Poland launches campaign to lure back migrant workers

Independent
By Jerome Taylor

For nearly four years, Britain’s construction and hospitality industries have flourished thanks to the influx of an estimated one million Polish workers – but now Poland wants them back. The Warsaw government is so worried about a national labour shortage in the professions that it plans to advertise in the UK to encourage expatriate Poles to return to the country that many of them left after it joined the European Union.

According to Polish media reports, the adverts will soon appear in English and Polish-language newspapers in this country. They are part of a wider campaign by the newly elected government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who swept to power six months ago with a pledge to encourage migrant workers to return.

However, there is mounting evidence that many Poles are already heading back east, particularly because the current weakness of Britain’s currency means they are getting fewer zlotys for their pounds.

Mr Tusk’s administration has produced a brochure that it plans to give away with Polish newspapers and at the many Polish cultural centres across Britain. The Handbook for Re-Emigrants advises Poles how to find accommodation back home and apply for special loans.

After Poland joined the EU in May 2004, an estimated two million people – about 10 per cent of the population – left to find work, predominantly in Britain and Ireland. But while the British and Irish economies benefited from the influx of cheap and willing labour, Poland suffered acute staff shortages, particularly in the building and and hospitality trades.

Of major concern to Warsaw is the lack of skilled construction workers needed to build new football stadiums before the European championships in 2012, which Poland and the Ukraine will host jointly. The government estimates that up to 200,000 extra workers are needed to complete the multibillion-euro projects earmarked for the event.

In the past year, the Polish government has introduced a series of measures aimed at encouraging Poles to return. It has abolished a rule which meant migrant workers were liable to pay taxes both in Britain and at home. Mr Tusk’s government also wants to grant a five-year amnesty to those who have failed to pay taxes in Poland while working abroad.

His opponents say this proposal is unconstitutional but, if approved, it will no doubt prove attractive to thousands of expats who have put off returning because they fear they will be receive a large tax bill when they arrive.

Estimating how many Poles return home each year is difficult because the government does not record the figure. However, many analysts believe that east European immigration to Britain may already have peaked. The numbers of east European migrants approved to work in Britain dropped from 227,875 in 2006 to 206,905 last year – a fall of nearly 10 per cent.

This may be because employment prospects in Poland have improved dramatically since it joined the EU. The current unemployment rate is 10 per cent – half what it was four years ago. Currency exchange rates may also have an effect on migration. When Poland entered the EU in 2004, £1 was worth seven zlotys; now it is worth only 4.2 zlotys.

Wojiech Pisasrki, a spokesman for the Polish embassy in London, believes there is evidence to suggest that the number of Poles coming to the UK may be the same as the number who are going home. “The process of leaving has already started,” he said. “Immigration to Britain is not as attractive a prospect as it was a few years ago.”

Jacek Winnicki, a Polish lawyer who has settled in London, said he doubted that an advertising campaign would encourage many of his countrymen to return.

“Work is just one of many factors behind why people chose to live where they do,” he added. “I don’t think an advert saying ‘come back to Poland’ will work, but I do think it will make Poles think and maybe a few will be tempted to leave.”

EU deal on immigrant detentions

By Paul Kirby
EU reporter, BBC News

After years of dispute, the EU has struck an accord on the detention and deportation of illegal immigrants.

“We have 10 to 12 million illegal persons in the EU… they are modern slaves,” said German MEP Manfred Weber, who described the deal as a “big step”.

He said there would be a six-month limit on detention for most people and a readmission agreement would have to be struck before they were sent home.

A final decision will now have to be made by MEPs and member states.

The deal was hammered out by the Slovenian Presidency of the EU, along with members of the European Commission and the parliament, but it is opposed by some MEPs.

The Socialist group has refused to give its consent to the accord, saying it objects to some of the terms.

“We have serious reservations about numerous aspects of the text, particularly on the duration for which immigrants can be held in detention centres,” said French MEP Martine Roure, who took part in the talks in Strasbourg on Wednesday.

While France currently has a 30-day limit on detention, some EU countries such as Malta have an 18-month maximum and seven others, including the UK, have no limit.

Instead of the agreed six-month limit on detention with a possible further year for exceptional cases, the Socialists believe there should be a lower limit with an absolute maximum of six months.

But Dutch Liberal MEP Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert told the BBC News website that while the agreement was not perfect, it was definitely a step forward.

“They (the Socialists) are acting politically irresponsibly and are completely immature,” she said.

British Green MEP Jean Lambert said that the difficulty for some French MEPs was that while some countries would have to reduce their limit for immigrant detention, France would substantially increase its own.

Although the agreement was far better than if it had been left to governments to negotiate, she said the Greens would probably vote against it because of some of the provisions.

“If you’re married to a British citizen but don’t have the right to stay and are forced to leave, you can now find yourself banned for five years,” she said.

The Socialists are also concerned about the treatment of unaccompanied children.

But Manfred Weber, the European Parliament’s rapporteur on the return of illegal immigrants, said that social services would be responsible for the return of children rather than the usual authorities.

The plight of illegal immigrants has become a major issue in a number of EU countries. In Germany, campaigners complain that if an illegal immigrant goes to a hospital for treatment, doctors are required to inform the authorities.

That, says Mr Weber, leads to a situation in which many do not seek treatment.

In France earlier this month, Malian immigrant Baba Traore died after jumping into the River Marne while trying to escape from police east of Paris. He fled when he was asked for his identity documents.

Protesters took to the streets demanding rights for immigrants and the closure of detention centres.

The French government, which takes up the EU presidency in July, has made reaching a European immigration pact a priority.

Italy’s incoming interior minister, Roberto Maroni, has called for “more rigour” against illegal immigration, speaking of a need for “more cleansing and more police”.

Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert said that the new agreement meant that there would now be an effective return policy across the EU which, until now, had not been in place.

“If you want to make a serious effort to come up with a comprehensive package on migration, you cannot ignore that we have to tackle the problems of illegal migration,” he said.

UKs asylum system marred by inhumanity

Anil Dawar guardian.co.uk, Thursday March 27 2008

The UK’s asylum system is “marred by inhumanity” and “not yet fit for purpose”, the most comprehensive study ever conducted into its workings has found.

A report published today by the Independent Asylum Commission found the treatment of asylum seekers coming to this country fell “seriously below” the standards of a civilised society.

The year-long study of the work of the Border and Immigration Agency, led by former appeal court judge Sir John Waite, said the system denied sanctuary to some in need and failed to remove others who should go.

It called the treatment of some asylum seekers a “blemish” on the UK’s international reputation.

The Border and Immigration Agency has refuted the report, claiming it operated a “firm but humane” system.

The commission was established in 2006 after the then home secretary John Reid branded the immigration system “unfit for purpose”.

It took testimonies from every sector of society, including former home secretaries, policy makers, charities, asylum seekers, police, local authorities, and citizens.

The findings highlighted three particular areas of concern: The use of detention centres, especially to hold children, pregnant women and torture victims; the often brutal handling of removals; and the use of destitution as a tool to drive claimants out of the country.

Waite said: “The overuse of detention, the scale of destitution and the severity of removals are all areas which need attention before the system can be described as fit for purpose”.

Commenting on the common practice of locking up refugees, the report said: “The detention of asylum-seekers is overused, oppressive and an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer,” and branded the detention of children “wholly unjustified”.

“The system still denies sanctuary to some who genuinely need it and ought to be entitled to it, is not firm enough in returning those whose claims are refused and is marred by inhumanity in its treatment of the vulnerable.”

Waite went on to call for “a thorough re-examination” of the detention and bail system, which treated asylum seekers as criminals.

“The justification for such a system is the fear of absconding, and that fear is, in our opinion, grossly exaggerated,” he said.

Border officials, the report found, did not give enough consideration to factors such as post-traumatic stress in initial interviews.

“Some of those seeking sanctuary, particularly women, children and torture survivors, have additional vulnerabilities that are not being appropriately addressed,” it said.

Other issues highlighted in the report included the fact that many genuine claims were being overlooked because of cuts in the legal aid budget which have made it more difficult to find lawyers for complex cases.

And some private security firms were described by the commission as carrying out removals with “unnecessary violence and carelessness”.

Government figures reveal there were 23,430 asylum applications in 2007, the lowest for 14 years, and a quarter of the record set in 2002.

Today’s report presented the commission’s interim findings. Further reports will be published in May, June and July, including recommendations on reform of the system.

Donna Covey, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “This is an important set of findings from an independent commission, which presents overwhelming evidence that the asylum system is still not fit for purpose.

“We must treat people with basic decency, and the system must get asylum decisions right – they are a matter of life and death.”

Responding to the report, Lin Homer, head of the Border and Immigration Agency, said: “The claims made in this report are not based on any thorough knowledge. I totally refute any suggestion that we treat asylum applicants without care and compassion.

“We have a proud tradition in Britain of offering sanctuary to those who truly need our protection, and anyone seeking asylum can have their case reviewed by an independent judge.

“We operate a firm but humane system, supporting those who are vulnerable with accommodation and assistance.

“But we expect those that a court says have no genuine need for asylum to return home voluntarily, saving taxpayers the expense of enforcing their return.

“We will enforce the removal of those who refuse to comply, always ensuring first that it is safe to do so.”

Related Articles
‘Inhumane and oppressive’: the final verdict on Britain’s asylum policy

Asylum seekers tell their stories

BBC NEWS ONLINE

The UK’s treatment of asylum seekers falls seriously below the standards of a civilised country, says a report. The Independent Asylum Commission heard from hundreds of witnesses, including asylum seekers who said the system had been unfair to them.

Germain Naruhana gave evidence to the commission in Leeds. He claimed asylum from the DR Congo in 2005. He says his father was beheaded by political opponents after the family spoke out against abuses. He has lost contact with his wife and three children. He says an asylum judge told him his story was not credible.

Afshin, who is originally from Iran, spoke to the Independent Asylum Commission about his experiences in the UK, where he has lived for the past 12 years.

He says he waited five years for a decision on his case - a refusal.

“If someone would tell an Iranian that in a Western country they treat you like this, they wouldn’t believe you - because they think there is so much humanity there because we have such a brutal government.”

Shoherah Muhummad, originally from Somalia, gave evidence to the commission in Leeds.

She says she struggled to get adequate legal representation to help her to prepare her case before asylum assessors.

“I was running around not knowing where I was going. The only thing that has been going through my head was why did I come to the UK - I made a very big mistake.”

Migrants are key to future for business

Scotsman

SKILLED migrant workers in Scotland are set to bring £2.4 billion to the UK economy over the next four years, a report by a recruitment agency has claimed.

The Future Flows report compiled for Harvey Nash by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) has predicted that Scotland will host around 26,000 migrant workers over the period – making up 3 per cent of the UK total.

The workers, who are likely to be employed in industries such as financial services and IT, will mainly come from the European Union, including new accession states such as Romania and Bulgaria.

In addition to filling and creating jobs, CEBR also forecasts that spending by migrant workers will bring £13bn to the Scottish economy by 2012.

Harvey Nash’s chief executive, Albert Ellis, said: “Skills are critical to the UK economy, but critically lacking in our current workforce. Far from undermining the UK labour market, migration is vital to future economic stability, helping to fill in the gaps created by older and under-skilled workforces and make a important vital economic contribution.

“Businesses in Scotland need to embrace skilled migration, as well as offer flexible and rewarding working practices for home-grown talent, in order to safeguard their long-term and global competitiveness.”