Immigration and asylum policies

The rapporteur, Mr Wiebenga, felt that the Commission’s proposals were disappointing. He wanted to see a working programme that was in line with Parliament’s position and that contained more precise details on the implementation of the policy together with a schedule and a financial statement for the measures proposed. He regretted the attitude of the Justice Ministers, who said that they wanted to implement an asylum and immigration policy but then used their veto, which should be abolished in this area. The rapporteur set out a series of priorities: - a policy to prevent immigration at EU level, with the establishment of an immigration monitoring centre; - the introduction of a European system for the reception of asylum-seekers, displaced persons and refugees in order that the responsibility for such reception might be equally shared by the Member States; - negotiation within the IGC of Parliament’s role under the third pillar. Commissioner GRADIN stated that the Commission would certainly consult Parliament on the main aspects of the asylum and immigration policy. It would try to resolve the deadlock in the Council over the draft convention on customs controls at the Union’s external borders. Before the end of the year the Commission would present a report on the possibility of applying Article K.9 (communitisation) to the asylum policy. The Commissioner also proposed that the first six paragraphs of Article K.1 (customs, drugs, etc.) should be transferred from the third pillar to the first pillar (criminal and police cooperation would remain under the third pillar). Other initiatives included: - the rules applicable to immigration and residence conditions; - family reunification; - the status of immigrants residing legally in the Union; - the conditions governing the temporary residence of refugees and people fleeing their country, with the problem of their return; - the study on sharing the responsibility for the reception of refugees among Member States. Finally, two communications would clarify: - the relationship between the development and assistance policy and the possibility of preventing illegal immigration; - migratory flows and political, social, ethnic and religious tensions.