen’ David Cameron’s case to repatriate powers from the EU.

The UK-born baby of Bangladeshi migrants who had overstayed their visa was !inally given lifechanging surgery at the end of April, after two weeks of publicity reversed the hospital’s original decision. Sanika Ahmed was born with Erb’s Palsy, which caused nerve damage to her right hand, in Portsmouth in July 2012. She needed to have surgery on the arm by the age of nine months, or the damage was at risk of becoming permanent. According to the BBC, Sanika’s parents were told that because of the NHS rules on overseas patients, the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital in Middlesex, where Sanika was being treated, could only offer the surgery if the family paid for it. The Ahmeds moved to the UK in 2008, where Muhammad Ahmed worked legally until 2009. Muhammad and his wife Syeda Ahmed, both from

Bangladesh, engaged solicitors Swain &Co to pursue a judicial review after the hospital’s refusal to treat Sanika. However, the hospital reversed its decision before the review could take place. The hospital’s interpretation of the NHS rules on overseas patients is questionable. While certain overseas patients do have to pay for healthcare, Sanika was born in the UK, and is therefore entitled to treatment under the NHS, regardless of her parents’ status. Unfortunately this interpretation of the rules by the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital is not an isolated case, and the publicity this particular case has received highlights the need for better awareness and training for NHS staff on what the rules around healthcare and immigration actually are.

No longer will the ‘Life in the UK’ test, compulsory for settlement and citizenship applications, test applicants’ knowledge of train timetables, the welfare system, and rules of the road. Today’s aspiring citizens will have to demonstrate knowledge of the Beatles, the Battle of Trafalgar, and the Bard - and get it at least 75% correct. The new test, introduced in January 2013, is part of the government’s pledge to reduce net migration, and has already come under heavy criticism for its focus on “identi!ication with elite views of British culture and history,” as described by Don Flynn, director of the Migrant Rights Network. “It takes us a long way from the goal of supporting the integration of migrants,” he said. The 180 page syllabus, defended by the Home Of!ice as focusing on events and people that made modern Britain great, requires knowledge of "artistic achievements, from medieval stained glass to David Hockney, our national love of gar-

dening, and the work of in!luential architects".

Sanika Ahmed

Becoming British: Home Office introduces new citizenship test Also coming under !ire is the syllabus and the test’s treatment of critical historical events. The decolonization of India and Pakistan, for example, makes no mention of the million people who died during the British withdrawal in 1947. The section on the Thatcher years makes no mention of the miners’ strike, and sections on the previous Labour government put forward the idea that support for trade unions is slacking in the UK in general. According to the Guardian, “the textbook bears the hallmark of the campaign by the education secretary, Michael Gove, for a more traditional, linear approach to history teaching, and looks set to face criticism for possible bias.”

The Queen and the Immigrants In May, Queen Elizabeth II delivered the Queen’s Speech, a traditional address to Parliament that outlines the areas in which the current government will focus its work in the coming months. One of the biggest headlines from this particular Queen’s Speech was new immigration measures, which purportedly aim to “ensure that this country attracts people who will contribute and deters those who will not” (Queen’s Speech). In particular, private landlords will now have responsibility for ‘vetting’ new tenants under new measures announced. They will be legally responsible for checking the immigration status of potential tenants. Those who fail to do so face !ines worth thousands of pounds. According to the Residential Landlord Association, “whilst immigration rules need to be enforced effectively, the reality is that tenants living in the UK legally will see rents rise as letting agents ramp up fees to cover the costs of further checks on tenants and to cover the greater risks new laws will bring.” This will surely squeeze the vulnerable and disadvantaged, both migrants and settled, as already expensive rents are likely to increase.

Stockholm burning

The recent spate of riots in several disadvantaged and largely immigrant neighbourhoods in the Swedish capital question how the country is coping with high youth unemployment and an in!lux of migration in a country better known for its welfare system and social justice initiatives. The riots, centered in the largely immigrant neighborhood of Husby, seem to have been triggered by the police killing of a 69 year-old man earlier in May, prompting allegations of police brutality. According to the Guardian, “After decades of the "Swedish model" of generous welfare bene!its, Sweden has been reducing the role of the state since the 1990s, spurring the fastest growth in inequality of any advanced OECD economy.” The Aftonbladet, a left-leaning major newspaper in Sweden, says the riots represent a failure of government policies, and failure to give those living in disadvantaged neighborhoods any hope for future. Rami al-Khamisi, a law student and founder of local youth organization Megafonen, talking to the Swedish edition of online newspaper The Local, said that the riots were a reaction to decades of marginalization and segregation within Swedish society, on both a class and race basis. Al-Khamisi said that teenagers in the neighborhood had been called ‘monkeys’ by police, and he himself had also experienced racial abuse by police in the area. The riots in Sweden seem to bear a close resemblance to those that took place across the UK in 2010, primarily in London. There too was the narrative about communities left behind, experiencing racism on a day-to-day basis, sparked by police brutality.

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 6

Citizenship, arts

and culture C Meriem Naïli, NICEM, Policy Intern

itizenship and identity seem to be common topics for art exhibitions, award and festivals in the UK in general and Northern Ireland in particular. Creating and participating in cultural events is one of the ways in which we can participate in society at large, and create a sense of belonging in a new place. Over the past few weeks, many events have taken place in Belfast in light of identity, culture and citizenship. “Identity and places” is an exhibition that took place at the Red Barn Gallery in Belfast between 7th of March and 11th of April 2013. Using art in various forms, local and international artists discussed topics around identity that are not always easy to address. It is a physical (as well as online) platform for discussion, which challenges us to examine who we are and how our identities are interlinked with our surroundings The ‘Culture For All’ programme will bring children and adults together to enjoy a range of community based arts and culture activities that link to the UK City of Culture. As the City of Culture, Derry/Londonderry will play host throughout 2013 to a yearlong celebration of culture for local people and visitors from around the world. In March, St Mary’s Primary School on Divis Street, Belfast, received a grant of £8,782 through the ‘Culture for All’ funding programme, funded by the Arts Council of Northern Ireland and the Big Lottery Fund in partnership with the Culture Company 2013. The grant will fund the creation of a mosaic depicting the cultural life of children at the school, which is home to children from a wide range of cultural and ethnic backgrounds. The project aims to provide these children with the opportunity to celebrate their own cultural traditions and cultures and share them with the wider community. Throughout the country, the !ight against racism is also happening through music. The ‘Love Music Hate Racism’ movement was set up in 2002 in response to rising levels of racism /fascism connected to the British National Party (BNP) in the run-up to the elections in the UK. Using the energy of the music scene to celebrate diversity, the aim is also to involve people in anti-racist activities and mobilise them to combat racist attitudes. Hundreds of events have been organized in the UK over the past 10 years: outdoors festivals, local gigs, club nights, - every place, every room becomes a hotbed for resistance against racism and every sound is a voice for peace. The Arts Council of Northern Ireland have just completed a second round of funding as part of a three year Intercultural Arts Programme that works to provide funding to minority ethnic communities and artists. Three hundred thousand pounds has been committed to this ongoing programme, highlighting the need to promote cultural pluralism, develop good relations and tackle racism within and between communities and their cultures.

Mosney Reception Centre Butlins dining room ANTHONY HAUGHEY, from the exhibition Citizen, shown at the Millennium Court Arts Centre in Portadown

At the Millennium Court Arts Centre in Portadown, artist Anthony Haughey’s mixed media exhibition tackled the concept of ‘citizenship’ directly - inviting its audience to take the British citizenship test as part of their experience of a collection of confrontational visual documents that re!lect the migrant experience of ‘Fortress Europe’. The exhibition worked to challenge negative stereotypes of migrants whilst allowing those who contributed to the creation of the work to reclaim their agency as what Gormley terms ‘informal citizens’. ‘Citizen’ ran during April and May as a cross-border collaboration with Highlanes Gallery in Drogheda. Many local community groups also organise their own cultural events. Polish Abroad, pro!iled in

this edition of Minority Rights Now, regularly organises cultural events in the Derry/Londonderry area, encouraging not only the Polish community but the rest of the community as well, to get involved and learn about the cultural backgrounds of the neighbours, making it into something they can all share. These are just a few of the many cultural activities taking place across Northern Ireland. Culturebased events create space for participation for those who may not be able to get involved in political processes, but also for those seeking to build belonging and shared space with their neighbours, as we seek to collectively move forward towards a shared society.

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 7

What does the European Union do for its citizens? Karen McLaughlin, Legal Policy Officer, NICEM

Policy Focus

European Parliament

DIRECTLY ELECTS

(Most democratic institution)

Court of Justice of the EU

(National courts refer cases for clarification on EU law)

Citizens

MAKE SURE NATIONAL COURTS IMPLEMENTING EU LAW PROPERLY

CITIZENS WORK FOR ALL

European Commission

(Key for policy development)

GOVERNEMNT REPRESENTS NATIONAL INTERESTS OF CITIZENS

2013 is the European Year of the Citizens. According to the European Commission the year is to “dedicated to the rights that come with EU citizenship”. Some of those rights have been outlined in the ‘Know Your Rights’ section of this magazine. The purpose of this article is to give an overview of what the relationship is between European institutions and its citizens with reference to some key pieces of law and policy. At the time of writing the European Union had 27 Member States (but this will soon become 28 when Croatia becomes an official member in July 2013). Under EU law, citizens of any Member State are also citizens of the European Union.

Council of the European Union

(Member States have their say)

The law – ʻCitizenʼs Directiveʼ 2004

In 2004, the EU introduced a law, which aimed to consolidate the pre-existing piecemeal approach to free movement in the EU. All Member States had to give effect to this law but they had some discretion as to how the law would translate into their national legal frameworks. Therefore, while the aim was to simplify the law, it has probably complicated things in some circumstances. Nevertheless, the Directive itself makes some very strong statements about the importance of citizenship within the Union: “Citizenship of the Union confers on every citizen of the Union a primary and individual right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States … The free movement of persons constitutes one of the fundamental freedoms of the internal market … Union citizenship should be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States when they exercise their right of free movement and residence”.

The policy – EU citizens: Your rights, your future 2013

As already mentioned above, the European Commission is the institution primarily responsible for policy development. The Commission carries out work speci!ically in relation to citizen’s lives, which includes: children’s rights, data protection, disability issues, EU citizen’s rights, fundamental rights, tackling discrimination and social inclusion. As part of the European Year on Citizen’s the Commission has produced a report, which states “citizens are and must be at the heart of European integration”. In that report the Commission also commits to undertaking 12 actions in the next two years, which have been designed to “make citizens lives easier”.

ACTION 1

ACTION 7

Plans to revise social security laws and look into extending benefits to make it easier for ci!zens to look for a job in another EU country.

Strengthen laws rela!ng to ci!zens' rights when they are suspected or accused in criminal proceedings.

ACTION 2

ACTION 8

Help young EU ci!zens develop their skills and enter the labour market by developing a quality framework for traineeships.

Make it easier to se"le disputes regarding purchases in another EU country.

ACTION 3

Launch a dedicated EU-wide awareness raising campaign on consumer rights.

Work to remove bureaucra!c obstacles faced by EU ci!zens and their families when moving between Member States. ACTION 4

Take ini!a!ves to promote best tax prac!ce in cross-border situa!ons and ensure the correct applica!on of EU law. ACTION 5

Building on its work to improve EU ci!zens' safety on the roads. ACTION 6

ACTION 9

ACTION 10

Take ac!ons to ensure that local administra!ons are given the tools to fully comprehend the free movement rights of EU ci!zens. ACTION 11

Make it clearer and easier for ci!zens to know whom to turn to for their rights to be redressed by providing user-friendly guidance on its central Europa web site.

Facilitate the mobility of persons with disabili!es within the EU.

ACTION 12

Do I have to be a European citizen for European citizenship to have an impact on my life?

(i.e. persons from countries outside the EU) parents to enjoy certain rights due to the fact that their child was a European citizen. If you think any of this might apply to you, you should contact some of the institutions/resources referred to in the ‘Know Your Rights’ section of the magazine.

No. Family members of EU citizens have certain rights based on their status as family members. In addition, there has been some recent case law, which allowed so-called ‘third-country national’

Promote EU ci!zens’ awareness of their EU ci!zenship rights, par!cularly par!cipa!on rights.

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 8

Feature

Relationships with places: I am a citizen Karen McLaughlin, Legal Policy Officer, NICEM

It is commonplace to de!ine a person’s relationship with a place, particularly in this increasingly globalised world (an idea teased out in ‘Citizenship and Globalisation’ later on in this issue). This occurs frequently when Government is implementing its laws, particularly immigration law. There are a lot of different words used to describe people who have moved to another country – immigrant, expat, newcomer, foreigner – and people de!ine themselves in different ways. The Government here also tends to highlight a person’s connection with Northern Ireland when developing policies in areas such as housing, healthcare and education. For example, migrant children are often referred to as “newcomer pupils”. Sometimes Government policymakers de!ine people according to their country of origin – for example EU or a ‘third country’ – in a way that people might not de!ine themselves. It is extremely important for policy-makers to be aware of the impact of using certain labels when developing policy, as terms such as “citizen” or “resident” have a speci!ic legal meaning and legal rights !low from such categorisation. Sometimes, however, labels are used inappropriately in the development of policy and this could effectively exclude certain groups of people from access to services. For example, in a recent consultation on the future of housing in Northern Ireland, the Department for Social Development repeatedly used the word “citizen” when outlining the new policy even though the policy appeared to have universal application. Taking this at face value, it would leave out some people who are ‘permanent residents,’ but not ‘citizens.’ Since citizenship is a speci!ic legal status that confers certain legal rights onto some people living in a country, it is concerning that this word was used during the development of a policy that was meant to apply to everyone living in Northern Ireland, no matter where they come from or how they de!ine themselves.

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 9

Feature

Human Rights

and Participation

ore to the concept of citizenship is political participation; the citizen participates in making decisions that affect the community. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 recognises this as a human right. The right to participate is included in a much more circumscribed way in Article 3 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. Until the end of the Cold War, these political rights were often ignored. The end of the Cold War witnessed enormous political change across the globe. In Eastern Europe, Communist one party states adopted democratic multiparty politics; the same period saw similar military dictatorships in Latin America give way to elected governments; in South Africa the racist apartheid regime was supplanted with a government representing all the people. These processes prompted greater interest in political participation rights, including within the limited European Convention system. The European system is limited because its language is mainly concerned with the rights to vote for, and to run for election to, a legislature in a representative democracy. These limitations are important. The limitation to legislative elections means that referenda, local elections, consultative body elections and presidential elections are all probably unprotected by the European Convention. On the other hand, elections for the Assembly and the European Parliament are covered. Even when the Convention applies, its provisions deal only with representative models of democracy. In a purely representative model of democracy, the people do not exercise power directly; rather they elect a smaller number of people to represent their interests. A representative model is frequently a weak model of democracy. A representative democracy may involve an anaemic exercise whereby voters are consulted every four or !ive years on who should be the governors. This reduces democracy to a competition among political parties to acquire political power. A purely representative model may treat the electoral process as a matter of counting up interest based (or even identity based) preferences. This is worrying for minority,

Professor Rory O’Connell, University of Ulster

vulnerable or disadvantaged groups. Merely counting interests means that interests are unexamined. This may be compatible with underrepresentation of women, minority ethnic groups and other disadvantaged groups. To make political participation meaningful a human rights system needs to promote inclusion, substantive equality and participatory democracy. Inclusion requires that members of different groups be able to participate. Substantive equality requires that participation not merely be a formal opportunity but that there be meaningful participation in practice. Finally, human rights should encourage the use of participatory mechanisms as well as representative ones. In a participatory system, people can in!luence decisions directly themselves; they do not simply delegate authority to elected politicians. For these reasons, the language of the Universal Declaration is preferable to that of the European Convention. The Universal Declaration speaks of the right to take part in the government of one’s country; this goes beyond participating in elections. Other European texts also go beyond the requirements of representative democracy: see for instance the OSCE Lund Recommendations on the Effective Participation of National Minorities in Public Life or Article 15 of the Framework Convention on National Minorities. Nevertheless, the contribution of the European Convention is important. The European Court of Human Rights has used the Protocol to promote inclusion. States cannot exclude racial and ethnic minorities from running for electoral of!ice (Sejdic and Finci v Bosnia and Herzegovina); states cannot summarily exclude people with mental disabilities from voting (Alajos Kiss v Hungary); and states cannot impose a blanket ban on all convicted prisoners voting (Hirst v UK). The failure of the UK to change its rules on prisoners’ votes is unacceptable, all the more so since the European Court has moderated its case law in this area (Scoppola v Italy). The European Court’s role in promoting inclusion is welcome, but the Court could do more to promote substantive equality in the political process. Impediments to effective political participation may not take the form of formal exclusions, but may consist of social structures or practices that indirectly impede effective participation. Barriers might include the lack of affordable childcare, failure to provide language

support for ethnic minorities; electoral facilities and procedures that do not accommodate people with disabilities or registration practices that do not take account of nomadic lifestyles. These barriers need to be addressed by indirect discrimination law, positive obligations or even positive action. For example, in Northern Ireland political parties have the possibility to adopt positive action measures (such as all women shortlists) to facilitate the election of women representatives (Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002), but our local parties have declined to do so. The European Convention may not require such measures, but in some of its case law on discrimination against Roma, the Court has considered relevant issues. It has highlighted that facilitating the inclusion of Roma children in education may require a !lexible approach to formal requirements like registration (Sampanis v Greece) and also require actions to promote education among the Roma community (Oršuš and others v Croatia). One could imagine similar positive action measures in respect of minority groups. Finally, the European Convention may help promote participatory democracy as well as representative democracy. The basis for this might be Article 8, the right to respect for private and family life and one’s home. The European Court requires that certain decisions affecting one’s home and environment must be based on a process that provide information about environmental risks and allows those affected a chance to participate (Chapman v UK, Hatton v UK). Furthermore, this line of cases endorses the principle that ‘some special consideration’ should be given in regulatory frameworks to the needs and different lifestyles of minorities (Chapman v UK). In sum the European Court has carried out some welcome work in promoting inclusion in the formal representative political process, but there is potential to further develop principles of substantive equality and participatory democracy. Rory O’Connell Editorial Board of Minority Rights Now; Professor of Human Rights and Constitutional Law, Transitional Justice Institute / Law School, University of Ulster r.oconnell@ulster.ac.uk, Twitter: @rjjoconnell

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 10

The European Commission in Northern Ireland:

An Interview with Colette Fitzgerald The European Commission has Representations in all 27 EU Member States. The main Representation to the UK is in London but there are also regional Offices in Belfast, Edinburgh and Cardiff. Northern Ireland (NI) has increased its engagement with the European Union (EU) over the past few years in a variety of ways, in both the public and private sectors. As the Head of Office in Belfast, Colette Fitzgerald, together with three colleagues, works to represent the EU in NI. She agreed to answer some questions relating to integration, discrimination and citizenship. How would you describe the role of the Commission in NI? The role of the of!ice is mainly to act as a bridge between Belfast and Brussels. My job is to send information back to Brussels about political, economic and social developments in NI. Also, working the other way, my role is to bring European policies to life here and help the people, the public and the private sector in NI to !ind out more about Europe.

Concerning ethnic minorities, what is the Commission doing to promote equal opportunities and integration, and reduce discrimination in NI?

EU policies apply in all Member States. The policies can be implemented in different ways to suit local needs but the EU’s equality law applies equally throughout the Union, prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, gender, religion and so forth. I think the Commission has been very much a force for good in promoting equality. I myself can remember, when I worked in Ireland, women were obliged to resign from the civil service when they got married and that position only changed when Ireland joined the EU in 1972. If that rule still existed, I would not have the job I have now. Here in NI we have our own dif!iculties not just with meeting the needs of ethnic minority groups, but also the so-called ‘two main communities’. In order to meet that need the EU put in place a special programme called the Peace Programme, which has spent almost two billion Euros over the past 20 years, funding projects to promote better community relations, integration, respect for each other’s culture in NI.

When did the Peace Programme start?

It started in 1995 and has gone through different stages. It is unique to NI because of the dif!iculties that the region has faced and it is essential now to promote reconciliation and integration. The EU

international business. How can minorities help in that respect, i.e. to promote international business and relations? Certainly the EU is about promoting economic links and trade links, worldwide and within Europe, to make Europe competitive on the worldwide stage. However, there is a very strong social agenda in the EU, which is about promoting equality of opportunities as well as integration within the Union. Europe is attracting people from across the world because of its success and that can only be good because different cultures in Europe would be able to relate one another. For example, the Chinese people living here in NI might be able to help stimulate trade links with China and vice versa.

So basically, minority groups are a strength of the EU?

would seek to take the lessons learnt from the NI experience and replicate them elsewhere; European society is changing very fast. For example, we have seen the problems in France with riots motivated by racial tensions and the EU seeks to address all these issues by learning from experiences in different Member States.

The 8th April was the International Roma Day. How would you describe their situation (as EU citizens) in NI?

About 18 months or two years ago, there was a widely publicised incident where Roma people living in NI seemed to be the subject of racial attacks and violence. I think NI politicians were very angry at that, as it wasn’t a true picture of how people are welcomed into NI. I think minorities are welcomed in NI and I think in some way it made it clear to politicians that they should adopt a different strategy. At the EU level, there is a speci!ic strategy for the Roma people. It is important that the EU is recognising the special position of the Roma, especially in their own country where their treatment is not as ideal as it should be, and the EU is willing to try to help and resolve that and put in place a better strategy for them.

What is/are the key element(s) of integration in the society?

For me, just speaking of the Peace Programme, the European strategy – obviously integration is a matter for the national authorities – is about equality of opportunity and equality of access to services such as education for young people from ethnic minorities. The Peace Programme is underpinned by a community-based approach, which operates from the bottom up, working with communities, community workers and community liaison of!icers to develop crosscommunity relations.

When politicians refer to the EU, they often focus heavily on economic development, IT expertise and

Yes, absolutely. Here, I have strong links with the Chinese Welfare Association, and I worked with the Belfast City Council to celebrate Chinese New Year recently. This gives visibility to the Chinese community here and affords them the opportunity to show exactly what they are contributing to the local economy as well as making people aware of their contribution.

In the long run, when people see the value that minority groups bring from their ‘home country’, it helps facilitate the process of integration. They aren’t seen as people coming here, taking jobs, welfare bene!its etc. When people see the positive side of migration that makes it a lot easier for everyone. This is vital because some local people who are out of work may think that their lives are being negatively impacted upon as a result of migration. However, it is very important that we are focused on the value that ethnic minorities bring to our society.

A recently published Joseph Rowntree Foundation report points out the link between poverty and ethnicity in NI and that many ethnic minority members face barriers in translating high skills and qualifications into good quality job opportunities. Do you think that the Commission would be able to do something to improve this situation?

The European Commission creates the conditions and the regulations in Member States that offer access to employment and opportunities. For example, the EU has introduced the system of recognition of quali!ications obtained in another Member State. Therefore, if you are quali!ied as a doctor in Romania, you can practise as a doctor in Sweden, Britain or Ireland, assuming of course that you ful!il the necessary criteria that a citizen of that Member State would need to ful!il. But that is a matter for the Member States to ensure that regulations are in place. In other words, what the EU has done is to say that a doctor is a doctor, whether they are Romanian or Swedish.

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 11

Language can also be a barrier to accessing employment. What is the EU doing to promote the learning of languages? The EU is promoting a lot of international or inter-European exchanges and programmes to promote language learning. There is a strategy for minority languages that are recognised by the European Parliament. In the context of education we have the Erasmus scheme, whereby young students in one Member State go to another and study there for up to a year, learn the language as well as experiencing the culture. The EU is in favour of inter-cultural exchange and the promotion of languages.

What does the idea of citizenship mean within Europe with so many people moving back and forth within countries?

The EU is made up of 27 Member States [soon to be 28 in July, when Croatia of!icially becomes the newest Member State] and they have diverse views - even within the same country. Some people are more pro-EU and some are more sceptical about the Union. We can see the latter very strongly in the UK. Now with the recent economic and social turmoil, in particular youth unemployment, it is very important that solidarity should exist between European citizens and that the EU is there for them in terms of helping to develop the economy and to put people back into work. That is why this year was designated the European Year of Citizens – this is a clear message to show that the Union is working on the behalf of people.

Some of the EU countries are small. Without being part of the Union, they would !ind it dif!icult to compete on the world stage. Therefore, it is very important to promote the bene!its of the Union, as well as awareness of European citizenship regardless of the historical views of individual countries.

So, your conclusion would be that in such a Euro-sceptic place it is important to remember that we are all European citizens? Yes. The President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barosso, during his ‘State of the Union’ speech last year, addressed the challenges facing Europe. President Barosso said the solution to the problem lies in more Europe, not less Europe. He addressed issues speci!ically, including youth unemployment; getting everybody back into work but particularly offering young people hope. When you see the !igures in Spain or Greece, people become very demoralised and they begin to question what the EU is all about. More Europe means greater solidarity – the richer Member States would help support those who are struggling - and more integration within the Union would help to embed the idea of solidarity between citizens as Europeans.

Intimate Migrations Elizabeth Nelson, Parliamentary and Campaigns Officer, NICEM

he amount of paperwork is staggering. For some, it includes translations of documents proving who you are, like a birth certi!icate, into several different languages. For others, it involves sourcing a myriad of documents to prove that they are in a committed relationship with the person with whom they say they are in a relationship. For others, it includes proving that the income you work hard for, sometimes at more than one job, is enough to support your family, enough to allow them to join you.

Sound complicated? It is. In an increasingly mobile world, people, relationships and entire families, are stretching across the globe, setting down new roots in new places, while still trying to remain connected to the places and people that make them who they are. Because this happens in every country – because every country, no matter how large or how small, how ‘developed’ or ‘under-developed’, now sends forth its people and brings in new ones everyday – you would be forgiven for thinking that the migration rules of each of these countries would be designed to re!lect the realities of families and relationships - that they might even respect them.

But largely, you’d be wrong. The way that immigration rules – particularly family migration rules in the UK – “almost as a side effect, intervene and interfere in one of the most intimate and private spheres of a citizen’s life,”i has unfortunately become part of the new reality of having a family with someone who is not a UK national. Or, attempting to have a family in the UK, as European Union nationals.

“My !irst words to her were in English. We live in an English-speaking environment, we speak in English to her.” Elodie, a French national, has been living and working in Northern Ireland for over 10 years. She and her Polish partner, Maciej, recently had a daughter. Both EU citizens, they are both habitually resident in the UK, and since their daughter was born here, she is entitled to claim UK citizenship – as well as French and Polish citizenship. The paperwork, says Elodie, is complicated.

“She needs to have local papers – British papers – for university, things like that. We did some very long-term thinking! We went for those papers !irst, because they’re the easiest to get because she was born here. “The French and Polish papers were a lot harder, because she wasn’t born there. Plus, we’re not married.”

Elodie and Maciej had to get translated transcripts of their daughter’s birth certi!icates from the French and Polish consulates. They then have to !ill in another form to claim French or Polish passports for her. “I suppose we’re only doing it for ‘heart’ reasons – it almost doesn’t make sense to claim other papers, because she was born here. But we thought she needed to have the same papers as at least one of us just in case. Traveling with three people on three different passports might be dif!icult – that’s also the reasoning behind making sure she has both our surnames.” For Elodie and Maciej, however many translations of papers they have to get, as EU

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 12

Intimate Migrations citizens the process is arguably simpler than for many, something Elodie recognises. The French and Polish papers may have been complicated due to Elodie and Maciej’s marital status, and a bureaucracy that Elodie described as “much worse” than the British one, but the British papers were not without their demands. To claim her daughter’s British passport, Elodie had to provide proof of her earnings for the last !ive years – as well as proof that she had not claimed bene!its. She must not be a ‘burden’ on the system.

For British citizens married or partnered with a non-EEA national, the process is much more complex, and became even more burdensome in July 2012. It too bears the signs of a government obsessed not only with numbers, but with the idea of making sure a migrant does not become a ‘burden’ on the state.

Previously, sponsors had to show that after providing accommodation they had an income equivalent to the level of income support available from welfare bene!its - £5,795.40 per year (UK government !igures). The current minimum wage is £6.19, which amounts to £12,875.20. The Living Wage, calculated at £7.45 for people living across the UK outside of London amounts to an annual income of £15,496. The London Living Wage, £8.55 per hour, amounts to £17,784 yearly. Under the new rules, the sponsoring spouse or partner, a British citizen or permanent resident, is required to earn a minimum of £18,600 per year, or have savings in excess of £16,000. All of the above incomes are substantially less than the new minimum requirement for someone to sponsor a family member. While the stated aim of the new rules is to ensure that migrants will not become a burden on the taxpayer, it seems that the real aim is to reduce net migration – one of the coalition government’s key pledges.

This is even more problematic than it seems at !irst glance. Average earnings vary from region to region, and yet the minimum income requirement is static. It does not take regional earnings into consideration. According to research conducted on behalf of KPMG in October 2012, one in !ive, or 20% of the overall population of the UK would be unable to live with their non-EEA spouse or partner in the UK under the new rules.

Moreover, as NICEM submitted in its response to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Migration’s Family Migration Inquiry, the impact of the new !inancial requirement is discriminatory:

“It discriminates against migrants who have settled in the UK or naturalized as British citizens, many of whom are in lower-earning jobs, and who are unable to meet the new !inancial requirement to sponsor their non-EEA spouse… It discriminates indirectly against women [because] women typically earn less than men whilst working in the same jobs… women take on a disproportionate childcare responsibilities compared to men… [and] British/settled women wishing to return to the UK to have a baby will not be able to sponsor their husbands unless they

How then can one help but wonder if the rules reflect, not an ignorance, but a willful lack of empathy towards real people, real families? At the heart of this is the fact that the rules governing family migration have no heart, and no conscience – and the impact of this can be devastating on families. have a job offer in the UK. It will be unlikely that they will have a job offer to start within 3 months of return to the UK, if they are pregnant… [and] the prohibition of third party support discriminates against certain ethnic groups whose cultural practices involve receiving !inancial support from extended family members.”ii And of course, as detailed above, it discriminates against people living in regions of the UK where salaries are lower – for example in Northern Ireland, where salaries are the lowest compared to the rest of the UK. In general, it does not take any account of differences in costs of living in different parts of the UK. *****

Jessica is an American who has been living in Belfast for over four years with her partner, a British citizen. She has recently received her permanent residency, and was lucky enough to already have been on the settlement track when the new rules were introduced, meaning she was bound by the old settlement rules – which were not without their dif!iculties. “It was so invasive,” she said when asked about her experience of the process of application.

“I had to prove my relationship based on bank accounts and pieces of paper sent to both of us at the same address. It was someone else’s opinion on my relationship. That entire process of proving, of providing evidence, makes you feel like an outsider. It’s clinical citizenship.” “The second time around, getting permanent residency, was ok. It didn’t take as long as I thought. But I had this constant fear in the back of my mind, that what happened the !irst time would happen again.”

The settlement track, as it was before the new rules, started with a two-year probationary period, after which time you could apply to become permanent. During the application process, an applicant must surrender their and their sponsor’s (partner or spouse) passports.

A few weeks after Jessica submitted her initial application, her grandmother passed away in the U.S. She had no passport.

“I called the UKBA, and miraculously got to speak to a person. They told me I could request the return of my passport in order to travel, but it would cancel my application. If I did that, if I left the UK, I couldn’t return. I would have to submit a new application – another £500 – and be separated from my partner, and probably lose my job in the process.” *****

Under the new rules, families are regularly faced with separation, often due to the sponsoring partner not meeting the new income threshold of £18,600. The impact on the British citizens or permanent residents trying to bring their families here to live with them is something often overlooked. The government speaks often about ‘reducing net migration,’ but rarely looks at how that drive actually impacts their own citizens, as Nando Sigona explains:

“This raises important questions concerning what exactly it is that the government assesses when evaluating the impact of immigration policy, and how it de!ines (rather narrowly) the ‘main affected groups’ in a way that consciously leaves aside an analysis of the unequal impact of its measures on citizens and citizenship.”

The recently released 2011 Census shows that a large number of UK citizens now live in ‘mixedstatus’ families – referring to families where some members are of different immigration status than others – and are at risk of falling foul of the new rules. Taken with the above examination of who in particular is affected, as Sigona describes: “we could say that the government’s goal to control immigration and immigrants has become a vehicle for class politics, or, perhaps more crudely, that the citizenship rights of many Britons are being threatened by a policy designed to serve the interests and visions of a Londoncentric, ageing, male-dominated elite.”

How then can one help but wonder if the rules re!lect, not an ignorance, but a willful lack of empathy towards real people, real families? At the heart of this is the fact that the rules governing family migration have no heart, and no conscience – and the impact of this can be devastating on families. It doesn’t matter if it’s hours of paperwork and translations, or if it’s being separated from the ones you love not only by oceans and miles of earth, but by a bureaucracy that sees you not as it should as a person but a number – and one they want to reduce. i Nando Sigona, ‘UK migra!on policy: we need to talk about ci!zens,’ 4 February 2013, openDemocracy.net ii Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minori!es and the Belfast Migrant Centre, ‘Response to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Migra!on Family Migra!on Inquiry,’ January 2013.

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 13

Migrant Domestic Workers in the UK: Transforming the Meaning of Citizenship

Jennifer McCurry, Policy Intern, NICEM

he marking of 2013 as the ‘European Year of Citizens’ aims to raise awareness of the rights associated with European Union (EU) citizenship. These include the freedom to travel, work and live anywhere within the EU without requiring a visa. It also aims to encourage the active participation of citizens in EU policy-making. These aims re!lect different yet closely connected aspects of what it means to be a citizen: enjoyment of rights and active participation in the processes which work to de!ine and protect them. Such re!lection on citizenship raises important questions regarding the 214 million people around the world who live outside their country of origin. 20.7 million non-EU citizens live within the EU and 4.8 million of these are in the United Kingdom (UK). How can those without citizenship actively participate in decision-making about the issues which affect their daily lives? Is it possible for a migrant without citizenship to be an active citizen? This dilemma has been experienced by the foreign-born domestic workers employed in UK households. If citizenship is about voice, participation and in!luence, the group is an unlikely candidate. Their employment in private households limits involvement with the community around them and restricts opportunities to build links with others in the same situation. The majority of domestic workers are women, often committed to sending money to their families back home. Their long working hours, coupled with the isolated nature of their employment, leaves little scope for public engagement. Research by Kalayaan, an organisation that campaigns for the rights of domestic workers, reveals some truly shocking statistics. By surveying their UK membership, they found that 58% of domestic workers had been psychologically abused and 16% had been physically abused. Sixty-four percent worked 7 days a week with no day off, and 65% had had their passport withheld by an employer. Five percent revealed that they had been sexually abused or harassed, although the real !igure is suspected to be much higher. Under the previous visa system, migrant domestic workers were permitted to change employers. This was essential in allowing them to escape from mistreatment and !ind better working conditions elsewhere. They were also able to apply for an extension of their visa. From the 6th of April 2012, migrant domestic workers coming to work in UK households are given a maximum of 6 months leave to remain without the possibility of extension. As well as losing the opportunity to eventually apply for settlement, they have lost the right to change employers. This applies even in cases of abuse. Both Kalayaan and Amnesty International have heavily criticised these changes, highlighting their potential to facilitate human traf!icking and slave labour. However, no group has been more vocal in opposing the new rules than migrant domestic workers themselves. Their actions challenge prevalent images of migrants, particularly migrant women, which portray them as passive victims of their circumstances.

Domestic workers are actively campaigning for their voices to be heard Photo credit: Justice for Domestic Workers (J4DW)

Although the challenges facing these groups are substantial and the potential for marginalisation is great, many are actively working hard to improve their situation and that of those around them. Marissa Begonia, a domestic worker from the Philippines, chairs the self-help union group Justice 4 Domestic Workers (J4DW). Set up in March 2009, it campaigns for social justice and offers its members practical advice and support. Writing in the Guardian, she likens the new regulations as ‘a step back into Victorian-era slavery. Her !irst personal experience of domestic work involved long hours, a low salary and a controlling employer. Upon learning that she had the right to change jobs, she found a position in another household where she is treated with respect. In her role with J4DW, she supported mistreated domestic workers to follow her lead. Now that the new regulations have come into force, this has ceased to be an option. The erosion of domestic workers’ rights is particularly disappointing because it backtracks on changes introduced to the visa system in 1998. Those changes recognised domestic workers as employees in their own right, allowing them to change employers and apply for an extension of their visa. They followed a sustained campaign by members of Waling Waling, a Filipino domestic workers group, and Kalaayan, their support organisation. Through a concentrated effort by the groups and the support of trade unions, the government was forced to sit up and take notice. Sadly, the progress these groups inspired has suffered a devastating setback. Not to be deterred, J4DW has risen to the challenge and is continuing its campaigning activities in earnest. They continue to provide educational opportunities for their members and

organise awareness-raising activities for the general public. As well as challenging the changes to UK immigration law, they campaign widely for the UK to ratify the ILO Convention on Domestic Work. Posting on the organisation’s blog, Begonia provides the results of research that she has carried out on domestic workers’ employment conditions. They clearly show that workers tied to one employer are often forced to work around the clock with little or no time off. In her research on domestic worker mobilization, Bridget Anderson highlights how the struggle of domestic workers to obtain rights challenges the widely accepted de!inition of citizenship as a !ixed form of legal belonging. If citizenship is also a practice, groups such as J4DW are engaged in transforming citizenship on a daily basis. As well as recognising the economic, social and cultural contributions which migrants make to our society, 2013 also offers the opportunity to re!lect on the contributions of migrants as citizens: whether the migrants in question happen to hold citizenship or not.

Anderson, B. (2009) ‘Mobilizing migrants, making ci!zens: migrant domes!c workers as poli!cal agents’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 33(1) pp. 60 – 740

Begonia, Marissa, 11 /03/12, ‘A step back into Victorian era slavery for UK Domes!c Workers’, Guardian Online, Available at: h"p://www.guardian.co.uk/commen!sfree/2012/mar/11/d omes!c-workers-visas-employer Eurostat (26/03/13) ‘Migra!on and Migrant Popula!on Sta!s!cs’, Available at: h"p://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/sta!s!cs_explained/index .php/Migra!on_and_migrant_popula!on_sta!s!cs Kalayaan, 15/03/2011, ‘Ending the Abuse: Policies that work to protect migrant domes!c workers’, Available at: h"p://www.kalayaan.org.uk/documents/Ending%20the%20 abuse%20-%20Kalayaan%20briefing%20-%202011.pdf

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 14

Feature

n March, Prime Minister David Cameron delivered a speech on immigration and presented a set of worrying plans aimed at reducing public money ‘wasting’ and so called ‘bene!it tourism’. The sources of the problems are largely misplaced and the focus on immigration only damages the image of migrant populations. More worryingly, it will arguably affect minorities’ enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, and thereby impact upon a range policy areas, including the 5 areas which are central to NICEM’s work: social security and housing, health, education, employment and training, and justice.

Health

David Cameron’s main course of action is to restrict access to public services and supports for immigrants from the European Economic Area (EEA, which comprises the EU plus Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein) and beyond. He said: “the British taxpayer will not go on endlessly paying for them any more”. In a word, if you are not British or do not hold a valid residence permit, you are ‘not allowed’ to seek any help. The spokesman said, “it is a question of the NHS getting better at being able to take and follow up the information it needs in order to recoup those costs.” The real question should be whether EEA citizens should be entitled to health treatments no matter their country of provenance or their degree of illness.

It has to be noted that the overwhelming proportion of migrants are not automatically entitled to bene!its and, as predominantly young people, they do not greatly depend on the NHS. The Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt even contradicted the Prime Minister over the cost of treating European patients on the NHS. Hunt said: “It is a huge issue. I don’t think those numbers are at all accurate” meaning that £10m to £20m costs announced by Downing Street was relatively small !igure on which to make such a major policy announcement (the NHS budget being more than £100bn a year). Also, according to the Migrant Rights Network, the announcement by the government that it ‘will look to introduce stricter charging or a requirement for non-EEA temporary migrants to have private health insurance in order to access NHS care’ sounds ambiguous – and ambitious – enough to never come to pass.

Social security and housing

The Prime Minister announced that Jobseekers Allowances (JSA) would only be available to those genuinely seeking a job for a maximum of six months. On top of that restriction, he also announced that EEA migrants would have to show pro!iciency in English: “We’re going to make that assessment a real and robust one, and yes, it’s going to include whether your ability to speak English is a barrier to work”. A study by University College London’s Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration found that “in 2008/9, workers from Eastern Europe contributed £1.37 in taxes for every £1 of services they used, while native Britons contributed 80p to the pound”. It is important to add that migrants represent about 13% of all workers but only 7% of all bene!it claimants. More striking is that out of the 2 million migrants who arrived to the UK from Eastern Europe since the accession of the A8

countries in 2004, only 13,000 people have claimed JSA.i

There will be undeniable effects following the implementation of this plan. Indeed, while few migrants claim bene!its, the social safety net also has an effect on people in work. The harder life gets for an unemployed person, the more power employers have over employees - which applies not only to migrants.

Rent subsidies also fall within the social security system. Analysis conducted by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) shows that too little money is spent on building homes that people can afford to live in, whereas the number of housing bene!it recipients keeps rising. In 2012, for every £1 the government spent on building houses, £19 was spent on rent subsidy. In addition, the Government is to put in place a so-called “bedroom tax” aiming at reducing the payment to families deemed to have too much living space. A third of social sector claimants are said to be affected by this. The measure is based on the control of the bedroom’s use and it is fair to wonder how this is going to be monitored.ii

By limiting access to rent subsidies, the gap in the budget may be mathematically !illed but thousands of people (if not more) could be left homeless. The solution would thus be to build more homes that would help to stem the tide and would be an investment for the future. Without more affordable homes built by local authorities and housing associations, the housing bene!it bill will surely be out of control. Morever, most non-

EEA migrants already have no access to social housing for their !irst 5 years and EU migrants “may have entitlement in some parts of the country, but usually have to queue for years like everyone else on the list for a council house”.iii Therefore, despite the fact that European social security law is quite complex and provides for very detailed regulations in relation to entitlement, these new plans seem to totally ignore that.

Education

Ministers were also considering a plan aimed at banning illegal immigrant children from schools. This measure might concern about 120,000 children living in the UK according to the Oxford University’s centre on migration, policy and society. This arguably puts the educational rights of the children at risk, as many parents would likely no longer put their children into school, fearing detection. It also potentially violates article 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which states that all children have the right to a primary education. It has to be noted that the CRC has been rati!ied by all the UN member states except for three, which shows its legal and political importance. It is certainly not the role of schools to monitor immigration status. David Laws has !inally vetoed this idea, saying it would be ‘bureaucratic and unworkable’ to implement.iv

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 15

Immigration Hysteria: the Consequences of Cameron’s Speech by Meriem Naili

This article first appeared on the Minority Rights Now blog

Employment and training

The issue of under-employment and forced labour of migrants must also be addressed. Several 2012 reports by the Joseph Rowntree Foundationv show that forced labour in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK is a reality: poor working conditions, low pay, restricted movements and verbal and physical abuse. New migrants also face obstacles like limited language skills, well as limited access to social networks. Prospective international students are also facing tougher regulations in universities and new conditions to access courses. In order to “prevent bogus applicants entering the country”, the consular staff is asked to interview more than 100,00 prospective students. In 2011, David Cameron already pledged to cut the net level of immigration to the UK to fewer than 100,000 before 2015, but universities have been campaigning to exclude international students from those !igures. The reality is that the number of applications from foreign students has increased by only 0,8% in 2011 (whilst almost 7% a year on average since 2007). It is a shame, considering that overseas students are estimated to bring £8bn a year into the economy, according to a study by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.vi

Justice

No clear mention was made by the Prime Minister of criminal justice issues per se. However, the idea of introducing residence permits to restrict access to public services and welfare bene!its for arriving migrants stems from the fact that passports are

not stamped with date of entry into the UK.

In the meantime, GPs, social housing and social security staff are largely refusing to act as immigration of!icers. Thus, a way to check how long they have been in the country must be put in place especially if tougher residence tests are to be introduced for other EU nationals. The government has con!irmed that plans are being considered to take !ingerprints and other biometric data, to be stored on an ID card with a photograph and electronic signature for arriving migrants. According to EU law, no discrimination is to be made among EU citizens so the residence card will not only apply to Bulgarians and Romanians arriving in Britain but also to all migrants form other EU states intending to stay for more than three monthsvii. The existing rules are actually quite tight already, so it is not unreasonable that the EU justice system would challenge such a decision if taken.

Concerning obtaining citizenship, anyone who actually wants to learn English - a requirement of gaining citizenship – will have a much harder time doing so very soon. Applicants struggling with English were previously entitled to enrol on an English for Speakers of Other Languages course. Under the new law, they will have to pass the citizenship test and the English test simultaneously (at the highest entry level) without being able to train for free.

Conclusion

Chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare

of Immigrants, Habib Rahman, points out: “This rhetoric may curtail rights to bene!its on a minor scale, but relatively few migrants compared with ‘indigenous’ people actually claim bene!it anyway. The real effect of this speech will be to further increase the intolerance and the hostile reception that immigrants are facing from some sections of society”. As stated earlier, the government focuses its concern on the wrong source of problem. Immigration is not the cause of each and every waste within the Government budget. If Britain is to impose tougher rules on migrants’ access to bene!its, as Mr Cameron promised, it will also likely increase intolerance and incur the wrath of organisations !ighting racism and discrimination, as well as the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice. Like all modern nations, the UK needs a mature, genuine conversation about immigration.

Typically, the migrants who arrive on our shores seeking work are among the most motivated, richest, and capable members of their nations; as a result, they tend to be a net bonus to the British economy. Current confusions around the contributions of migrants to the UK economy have to be clari!ied - such as the aspects of the tightening of student visas that are threatening to do real !inancial and reputational damage to UK universities. Politicians need to better articulate the positive cultural and economic bene!its of migration and not simply demonize either migrants or their impact.viii In other words, they need to lead on the immigration debate, not follow often misinformed and hysterical media and public opinion. Centre for Research and Analysis of Migra!on Discussion Paper Series CDP No 18/09, ‘Assessing the Fiscal Costs and Benefits of A8 Migra!on to the UK,’ Chris!an Dustmann, Tommaso Fra#ni and Caroline Halls. i

ii Ins!tute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), ‘Housing policy: a fundamental review,’ available at h"p://www.ippr.org/research-project/44/7132/housingpolicy-a-fundamental-review iii Migrant Rights Network, Ruth Grove-White, ‘The Prime Minister is playing right into UKIP’s hands on immigra!on;’ available at h"p://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2013/03/primeminister-playing-right-ukips-hands-immigra!on

Nicholas Wa", chief poli!cal correspondent, The Guardian. ‘David Laws vetoes plan to force schools to check immigrant status of pupils;’ available at h"p://www.guardian.co.uk/poli!cs/2013/may/22/immigra nt-status-checks-on-schoolchildren-vetoed

v Joseph Rowntree Founda!on, ‘Forced Labour in Northern Ireland (Neil Jarman et al 2011); ‘Experiences of Forced Labour in the UK Food Industry (Sam Sco" et al 2012).

BIS Research paper number 46, ‘Es!ma!ng the value to the UK of educa!on exports,’ June 2011, available at h"ps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ a"achment_data/file/32395/11-980-es!ma!ng-value-ofeduca!on-exports.pdf vii Alan Travis, The Guardian. ‘Immigrants’ residents permits: how would they work?’ available at h"p://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/25/immigrantsresidents-permits-how-work vi

viii Michael White, The Guardian poli!cs blog. ‘Immigra!on: we need a conversa!on, not a bidding war,’ available at h"p://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2013/mar/25/immigra !on-conversa!on-not-bidding-war

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

12:59

Page 16

Policy

Know Your Rights

Fundamental Rights in the EU

The rights of every individual within the EU (European Union) were established at different times, in different ways and in different forms. The EU decided to clarify things and to include them all in a single document, know as the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has been updated in the light of changes in society, social progress and scienti!ic and technological developments. The Charter guarantees a wide range of rights, which have been grouped under speci!ic headings: dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizen’s rights and justice. However, the Charter only applies to EU institutions in general terms and then further applies in

An EU citizen living in Northern Ireland

Member States when implementing EU law. Citizens can avail of Charter rights when they are exercising another EU right such as the right to move and reside freely within the EU.

Your Rights as a European citizen:

• Not to be discriminated against on the grounds of nationality • To move and reside freely within the EU • To vote and stand as candidates in municipal and European Parliament elections wherever they live in the EU, under the same conditions as nationals • To be assisted by another EU country’s

embassy or consulate outside the EU under the same conditions as a citizen of that country, if their own country is not represented

Citizens and Participation Rights in the EU

• To petition the European Parliament (your local MEP) • Apply to the European Ombudsman • Address the EU institutions (in any of!icial EU language) • To organise or support, together with other EU citizens, a citizen’s initiative to call for new EU legislation • To participate in a Citizen’s Dialogue

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

13:00

Page 17

Citizenʼs Initiative

A European citizens' initiative is an invitation to the European Commission to propose legislation on matters where the EU has competence to legislate. A citizens' initiative has to be backed by at least one million EU citizens, coming from at least 7 out of the 27 member states.

Where to find out more about your rights in the EU: Your Europe: http://europa.eu/youreurope

Europe Direct: http://europa.eu/europedirect

The EU Fundamental Rights Agency has developed a ‘Charterpedia’ which outlines all the rights in the Charter, as well as a mobile phone app: http://infoportal.fra.europa.eu/InfoPortal/infoba seFrontEndCountryHome.do?btnCountryLinkHo me_1 Contact the European Commission Representation in Northern Ireland: 74 - 76 Dublin Road Belfast BT2 7HP What to do when you think your rights as an EU citizen are not being respected when living in another EU member state:

SOLVIT:

SOLVIT is an on-line problem-solving network in which EU Member States work together to solve without legal proceedings problems caused by the misapplication of Internal Market law by public authorities. There is a SOLVIT centre in every European Union Member State (as well as in Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). SOLVIT Centres can help with handling complaints from both citizens and businesses. They are part of the national administration and are committed to providing real solutions to problems within ten weeks. Using SOLVIT is free of charge. Go to http://ec.europa.eu/solvit/site/centres/address es/index.htm for contact details

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

13:00

Page 18

Feature

Citizenship and

Globalisation T Felice Kiel, Community Development Officer, NICEM

raditionally, citizenship has been thought to be about membership, belonging, rights and obligations determined by abstract legal de!initions of who is to be included or excluded from the political community or nationstate. However, in an era of growing economic interdependence, migration and increasingly multi-ethnic populations, conventional notions and de!initions of citizenship and what it means to be a citizen have become topics of contention and debate. The criteria that countries use for conferring citizenship is complex and often confusing. A core premise of citizenship is that countries can establish and control the rules for membership. Historically, nations have used two main principles to confer citizenship at birth: jus soli — citizenship determined by place of birth; and jus sanguinis — citizenship determined by the nationality of one or both parents. Many countries base their citizenship laws on a combination of jus soli and jus sanguinis. The United States, Canada and most Latin American countries attribute citizenship unconditionally to all persons born in their territory as well as to the children of their citizens who are born abroad. Most European countries emphasize jus sanguinis principles, which has made citizenship more dif!icult to acquire. None of the European Member States currently grant unconditional birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants. The children of immigrants (second generation residents) in many European countries must petition to acquire citizenship; access to citizenship occurs only after ful!illing certain residency or age requirements. For example, second-generation children born in France of two non-French parents cannot become French citizens until they turn eighteen and complete the required paperwork. They must also provide proof that they have lived in France continuously for at least !ive years. Prior to 1981, the UK allowed the people living in its former colonies to have British Commonwealth Citizenship, which gave them the right to settle in the UK without !irst acquiring work or residence permits. With the enactment of the British Nationality Act of 1981, the UK abolished this status and created a multi-tiered citizenship system. This system includes: British citizens, British Overseas Territories citizens, British Overseas citizens, British Nationals (Overseas), British subjects and British protected persons. Only British citizenship and certain commonwealth citizens have the automatic right

The intensification of economic, political, social and cultural relations across borders challenges traditional concepts of the nation-state and raises enormous questions about the meaning of citizenship. Perhaps, in this era of globalisation we can think of citizenship as Socrates did when he stated, “I am a citizen, not of Athens or Greece, but of the world.”

of abode in the UK. In 2004, Ireland's citizens passed a referendum that eliminates an Irish-born child's automatic right to citizenship when both parents are not Irish nationals. Despite the implementation of restrictive pathways to the acquisition of citizenship in the UK and Ireland, some other European countries have begun to implement citizenship laws and naturalization policies that have resulted in access to citizenship being opened to long-term residents and their children who were previously excluded from citizenship. For example, in 1999, Germany liberalized its constricting jus sanguinis laws which made acquiring citizenship virtually impossible for individuals whose parents were not German. The policies and requirements for acquiring as well as holding and maintaining other citizenships differ signi!icantly from country to country. Some countries allow dual-citizenship (e.g. US, UK, France) while others revoke the citizenship of a person who acquires citizenship in another country (e.g. Bulgaria, South Korea, Sweden). An individual whose citizenship status is not conferred through birthplace or parentage can in some instances be granted citizenship status through naturalisation. The naturalisation process varies from country to country, but it generally requires that individual meet speci!ic statutory requirements, including those related to

residency. As part of the naturalisation process to acquire citizenship in the UK, a person must demonstrate “suf!icient knowledge of life in the UK”. This is determined by a mandatory ‘Life in the UK’ test. The test has been a source of controversy and its contents are often criticized for not adequately addressing contemporary issues or evolving notions of what constitutes British identity. A number of other European Union countries such as the Netherlands and Denmark also require naturalizing applicants to demonstrate a level of language pro!iciency and knowledge of national social and political institutions, democratic values, society and facts about history. It is interesting to note that in 2012, France abolished the French culture test that was a component of its naturalization requirement. Manuel Valls France’s Spanish-born interior minister who became a French citizen when he was twenty years old, stated, “You don't become French by answering multiple choice questions." The shifting relationship between the rights and obligations of citizens along with the questions of membership that have accompanied the advent of globalisation, in particular the aspect of migration and movement of people, increasingly challenge established concepts of national identity and belonging. According to a United Nations study, in 2010, 214 million - three per cent of the world’s population - lived outside of their country of origin. The twenty-!irst century has witnessed unprecedented demographic changes in developed as well as developing countries. In 2011, sixteen of the European Union’s twentyseven member states reported more immigration than emigration, but in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Poland, Romania, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, emigrants outnumbered immigrants. During 2011, 782,200 people acquired citizenship of a European Union member state. That year, the UK, France, Spain and Germany acquired the greatest number of new citizens. The intensi!ication of economic, political, social and cultural relations across borders challenges traditional concepts of the nation-state and raises enormous questions about the meaning of citizenship. Perhaps, in this era of globalisation we can think of citizenship as Socrates did when he stated, “I am a citizen, not of Athens or Greece, but of the world.”

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

13:00

Page 19

NEWS FROM THE HILL The All Party Group on Ethnic Minority Communities (APG on EMC) has continued to work on important issues for ethnic minority communities. In the last quarter this included focusing on ethnic monitoring practice by departments and statutory agencies, poverty and ethnicity, a consolidated Race Relations Order, and the implications of the latest census !igures. Office Bearers The positions of the of!ice bearers of the APG on EMC rotate every six months; the of!ice bearers from February to June are: Chair: Danny Kinahan, MLA (UUP) Vice-Chair Colum Eastwood, MLA (SDLP) Secretary: Conall McDevitt, MLA (SDLP) Treasurer: Sammy Douglas, MLA (DUP)

Race Relations Order The APG on EMC has continued to push for the establishment of a consolidated Race Relations Order. The Assembly had agreed to do this in a motion debate in 2009, and yet there has been no action. The Chair of the APG on EMC has put in several Assembly Written Questions (AQWs) on the matter, and the APG on EMC will continue to work on the issue.

Questions that Matter The APG on EMC has organized two successful regional ‘Questions that Matter’ events, following on from the pilot in June 2012. These were in Craigavon and Derry/Londonderry, and bene!itted from cross-community political buy-in as well as great participation and attendance from ethnic minority communities. Some of the issues covered were the recognition of foreign quali!ications and access to employment, provision of English classes, racial harassment and hate crime, and the provision of interpreters for health and education services. Presentations This quarter has seen excellent and thought-provoking presentations from a number of outside agencies. This included the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), which presented on the process and !indings of the initial stages of its research into poverty and ethnicity in Northern at the APG on EMC in March. This was very valuable and the APG on EMC will continue to work with JRF on the research, and on following up politically on many of the issues raised by their research. The APG on EMC also had a visit from the Census Of!ice, which detailed some of the most useful and relevant statistics coming out of the 2011 census, particularly relating to the growth in the ethnic minority population, as well as the usage of minority languages.

The APG on EMC and Participation According to the Terms of Reference of the APG on EMC, its purpose is to provide a forum for dialogue between political parties and BME groups to work together towards “a society in which racial diversity is supported, understood, valued and respected, where racism in any of its forms is not tolerated and where we live together as a society and enjoy equality of opportunity and equal protection” (Racial Equality Strategy for Northern Ireland 2005-10). Part of the rationale for setting up the APG was to ensure that ethnic minority communities are empowered “to participate freely and on an equal footing in their country’s political, economic, social and cultural development” which arose from the 2001 United Nations World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. The APG on EMC allows BME groups and individuals access to the heart of decision-making, ensuring and enhancing their participation in the political processes that shape their lives. This is a core principle of civic ‘citizenship,’ that those who live in a society, regardless of whether they are legal ‘citizens,’ can participate fully in that society – whether that be through community groups and civic forums, or talking to and in!luencing politics and decision-making. By being not just present at Stormont, but fully involved in its inner-workings, BME groups and individuals ensure that their voices are heard.

A Birdʼs Eye View of… Stormont

A Birdʼs Eye View of… Westminister

An overview of what’s happening at the Northern Ireland Assembly

Bills before Parliament

Work of the Committees Social Development

The Social Development Committee recently held a housing event with key stakeholders about developments in local housing needs and how they could be addressed. They are also considering the Department’s draft Housing Strategy Action Plan.

Education

The Committee for the Department of Education will be scrutinizing departmental brie!ings on Traveller Children in Education as well as consultation responses to the Priorities for Youth draft framework.

Enterprise, Trade and Investment

The Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment will look at research from the Northern Ireland Assembly Research services into abolishing mobile phone roaming charges within the European Union.

Environment

The Committee for the Department of the Environment is continuing to scrutinize the Planning Bill, working towards agreeing its report at the end of June.

Caravan Sites Bill [HL] 2012-13

Health, Social Services and Public Safety (HSSPS)

The HSSPS Committee will be visiting the new Sexual Assault Referral Centre (SARC), a joint initiative with the Justice Committee. They will also receive a departmental briefing on the draft Sexual Violence Strategy. In July, they will receive an update from the Health Minister, Edwin Poots, on the Transforming Your Care initiative. Office of the First Minster and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) The OFMDFM Committee will receive an overview of the Programme for Government and an update on its delivery from departmental of!icials. Regional Development The Committee for Regional Development will be looking at the Affordable Warmth Evaluation and the outcomes of the Social Fund Reform Consultation, in the coming weeks.

A bill to make provision to secure the establishment of caravan sites by local authorities in England for the use of Gypsies and Travellers.

Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill [HL] 2012-13

A bill to make provision about human trafficking offences and exploitation, and about measures to prevent and combat human trafficking and provision of support for victims.

Independent Press Council Bill [HL] 2012-13

A Bill to provide the framework for the appointment and functions of a Press Council to act independently and in the public interest to promote and protect freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, in communicating information and opinions to the public, to encourage and maintain professional standards and practices, and to provide redress for victims of professional misconduct; and for connected purposes.

Referendum (European Union) Bill [HL] 2012-13 A bill to make provision for the holding of a referendum in the United Kingdom on the United Kingdomʼs continued membership of the European Union.

Minority Rights Now

Issue2NICEM:Layout 1

18/6/13

13:00

Page 20