Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference Working Group on Migration and Integration 2019 – 2nd Interim Report

BSPCBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceWorking Group on Migrationand Integration2nd Interim ReportBSPCBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceBaltic Sea ParliamentaryConferenceWorking Group on Migrationand Integration2nd Interim Report2The BSPC Rapporteur on Working Group on The Baltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceMigration and Integration (BSPC) was established in 1991 as a forum forpolitical dialogue between parliamentarians© Stockholm / Schwerin 2019 from the Baltic Sea Region. BSPC aims at rais-ing awareness and opinion on issues of currentpolitical interest and relevance for the BalticSea Region. It promotes and drives variousText: Hans Wallmark initiatives and efforts to support a sustainableenvironmental, social and economic develop-Editing: Bodo Bahr, Ralph Hermannsson ment of the Baltic Sea Region. It strives at en-and Jördis Palme hancing the visibility of the Baltic Sea Regionand its issues in a wider European context.Layout: produktionsbüro TINUSBSPC gathers parliamentarians from 11 na-Photos: BSPC Sec Gen tional parliaments, 11 regional parliamentsand 5 parliamentary organisations aroundthe Baltic Sea. The BSPC thus constitutes aunique parliamentary bridge between all theEU- and non-EU countries of the Baltic SeaRegion.BSPC external interfaces include parliamen-tary, governmental, sub-regional and otherorganizations in the Baltic Sea Region andthe Northern Dimension area, among themCBSS, HELCOM, the Northern DimensionPartnership in Health and Social Well-Be-ing (NDPHS), the Baltic Sea Labour Forum(BSLF), and the Baltic Sea States Sub-regionalCooperation (BSSSC).BSPC shall initiate and guide political activ-ities in the region; support and strengthendemocratic institutions in the participatingstates; improve dialogue between govern-ments, parliaments and civil society; strength-en the common identity of the Baltic Sea Re-gion by means of close co-operation betweennational and regional parliaments on the basisof equality; and initiate and guide politicalactivities in the Baltic Sea Region, endowingBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference them with additional democratic legitimacyBodo Bahr and parliamentary authority.Secretary GeneralThe political recommendations of the annual+49 171 5512557Parliamentary Conferences are expressed in abodo.bahr@bspcmail.netConference Resolution adopted by consensuswww.bspc.netby the Conference. The adopted Resolutionshall be submitted to the governments of theBaltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the EU, andBSPC Secretariatdisseminated to other relevant national, re-Schlossgartenallee 15gional and local stakeholders in the Baltic Sea19061 SchwerinRegion and its neighbourhood.Germany3Contents0. Summary ........................................... 81. Purpose ........................................... 102. Mandate ........................................... 113. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress ......... 145. Working Group Meetings four, five and six ................ 215.1 The Working Group on Migration and Integration, heldits fourth meeting on the premises of State Parliament ofSchleswig-Holstein in Kiel on 17 December 2018. . ..... 215.2 The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integrationheld its fifth meeting in the plenary hall of the State Duma ofKaliningrad on 29 March. . ........................ 315.3 The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration heldits sixth meeting together with the Baltic Sea ParliamentaryYouth Forum in the plenary hall of the Castle in Schwerinfrom 27 till 28 May 2019. ........................ 386. 2nd Intergovernmental Survey .......................... 887. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region ..... 89List of Members ...................................... 122WG Secretariat ....................................... 126Annex 1 ............................................. 127Introduction 5IntroductionHans WallmarkLadies and gentlemen,Migration and integration continue to be central themes of politicaldiscussion and debate in our countries. In some election campaignsin particular, the discussion of these issues often still plays a decisiverole, even though other areas - such as the climate debate, but alsothe increase in international tensions - have moved more to the forein the meantime.Internationally, for the first time, there has been a comprehensiveagreement on the subject at the global level. The overwhelming ma-jority of the countries around the world have adopted the UnitedNations GLOBAL COMPACT FOR SAFE, ORDERLY ANDREGULAR MIGRATION although this has been linked to somediscussions in some countries and not all countries have signed theagreement. The European Union has presented in March a Progressreport on the Implementation of the European Agenda on Migra-tion. Russia has launched a migration strategy. The discussions inthe individual countries are - although no longer in the fierceness asthey were about 3 years ago – still often conducted very emotional-ly and with reference to ideological basic views.Against this background, the working group has further deepened thetopic with the focus on the Baltic Sea region. On the one hand, theconsultation of governments on the subject was continued and extend-ed. A number of best-practice examples from different regions were in-troduced into the discussion and discussed. A scientific analysis of theresults of the interviews was commissioned from the Migration Insti-tute of Finland in Turku and is included in this report. This needs to befurther refined. Further conclusions must be drawn from this.6 IntroductionThe working group was informed in detail about the situation inRussia during a meeting in Kaliningrad, so that the informationbase covers the entire Baltic Sea region.During a 2-day Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in Schwerin,the topic was discussed by the working group together with youngpeople from the Baltic Sea countries.The results were and are taken into account in the work of the work-ing group and presented by representatives of the young people in-volved during the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference.Since the working group, like the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Confer-ence, can only pass unanimous resolutions and submit correspond-ing recommendations for action, consensus-oriented recommenda-tions for action for the entire Baltic Sea region have been and are be-ing developed. Against this background, the work focuses primarilyon the discussion of best practice examples and projects that can berecommended as examples for the entire Baltic Sea region.Discussions during this year’s annual conference are also expectedto make a further contribution to this.Since integration as a result of migration processes takes place par-ticularly at the municipal level, it is important to convey relevantapproaches to solutions in this area.Recent stocktaking and reports on integration measures in the re-gional and municipal areas in particular show that after the migra-tion waves of 2014 to 2016, which in part led to excessive demandson the ground due to the speed and extent of the migration, a situ-ation has now arisen that has led to more structured approachesthrough intensive measures and comprehensive cooperation be-tween a wide range of stakeholders. As a result, successful pathshave been taken with regard to integration processes, which havenoticeably reduced uncertainty and emotionality in the managea-bility of the topic.The next meeting of the working group will take place in Octoberin Hamburg in the context of a migration forum attended by morethan one hundred experts and project leaders.The governments of the entire Baltic Sea region have commentedon the initial recommendations for action already made at the lastBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference. The results are published onthe BSPC website. Governments are also invited to comment onthis year’s further recommendations for action.2nd Interim Report 7I would like to thank Ms Carola Veit, the President of the State Par-liament of Hamburg and Vice-Chair of the working group forchairing the working group meeting in Kaliningrad and co-financ-ing the policy analysis of the surveys as well as my fellow Swedishcolleague Pyry Niemi for chairing the working group meeting inKiel when I had to fulfill other parliamentary duties. My thanksalso go to the President of the State Parliament of Schleswig-Hol-stein for hosting the meeting in Kiel, to the President of the Region-al Duma of Kaliningrad and the Russian State Duma for hostingthe meeting in Kaliningrad as well as to the President of the StateParliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for hosting and organiz-ing the meeting and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum inSchwerin. Furthermore, I would like to thank all the members ofthe Working Group for their high-quality contributions, the inten-sive discussions and the harmonious atmosphere as well as all thosewho support the work of the Group with the highest level of com-mitment. Only through such highly committed cooperation is itpossible to achieve results in such a difficult policy area that willbring us forward in reality.The working group will prepare its final report with final recom-mendations in the spring of next year and present it to the next con-ference in Vilnius in August 2020.Irrespective of progress in the field of integration, the issue of mi-gration remains a central issue of international policy. Only throughfar-sighted agreements to solve the causes and by avoiding wars,natural disasters and famines can migration be controlled and inte-gration be successful in the medium and long term with a high de-gree of acceptance.Hans WallmarkMember of the Parliament of SwedenChair of the Working Group on Migration and Integration8 0. Summary0. SummaryThe BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration waslaunched by the 26th BSPC in Hamburg on 5 September 2017. Thetopic for the Working Group is a reflection of the events that tookplace in 2015 with the so-called refugee crises and the shared – al-though various - challenges it created in our region.The Working Group is constituted as an ad-hoc working group un-der the auspices of the Standing Committee of the BSPC in accord-ance with the BSPC Rules of Procedure. The primary outcome ofthe activities of the working group is to elaborate political recom-mendations on the topic of migration and integration.Regarding the associated complexity of the issue, the BSPC Stand-ing Committee in Trondheim decided to extend the mandate of theBSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration by a furtheryear. Therefore, the Working Group decided to present a 2nd inter-im report for the Annual Conference in Oslo.This opened the opportunity to build on the results of the work todate and, with due thoroughness and within the available time-frame, to achieve further results that are suitable for advancing theissue in the Baltic Sea region. The Working Group will present thefinal report with further recommendations and calls for action tothe governments of the Baltic Sea Region at the Annual Conference2020 in Vilnius.The scope of work of the Working Group covers, but is not limitedto, issues such as• The state of the refugee crisis, migration and integration inthe Baltic Sea Region;• Best practices in migration and integration;• Measures to solve current challenges;• Challenges and opportunities for integration;The Working Group and its members should – according to theirmandate determined by the Standing Committee of the Baltic SeaParliamentary Conference - aim at raising the political attention onmigration and integration and contribute to the exchange of knowl-edge and best practices within its area of responsibility.For this purpose, the Working Group established and maintainscontacts with relevant institutions, organizations and other actors0. Summary 9in the Baltic Sea Region and furthermore help to actively drive co-operation in the Baltic Sea Region as well as to follow and influencepolitical initiatives.During the past year, the Working Group held 3 further meetingswith a large number of experts in Kiel in December 2019, in Kalin-ingrad at the end of March 2020 and in Schwerin at the end of May2020.The meeting in Schwerin was held in conjunction with a Baltic SeaParliamentary Youth Forum. The young participants involved hadbeen nominated by the member parliaments and discussed the top-ic with the working group members. The results will be presentedduring the annual conference in Oslo and will be taken into ac-count in the further deliberations of the working group.During the first year of its activity, the working group had conduct-ed a survey among the governments of the Baltic Sea Region. Thegovernments have commented on a number of issues. This surveywas deepened and expanded during the past year. The governmentstatements constitute a unique compilation of information on theissue from across the Baltic Sea region. The Standing Committeeand the working group have commissioned a political science anal-ysis. This was carried out by the Institute for Migration in Finland.The results will be presented during the annual conference in Osloand incorporated into further discussions.The working group’s recommendations for action, which were in-corporated into last year’s 27th resolution, were forwarded to thegovernments of the member parliaments for their comments as partof the overall Mariehamn resolution. The statements of the govern-ments have been incorporated into the further work and will be dis-cussed again. The recommendations for action of the annual confer-ence in Oslo will also be sent to the governments with a request fora statement on implementation. This will provide the workinggroup with an overview of the results of its work and recommenda-tions for government action during the running work.The next meeting of the working group will take place from 24 to 27October 2019 in Hamburg in conjunction with a migration forum.This opens up the possibility of coming into contact with around 100experts and project participants from the entire field of migration andintegration and of incorporating the results of their work into furtherconsultations. Further meetings are scheduled for late January 2020in Berlin and April 2020 on the Åland Islands. The working groupwill present its final report with further recommendations for actionduring the Annual Conference 2020 in Vilnius.10 1. Purpose1. PurposeThe purpose of the 2nd Interim Report is to present a further set ofpolitical recommendations from the BSPC Working Group on Mi-gration and Integration (WG MI) to the 28th BSPC in Oslo 25- 27August 2019. This is pursuant to the mandate of the WG.The report also gives a cursory account of some challenges that theWG has discussed with a number of experts during the second yearof its work. It includes also the statements and answers receivedfrom the governments of the Baltic Sea States to a second surveyamong the governments. On these documents it will be possible toidentify similarities and differences and to draw conclusions for thepossibilities of joint action.2. Mandate 112. MandateThe BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration was es-tablished by a corresponding decision of the BSPC Standing Com-mittee on 3 September 2017 by the Baltic Parliamentary Confer-ence on 5 September 2017 at its 26th annual conference in Ham-burg. The BSPC Standing Committee in Trondheim decided on 13November 2018 to extend the mandate of the BSPC WorkingGroup on Migration and Integration by a further year.In accordance with this decision, the scope of work of WG MI cov-ers, but is not limited to the following main items:A. Migration and integration in the Baltic Sea region - a survey on the current situationThe refugee crisis as well as the topic of migration and integrationdefer in the Baltic Sea region states. To find a common platform fordeliberations about common activities it seems to be necessary, thatthe working group elaborates a common fundament for the discus-sion by collecting information about the current situation in theBaltic Sea region countries and its immigration policies.The information base should cover migration routes not only fromthe South and East to the West and North of Europe but also fromother continents to Europe.B. Best practice examplesThe WG should, through e.g. expert presentations, study visits andquestionnaires, collect and compile examples of best practices, inte-gration programmes and measures, follow and influence politicalinitiatives. The issues should embrace various aspects related to mi-gration and integration. The aim is to get an impression of the stateof migration and integration in the Baltic Sea Region and to identi-fy where common action is possible and further action is needed.This will form one part of the base for the political recommenda-tions of the WG. It should also be examined how the BSR countriescould benefit from the experience of other countries.12 2. MandateC. Measures to Promote IntegrationThe WG should, by means of e.g. expert presentations, study visitsand questionnaires, collect and compile examples of measures topromote integration.The aim is to identify typical measures that have been applied andto assess the achievements made. This also serves to identify gapsand needs for measures to promote integration. This will form an-other part of the base for the political recommendations of the WG.The WG should further help to actively drive cooperation and de-velop recommendations for improving collaboration and exchangeof information between Baltic Sea countries in matters related toimmigration and migratory flows between various authorities, or-ganisations and other operators.D. Political RecommendationsThe primary outcome of the activities of the WG is to elaborate po-litical recommendations migration and integration. The politicalrecommendations should be based on an assessment of the specificrole and added value that the parliamentarians can contribute forthe promotion of integration. The political recommendations con-stitute a manifestation of the joint political push that parliamentar-ians of the BSPC can exert on the governments of the Baltic Sea Re-gion.3. Objectives 133. ObjectivesThe overarching objective of the Working Group is to elaborate po-litical positions and recommendations pertaining to migration andintegration. For this purpose, the Working Group established andmaintains contacts with relevant institutions, organizations andother actors in the Baltic Sea Region.The scope of work of the Working Group covers but is not limitedto issues such as• The state of the refugee crisis, migration and integration inthe Baltic Sea Region;• Best practices in migration and integration;• Measures to solve current challenges;• Challenges and opportunities for integration;The Working Group and its members should aim at raising the po-litical attention on migration and integration, for instance by pur-suing those issues in the national parliaments of the members of theWorking Group. Moreover, the Working Group should contributeto the exchange of knowledge and best practices within its area ofresponsibility. It should furthermore help to actively drive coopera-tion in the BSR on this policy field and to follow and influence po-litical initiatives.The Working Group provided political input to the Conference res-olutions of the 27th and the 28th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Confer-ences and will provide further input to the 29th annual conference2020 in Vilnius.14 4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress4. Scope of Work – Programmeand Work in ProgressAt its first meeting in Hamburg on 5 December 2017, the WorkingGroup discussed the following Scope of Work and agreed with itscontents:4.1The 24th BSPC Resolution in 2015, the 25th BSPC Resolution in2016 and the 26th BSPC Resolution in 2017 included sections onMigration and Integration, as follows:1. Expressing against the background of the current situation theirsolidarity with the refugees which are forced to flee their home-lands, being aware of the big challenge to secure a safe res-idence (2015);2. to educate and integrate refugees into the labour market as soonas possible and to exchange experiences with best practice ex-amples within the Baltic Sea Region. And also embed the socialpartners comprehensively and at an early stage in these efforts(2016) and3. being convinced that the issues of Migration and Integrationpose a tremendous challenge to all countries in the Baltic SeaRegion as well as a great chance for their further development.Those issues call for intensive dialogue as well as close coopera-tion and coordinated policies also between the Baltic Sea States(2017).The BSPC Standing Committee had intensive discussions on thesituation of refugees in Europe and on the topics of migration andintegration in its meetings on 6 November 2014 in Riga, on 28January 2016 in Brussels, on 15 November 2016 in Hamburg, on23 January 2017 in Brussels and on 28 April 2017 in Hamburg.The members of the Standing Committee reported on the differ-ent situations and discussions in the BSR member countries. Itwas pointed out, that this topic is of great significance and poses atremendous challenge to all countries in the Baltic Sea region. TheStanding Committee was highlighting that it is necessary to ex-change views on own experiences, political approaches and per-spectives among the parliamentarians Working on migration andintegration is furthermore one of the BSPC Priorities in 20174. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress 15- 2018, especially finding solutions based on mutual informationand best practices.In their speeches on Migration and Integration the 26th BSPC inHamburg 2017 Pedro Roque, President of the Parliamentary As-sembly of the Mediterranean, and Isabel Santos, Vice-President ofOSCE PA an the Vice-Chair of the OSCE PA ad hoc Committeeon Migration, pointed out, the only solution to cope with the mi-gration challenge is more solidarity and more collaboration byco-operating closely on the regional, European and global level andto start having a dialogue on what type of migration policy can bedeveloped together in Europe.4.2The purpose of this Scope of Work (SoW) is to provide a back-ground and framework for deliberations on the scope and issues ofMigration and Integration, as well as on the added-value and rec-ommendations that the Working Group (WG) could deliver to dealwith the challenges of migration and integration.The draft SoW is a living document that will be adjusted andamended continuously. The SoW contains descriptions and anal-sesof relevant issues within the field of migration and integration, to-gether with examples of practical efforts to promote integration ofmigrants. Input is gathered from topical external sources and can beadded from the Homework carried out by the WG members them-selves. This material constitutes the basis for the WG ́s assessmentof possible action needs and political recommendations with regardto Migration & Integration.The draft SoW could also serve as a template and raw material forthe structure and content of the mid-way report and the final reportof the WG.4.2.1 Objective and Scope of the WGThe overarching objective of the Working Group is to elaborate po-litical positions and recommendations pertaining to Migration &Integration. Strong emphasis should be placed on integration. In-sights from previous BSPC Working Groups on Labour Mobility,Labour Market and Social Welfare as well as on Human Traffickingcould be incorporated.16 4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in ProgressThe scope of the Working Group should include, but not be limit-ed to, areas such as• A clear definition of which kinds of migration the WGwould like to discuss (refugees, migrant workers, smuggling& trafficking etc.)• Causes of flight;• Migration policy goals;• Governance guidelines;• Demographic development and migration;• Status and trends in migration;• Challenges of migration;• Challenges of integration;• Prospects of migration;• Best-practice examples of integration.The Working Group and its members should deepen the politicalattention on migration & integration, for instance by pursuingthose issues in the parliaments of the members of the WorkingGroup. Moreover, the Working Group should contribute to the ex-change of knowledge and best practices within its area of responsi-bility. For this purpose, the Working Group should establish andmaintain contacts with relevant institutions, organizations and oth-er actors in the Baltic Sea Region and beyond.4.2.2 Defining Migrants and RefugeesWith more than 65 million people forcibly displaced globally andboat crossings of the Mediterranean still regularly in the headlines,the terms ‘refugee’ and ‘migrant’ are frequently used interchangea-bly in media and public discourse. According to the UN HighCommissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the two terms have distinctand different meanings1:Refugees are persons fleeing armed conflict or persecution. Therewere 21.3 million of them worldwide at the end of 2015. Their sit-uation is often so perilous and intolerable that they cross nationalborders to seek safety in nearby countries, and thus become interna-tionally recognized as “refugees” with access to assistance fromstates, UNHCR, and other organizations. They are so recognizedprecisely because it is too dangerous for them to return home, and1 See: http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/7/55df0e556/unhcr-viewpoint-refugee-migrant-right.html and: http://www.oecd.org/els/international-migration-outlook-1999124x.htm4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress 17they need sanctuary elsewhere. These are people for whom denial ofasylum has potentially deadly consequences.Refugees are defined and protected in international law. The 1951Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol as well as other legaltexts, such as the 1969 OAU Refugee Convention, remain the cor-nerstone of modern refugee protection. The legal principles they en-shrine have permeated into countless other international, regional,and national laws and practices. The 1951 Convention defines whois a refugee and outlines the basic rights which states should affordto refugees. One of the most fundamental principles laid down ininternational law is that refugees should not be expelled or returnedto situations where their life and freedom would be under threat.The protection of refugees has many aspects. These include safetyfrom being returned to the dangers they have fled; access to asylumprocedures that are fair and efficient; and measures to ensure thattheir basic human rights are respected to allow them to live indig-nity and safety while helping them to find a longer-term solu-tion. States bear the primary responsibility for this protection.Migrants choose to move not because of a direct threat of persecution, butmainly to improve their lives by finding work, or in some cases for educa-tion, family reunion, or other reasons. Unlike refu-gees who cannot safelyreturn home, migrants face no such imped-iment to return. If they chooseto return home, they will continue to receive the protection of their gov-ernment.According to the UNHCR, the distinction is important for indiv-id-ual governments. Countries deal with migrants under their ownimmigration laws and processes. Countries deal with refugeesthrough norms of refugee protection and asylum that are defined inboth national legislation and international law. Countries have spe-cific re-sponsibilities towards anyone seeking asylum on their terri-tories or at their borders. Conflating refugees and migrants couldhave serious consequences for the lives and safety of refugees. Blur-ring the two terms takes attention away from the specific legal pro-tections refugees require. It could undermine public support for ref-ugees and the institution of asylum.18 4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress4.2.3 Status and Trends in Migration and FlightAt the end of 2016 more than 65,5 million people were forciblydesplaced worldwide, 22,5 million of them are refugees. 55 % ofthe refugees worldwide came from three countries: South Sudan 1,4million, Afghanistan 2,5 million and Syria 5,5 million. Over half ofthe 22,5 million refugees are under the age of 18. More than 60 %of the refugees worldwide are Internally Displaced Persons (IDP),forcibly displaced in their own country. (Figures published by theUNHCR on the 19th of June 2017.)2.The following stats are extracted from the United Nations Depart-ment of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division’s report“International Migration Report 2015”3:The number of international migrants worldwide has continued togrow rapidly over the past fifteen years reaching 244 million in2015, up from 222 million in 2010 and 173 million in 2000.Nearly two thirds of all international migrants live in Europe (76million) or Asia (75 million). Northern America hosted the thirdlargest number of international migrants (54 million), followed byAfrica (21 million), Latin America and the Caribbean (9 million)and Oceania (8 million).Between 2000 and 2015, positive net migration contributed to 42per cent of the population growth in Northern America and 32 percent in Oceania. In Europe the size of the population would havefallen between 2000 and 2015 in the absence of positive net mi-gra-tion.The following topics are to be deepened in the further course of thework:4.2.4 Causes of flight and migration• poverty• crisis and wars2 http://www.bpb.de/politik/hintergrund-aktuell/250498/weltfluechtlingstag-20-06-2017 andhttp://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html3 See: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/publications/migrationreport/docs/MigrationReport2015.pdf , http://gmdac.iom.int/global-migration-trends-factsheet and http://gmdac.iom.int/oecd-iom-and-undesa-organise-first-international-forum-migration-statistics4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progress 194.2.5 Migration policy goals concerning among others• integration of women, children and juveniles in terms of• safety• education• work• prevention of terror and recruitment of terrorists in our na-tions4.2.6 Governance guidelines regarding among others• welcoming culture• joint standards• joint political messages• conditions in the countries of arrival (like housing ...)4.2.7 Demographic development and migration• Perception of interdependencies• to take appropriate joint steps4.2.8 Challenges and prospects of refugees, migration &integrationPast BSPC Working Groups on Labour Mobility, Labour Marketand Social Welfare as well as on Human Trafficking partially dealtalready with the challenges and topics of migration & integration.In its final report to the 18th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conferencein Nyborg in 2009, the BSPC WG “Labour Market and Social Wel-fare” wrote, for instance:In the Working Groups’ discussions, it became apparent that cross-border labourmarkets can contribute to improving employment opportunities and to dynamic re-gional development, which benefits the economy, business and employees. Such mar-kets promote flexibility, open up options for experiencing different working condi-tions, resolving conflicts in different ways, and conveying oth-er hierarchical struc-tures, cultures and values.All the same, challenges exist, like information deficits, imbalances between freedomsand rights on the labour market, uneven regional developments, demographic chal-lenges, labour shortages, labour deficits in certain professions and various economicsectors, migra-tion of young and qualified employees, illegal labour, wage dumpingand working conditions, social-security issues when working in two countries, reha-bilitation options, unemploy-ment-benefit issues in the case of casual work,20 4. Scope of Work – Programme and Work in Progressvocational training, taxation of companies employing temps, lack of language skills,poor traffic infrastructures, deficits in the social dialogue between government, au-thorities, companies and trade unions, etc.Experience has shown that, when a decision is taken to seek work in another countryor even in a neighbouring country, a whole host of questions emerge for employees,but also for employers. In the so-cial area, these concern social-security issues, all theway from health, long-term care and accident to unemployment and pension insur-ance. Labour-law questions, like protection against unlawful dismissal, collectivewage agreements or employee rights in a com-pany, play a similarly large role. Tothis must be added – against a backdrop of different fiscal regulations – questions oftax law. Oth-er subjects include the specific statutory social benefits, e.g. for chil-drenor families.Some regions and countries have already responded in recent years by setting up in-formation centres, info points, Internet platforms or cross-border commuter projects.In other areas, comparable initiatives do not exist.In the course of its activities over the past year, the working grouphas been increasingly concerned with integration issues and bestpractice examples in the field of integration. At the same time, ref-erence was made during the deliberations to reports from other in-stitutions in which basic questions, facts and trends of migrationwere presented and dealt with in detail. The extent to which the var-ious aspects of the scope of work have played a role in the past yearcan be seen from the following presentation of the outcome of thedeliberations and the stocktaking of the individual meetings sincethe presentation of the first interim report 2017 in Mariehamn.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 215. Working Group Meetingsfour, five and six5.1 The Working Group on Migration and Integration, heldits fourth meeting on the premises of State Parliament ofSchleswig-Holstein in Kiel on 17 December 2018. Delegationsfrom the Denmark, Finland, Hamburg, German Bundestag,Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Nordic Council, Norway,Poland, Russian State Duma, Schleswig-Holstein and Swedenparticipated in the meeting. The meeting was chaired by PyryNiemi, representing the Chairman of the WG during theSwedish Chairmanship.The Working Group discussed the following expert presentations, asecond intergovernmental survey of the Working Group, as well as theupcoming activities and meetings.22 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Expert PresentationsPresentation by Ms Sabine Hahn, Coordinator of the PolicyArea Education, Hamburg Institute for Vocational Educationand Training on “EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region -presentation of the new action “Recognising potential - easingthe way for newly arrived refugees”http://www.bspc.net/?attachment_id=8397Ms Sabine Hahn, Coordinator of the Policy Area Education, Ham-burg Institute for Vocational Education, informed the WorkingGroup on the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region’s new action“Recognising potential – easing the way for newly arrived refugees”.Ms Hahn explained that they were working on the EU Strategy forthe Baltic Sea Region with four sub-areas: education, research, em-ployability as well as the integration of refugees. The latter pointhad been added because of the refugee crisis in 2015. Of the actionslisted in the EU Strategy, she said she would focus on the fifth item:recognising potential – easing the way for migrants. In 2015, therehad been a huge inflow of migrants to Europe. While the inflowhad shrunk in 2016, Ms Hahn believed the current situation to bemore of a pause. As such, it was still a common challenge in the Bal-tic Sea area to integrate these people into society. At the same time,she noted the demographic change. People also had to be integratedinto the labour market. There was a high demand for labour, yetthere was a mismatch of these components. Ms Hahn stressed thatthis was not only on the Working Group’s agenda but also on thatof her institute.She described the Baltic Sea area as a set of similar countries thatnonetheless had different mindsets regarding their openness to-wards migrants. More cooperation was required. Therefore, theywere aiming to create transnational actions, binding together gov-ernments, to create and improve integrated measures for migrants.This would come together in a new flagship.The actions already established so far focused on the exchange ofbest practices, as called for in the Action Plan for the Baltic SeaStates. A platform for said exchange was in place; in addition, meth-ods and systems were being developed and tested. Once validated,the goal was to allow local actors to use these, facilitating entry intothe labour market. Among the challenges was the need of countrieswith aging populations to add to the labour force; yet, there werevarious respective attitudes around the Baltic Sea. What was neededto deliver on that need was an insurance that migrants would learn5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 23a new language and would obtain access to work-based learning soas to be eventually integrated into the labour market.Ms Hahn next spoke about the emerging flagship. One of theirgoals was to separate the policy sub area “integration” from the ex-isting flagship “School to Work” and create a new one, which wouldbe an MRS cross-cutting flagship, involving all macro regions. Shestressed that it would not be limited to the Baltic Sea but rather en-velop all the macro-regional strategies of the EU. They were cur-rently in a dialogue with stakeholders in Northern Germany onpossibly providing anchoring for this flagship; no decision had yetbeen made. The financing would possibly be enabled through a co-ordinated ESF call in 2019, targeting the integration of migrants.The plan called for the flagship to be established in 2019, with akick-off meeting in Hamburg. That meeting was expected to takethe form of a conference or a forum on the integration of migrants.Preparations for that forum had already begun. The goal was tobring together 100 participants, representing the public and privatesector. Thus, best practices could be shared, and knowledge ex-changed. To that end, 30 workshops were planned, with 5 runningin parallel, respectively. Accordingly, each participate could takepart in up to 6 workshops. Two half days were planned. Discussionwould concentrate on the needs and gaps of the issue.Presentation by Mr Matti Mäkelä, Head of the ProjectManagement Office, City of Turku/Education Divisionon “Knowledge platform – integration of newly arrivedrefugees”http://www.bspc.net/?attachment_id=8398Mr Matti Mäkelä, Head of the Project Management Office, City ofTurku/Education Division, began his presentation on “Knowledgeplatform – integration of newly arrived refugees” by informing theworking group about the flagship School to Work, a platform fortransnational cooperation, allowing policy-makers to zero in on tar-get groups, learn from each other and to develop new ideas. Theplatform further permitted exchange of best practices as well as thelaunch of new initiatives and projects. He went on to describe thestructure of the flagship, with Sweden’s SALAR as the leader, over-seeing three sub-platforms, namely the NEET knowledge platform24 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6operated by Norden in Sweden as well as the two platforms EarlySchool Leaving and Newly Arrived Refugees, both run by the Finn-ish city of Turku.For Mr Mäkelä, the way this had come about was a good examplefor regional cooperation. He noted that he was also the chairman ofthe Baltic Sea task force for employment and well-being. This taskhad proved very similar to the flagship School to Work. According-ly, three years ago, it had been decided to work together instead ofpursuing the same work separately. This was one of the main ideasin their work load, to collaborate. All the materials, seminars, poli-cy recommendations, events, information about conferences hadbeen gathered in a development report, which also contained bestpractices.The goal was to allow people to join the flagship with its sub plat-forms, no matter at which stage of transnational cooperation theywere. The very first level consisted of collaboration through meet-ings or study visits, allowing the exchange of ideas. On the next lev-el, there was cooperation, including benchmarking, shadowing andpeer review. All of this was leading to an ever-closer cooperation inpursuit of the joint goals, exchanging best practices. Learning fromeach other was one of the primary concerns; Mr Mäkelä pointedout that this was the only way to prevent each nation from makingthe same mistakes another country may have already made.He went on to note the case of BSR Integrate Now, a project focusedon the exchange of best practices to smooth integration into societyas well as the development and testing of methods and systems sup-porting integration. The city of Turku was the coordinator, comingtogether with their partners from Sweden, Stockholm’s SALAR andSALA from Malmö as well as the Norden Association. Rather unusu-al, he noted, was the final partner, namely the Thomas More Univer-sity College from Belgium which helped them to create and studynew ways of guidance for migrants and refugees. He pointed out thatthese were just the partners with funding from the project. Theknowledge platform in total counted some sixty members, and if oneincluded all organisations in some way associated with the platform,the number would skyrocket to well over 100. As such, Mr Mäkeläsaid, this provided a good basis for the creation of a new flagship.Although a comparatively long time ago, he noted the events of2017, with a kick-off seminar in Stockholm in June and a numberof workshops which had led into the transnational cooperationevents of 2018, starting with a March conference on the integrationof newly arrived migrants and refugees in Rostock, Germany, underthe heading “Sharing the European Dream”. The goal was to create5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 25a vision for immigration in 2038 in the Baltic Sea region. The re-sponsibility on the side of Mr Mäkelä’s team covered eight work-shops on labour market integration along with study visits, trainingsessions on entrepreneurship and appreciative inquiries as well asthe collection and dissemination of good practices through theknowledge platform on their website. Furthermore, they worked onwidening the national and Baltic Sea region networks.In these two years of operations, Mr Mäkelä noted that they hadlearned a number of lessons. First of these was that transnational coop-eration truly worked and created added value. For example, the city ofTurku had learned much about the mentoring process in Hamburgwhich had by now been implemented in the Finnish city. Other bestpractices adopted from Baltic Sea countries included the integrationknowledge centre that would be launched in Turku in 2019.Another lesson was that new working models were required. As anexample, he noted their work on “study visits 2.0”, based on theidea that there had to be a better follow-up to the visit, elaboratingwhat added value had been generated for each organisation. Duringthe study visits themselves, there should also be more input gather-ing for the Baltic Sea region.Furthermore, Mr Mäkelä pointed out that the cooperation both onthe Baltic Sea and the European level should be mainstream work,to get the best out of the cooperation as well as the available resourc-es. With the new flagship emerging, he expected there to be somevery interesting discussions and work ahead.26 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Mr Niklas Muhlack, AWO regionalassociation Schleswig-Holstein, Integration Center Kiel, onthe project “Landgewinn” – empowerment of migrants in ruralareas through social and democratic participation”http://www.bspc.net/?attachment_id=8399Mr Niklas Muhlack, “Arbeiterwohlfahrt (= a national workers’ wel-fare association) (AWO) Schleswig-Holstein”, presented the project“Landgewinn” – empowerment of migrants in rural areas throughsocial and democratic participation”. Specifically, their task was em-powering migrants in rural areas through social and democratic par-ticipation. The programme had been launched in October 2017,scheduled to last until the end of 2019. Funding had been providedby the federal programme “Demokratie leben!” (“Living Democra-cy!”) and the ministry of the interior of Schleswig-Holstein. Withtheir core idea of empowering migrants to participate socially andpolitically, their goal was not merely to provide shelter and food fornew arrivals but also to give them the opportunity to have theirvoices heard. They approached this through a political mentoringprogramme between migrants (“mentees”) as well as local and re-gional politicians (“mentors”).He further noted that “Landgewinn” had succeeded another AWOprogramme which had suffered from the problem that the country-side had always been a blind spot. Because the challenges in rural ar-eas differed from urban areas, the former had been selected as the5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 27focal point. In “Landgewinn”, each mentoring scheme lasted fourmonths per region. The project had begun in the north of Schle-swig-Holstein, moving gradually further south. The idea was thatthere were one or two individual meetings between the mentee andthe mentor each month. Here, the mentee might accompany thementor to a political party’s conference or to a local or regional par-liament. This would provide the mentee with an idea of how poli-tics worked and what politicians in Germany were doing, even onthe local level. In addition, mentees attended six-day-long work-shops on various political topics, for example on human rights, fed-eralism or the different roles played by the political institutions inGermany. The project also offered an educational trip to Berlin perinvitation of a member of the federal parliament, providing a round-ed picture of the entire political scheme of Germany by visiting theparliament and several ministries.The main goals of the project were that migrants would acquire ba-sic knowledge about politics in Germany and get to know the struc-ture of civil society. Moreover, they would obtain an overview aboutexisting associations, organisations and parties, entering into con-tact with these institutions. The project was aiming to empower themigrants to build personal networks for their own social and polit-ical participation. Mr Muhlack considered the latter to be a veryimportant aspect. He noted that some of the mentees had becomepolitically active after their time in the project. The speaker pointedout that the original implementation in the first two regions hadworked as a “kick-starter” for political participation. Currently, theproject was talking to the district administration on how to use thestructure created by “Landgewinn” and turn this into a permanentinstitution. This could be handled by founding clubs or other struc-tures that had been non-existent in the rural area so far.Presentation by Ms Vanessa Perbos, AWO regional associationSchleswig-Holstein, Integration Center Kiel, on the project“Hayati” (Arabic: my life) – Integration of female migrants inthe labour market, on “Knowledge platform – integration ofnewly arrived refugees”Ms Vanessa Perbos, AWO regional association Schleswig-Holstein,Integration Center Kiel, informed the Working Group on the pro-ject “Hayati” (Arabic: my life) – Integration of female migrants inthe labour market. This project had been designed for refugee wom-en in Kiel who were unable to take German language courses be-cause they had to take care of their young children at home, notleast because of the paucity of appropriate child care facilities in28 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Kiel. “Hayati” had been conceived to give these women the space tolearn and at the same time provide child care for their children.The project had run from November 2017 to May 2018 and hadbeen funded by the Schleswig-Holstein Ministry of Economics, La-bour, Transport and Technology as well as the Job Centre of Kiel.The target group had been refugee women and their children underthe age of six, without alternative child care options. 26 women and19 children had been involved in the project, forming a highly di-verse group, considering the country of origin, the time spent inGermany or the educational background. The project had beenstaffed with two project coordinators, two interpreters and fourchild carers. The time frame had been Mondays to Fridays, from09:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., with an additional one-hour meeting permonth with the coordinators.“Hayati” had primarily aimed to empower refugee women, to allowthem to integrate into society and to prepare them for their aca-demic or professional future – an important goal for the ministry –as well as for a German integration course. The project’s structurewas based on the one hand on daily child care.In the project, the first challenge had been building trust within thegroup. This, Ms Perbos stressed, did not simply refer to the womenon the one side and the staff on the other but also between the5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 29women themselves. After that, the next challenge had been how thewomen understood their roles in the family and in society. Yet an-other challenge had been posed by the mental health of the women.Some of them had seen horrific things on the way to Germany, hadsuffered through very difficult living conditions or had lost mem-bers of their family back in Syria or Afghanistan.Ms Perbos went on to describe the successes of the project: Child-care was one of these as it had enabled the women to have time forthemselves. The children themselves had also benefited, showingquick development in their motor skills. All participants also bene-fited from strong linguistic development. It had been gratifying forthe staff members to witness the strong bond between the womenthat had formed during the project and was still in existence at thistime. Moreover, the women had been empowered. They had alsodeveloped a better understanding of the system, with some of themforming concrete aspirations for their professional lives. Last butnot least, the high participation rate of the women in the integra-tion course was also considered a great success. Six months after thecompletion of the project, a large portion of the women were stillattending that course on a daily basis.Presentation by Mr Aljoscha Tischkau, Turkish Communityin Schleswig-Holstein, on the project “Diss-kriminierung –empowerment of young participants against discrimination”http://www.bspc.net/?attachment_id=8400Mr Aljoscha Tischkau, Turkish Community in Schleswig-Holstein,presented the project “Diss-kriminierung – empowerment of youngparticipants against discrimination”. In the project’s title, “Diss”stood for diversity, inclusion and self-confidence as well as self-em-powerment. The project was targeting youths with migrationalbackgrounds from various origins that were often facing problems.Mr Tischkau described the maxims and goals of the project as em-powerment as well as life-world orientation. The speaker presenteda short video featuring various modern music elements, and hestressed that the entire video from start to finish, including the pre-sented songs, had been created in the project’s workshops.Their work, Mr Tischkau said, consisted of workshops and miniprojects as both medium and method.The programme was funded by “Demokratie Leben” and the Turk-ish Community.30 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6A series of workshops had been started that would run until Febru-ary 2019, with different topics about power structure, execution ap-proaches, exchanges of experiences, legal frameworks of conditions,development of options for action and empowerment. In the sec-ond phase, begun in April 2018, multiplier training had been start-ed so they could launch their own mini projects which were to berun from February 2019 to the end of that year. Also, part of thisphase had been “Beats in the Park”, a youth festival where theycould present their own topics. Some two thousand people had at-tended the event. The series of workshops had been set at twelveevents.The idea of the project had been to begin with state-wide work-shops, leading into the multiplier training, all to strengthen theoverall goals of providing support and guidance on the issue of dis-crimination among young people and to empower them. A primarymotto here was “Each one, teach one”, meaning that you could giveback what you deserve from society. Mr Tischkau stated that theproject was aiming at strengthening youths in their experiences andtheir subjectivity while treating each other with appreciation and es-teem. Thus, exclusionary experiences were recognized and per-ceived.Next, Mr Tischkau spoke about empowerment which he describedas taking control of your own life at the individual level and deter-mining your own identity. Here, he pointed out that they were con-sidering empowerment at three levels: the personal, group and so-cial levels. Bringing these topics and people together was very im-portant for the empowerment process. Another aspect was teachingto give something back to society. He stressed that all these threelevels had to be addressed, also in parliamentary debate.Empowerment was a bottom-up process facing numerous chal-lenges.Mr Tischkau also explained that the group conducted media work– including studio and video production -, allowing the participat-ing youths to bring their work to the public. Mini projects were be-ing conducted at schools or youth centres.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 315.2 The BSPC Working Group on Migration andIntegration held its fifth meeting in the plenaryhall of the State Duma of Kaliningrad on 29March. Delegations from Åland, Finland, Germany,Hamburg, Latvia, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern,the Nordic Council, Poland, Russia and Swedenparticipated in the meeting. Chaired by Ms CarolaVeit, Vice-Chair of the Working Group and Presidentof the Hamburg State Parliament the Working Groupdiscussed the below listed expert presentations on theRussian perspective on migration and integration,current aspects of the issue from the perspective of theCBSS as well as upcoming activities and meetings.Welcome speeches were given by Ms Marina Orgeeva, Chairpersonof the Kaliningrad Regional Duma, and by Ms Valentina Pivnenko,Head of the Delegation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Fed-eration to the BSPC.Marina Orgeeva pointed out that migration played an importantrole in Kaliningrad. Most migrants had come from other parts ofRussia such as Siberia or the Russian Far East. Because of the32 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6vibrant economy of the region, an influx of labour was in demand.The speaker stressed that new businesses in the region demandedmore people. For this reason, she concluded, migration was wel-comed in Kaliningrad.Valentina Pivnenko expressed her strong opinion that issues con-cerning migration must be solved together and that cooperationwith the rest of Europe in these matters was essential. She also de-scribed how the Kaliningrad region was trying to attract more peo-ple to come there. One concrete way was that migrants from theRussian Far East were given one hectare of farming land if they de-cided to settle down in the Kaliningrad region. At the same time,she stressed, it was important to fight illegal immigration into thecountry.Carola Veit stressed that the meeting in Kaliningrad was fulfilling arequirement that the working group set itself from the outset: TheWG wanted to have an overall picture of the issue of the workinggroup from the entire Baltic Sea region and incorporate the situa-tion in all states and regions of the members into its discussions andrecommendations. That is why the WG had conducted surveys to-gether. That also meant that the WG was visiting the individualcountries and regions, with local experts reporting on the respectivesituation. In this way, the WG achieved a broader information basethan was otherwise available in other formations. The questions re-lated to the topic of the working group were often discussed veryemotionally and controversially in all countries. She explained thatthese issues were influencing the situation not only in these nationsbut also in neighbouring countries and beyond, touching on funda-mental values and moral concepts. Carola Veit referred additionallyto the United Nations Migration Compact, the Progress report onthe implementation of the European Agenda on Migration as wellas the Russian Action Plan on Migration.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 33Expert PresentationsPresentation by Kirill Adzinov, Head of the Department forthe organisation of visa work at the Main Department forMigration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of RussiaKirill Adzinov stated that another way of making migration easierwas the abolition of visa requirements. He expressed his convictionthat in the near future it would be possible to issue an electronic visathrough a web-based system. The aim of modern visa systems wasto facilitate visits to Kaliningrad for not least the large groups of vis-itors from Poland and Finland. Mr Adzinov informed his audiencethat Russia had introduced a new law on asylum in 1993. Sincethen, there had been many dramatic changes in and around Russia.The conflict in Ukraine had led to 271,000 asylum seekers comingto Russia in 2014. Three years later, there were only some 9,000Ukrainians seeking asylum in Russia. Around 500 of those personsgranted asylum in Russia had ended up in Kaliningrad. These weremostly Ukrainians, but also some Afghans.Presentation by Ms Victoria Ledeneva, Head of theDepartment for methodological support of social and culturaladaptation and integration of foreign citizens at the FederalAgency for Nationalities of Russiahttps://www.bspc.net/ledeneva/Victoria Ledeneva explained that many people were coming to Ka-liningrad to work for a limited amount of time before returning totheir country of origin. For those who decided to stay, a state policymeasuring integration should be applied. The goal was to avoid allpossible tensions between the migrants and the Russian society. Inthat regard, the speaker noted that in Kaliningrad, and in Russia asa whole, there was a very strong emphasis on social adaptation andintegration, not least on a regional or local level. It was a prioritythat newly arrived migrants were introduced to Russian customs,laws and culture as well as to the Russian language. Thus, the exclu-sion and segregation, as well as the creation of ethnic enclaves, wereavoided. Migrant adaptation was described by the expert as a com-plex process where the migrant had to adapt not only to a new geo-graphical environment but also to a new set of social, political, cul-tural and economic realities. In order to succeed with this task, a34 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6number of agencies and local society cooperated with each other. Invarious Russian regions, newly arrived migrants were offered helpby migration centres where fingerprint registration was being per-formed as well as a medical examination, registration for health in-surance policy, translation of documents and testing of languageskills and knowledge of Russian history. There were also call centresfor migrants, information portals online in different languages anda sort of “Sunday school” for migrants.Victoria Ledeneva responded to a number of questions and com-ments, especially from Prof Jānis Vucāns and Maria Tolppanen.Because of the mentioned measures, ethnic enclaves were not agreat problem in Russia, according to Ms Ledeneva. Some 80 per-cent of all the migration labour came from Uzbekistan and they hadall been thoroughly checked before entering into Russia.She concluded by pointing out that currently, residence permitswere issued for a period of five years. That, however, was soon to bechanged. Late in the previous year, a new concept for migration inthe Russian Federation had been adopted for the years 2019-2025.One of the new policies was that residence permits could be issuedfor an unlimited period of time.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 35Presentation by Mr Victor Musikhin, Director, privateinstitution for additional education, “Practices of theCenter for Assistance to Migrants on organizedrecruitment and involvement of foreign citizens fortemporary employment in the Kaliningrad region, theirsocial adaptation and integration”.https://www.bspc.net/центр-помощи-мигрантам/Victor Musikhin informed the Standing Committee about the ac-tivities of private companies facilitating the migration of workers tothe Kaliningrad region. The companies, including the one he repre-sented acted as a sort of intermediary, provided additional educa-tion and attracted migrant workers. He mentioned that there wereother similar organisations in other parts of Russia, but he believedthat his was among the better organized ones. Mr Musikhin ex-plained that every year, around 2,000 migrants were seeking his or-ganisation’s help. They might come from neighbouring countriessuch as Poland or Lithuania, or from places like Germany, Italy orChina. The vast majority, however, was from Uzbekistan. There waseven a direct flight service between Kaliningrad and Uzbekistan.Typically, a company in Kaliningrad would contact the organisa-tion with a request for what kind of employee they were looking for.The organisation would then search for a suitable employee (proofof asked for skills and a clean criminal record were demanded) andwould send the request to the Office of Labour Migration. Afterthat, interviews would be carried out over Skype. If the interviewwould turn out satisfactory, an invitation would be extended, andthe company would meet the migrant at the airport, helping him orher with all the paper work and could even provide a low-interestloan to get settled before the first salary.Concluding his presentation, Mr Musikhin stressed that eventhough it all sounded fairly smooth, there was still too much bu-reaucracy surrounding the whole process.In response to questions from Victoria Ledeneva, Prof Jānis Vucānsand Bodo Bahr, Victor Musikhin pointed out that it would bemuch easier if there were only one state agency dealing with thesequestions instead of several. A more standardized process would runfaster and smoother.36 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Ms Vladlena Avdeeva, Project Manager at theNGO Stellit in St Petersburghttps://www.bspc.net/children-at-high-risk-of-humantrafficking_par-ticipation-in-the-decision-making-process/Vladlena Avdeeva emphasised that unlike some other countriesaround the Baltic Sea, there were few unaccompanied minors inRussia. One reason for that was that Russian immigration alwaysdemanded a valid passport or ID to cross their borders.Although the numbers of unaccompanied minors were relativelylow in Russia, that did not mean that there was no such problem.Ms Avdeeva described her organisation’s work dealing with childrenat high risk of human trafficking. She pointed out that according toUNICEF, about 28 percent of the victims of trafficking worldwidewere children. In 2016, about 10 million children had been victimsof trafficking. The real number was likely even higher as many caseshad never been detected or reported. Stellit had done research on113 children from Russia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan living in shel-ters in St Petersburg. According to results of their consultationswith children, one of the most important characteristics of provid-ing assistance for children was taking their opinions into accountand informing them about the situation. The speaker noted that thecomponents of the “ideal” shelter for children included giving themthe opportunity to develop everyday skills and to have private spaceas well as providing opportunities for creative activities aimed atself-realization, sports and education. She summed up her speechby stating that consultations with children as “experts” could beused in developing preventative programs and recommendationsfor professionals involved in the identification and rehabilitation ofchildren who had suffered from abuse, exploitation and human traf-ficking.Presentation by Mr Bernd Hemingway, Deputy DirectorGeneral of the CBSS Secretariathttps://www.bspc.net/bspc-on-migration-and-integration/Bernd Hemingway emphasised in his presentation that migrationwas growing in the Baltic region and that it was now the largestcomponent of demographic change. Member states were still strug-gling with the large influx of asylum seekers in 2015. At the sametime, other countries in the Baltic region were facing the oppositeproblem – that of high emigration. He stated that in 2015, there5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 37had been around 10 million Russians living abroad while in thatsame year, Russia had hosted over 11.6 million migrants. Similartrends could be seen in Poland and the Baltic states. Mr Heming-way warned that these countries were running the risk of sufferingfrom a brain drain.He pointed out three fundamental factors for successful integra-tion: labour and the possibility to provide for your own means ofliving, language skills and, thirdly, education and health care. Onecould also add a fourth factor: a welcoming culture in the host soci-ety.Mr Hemingway also stressed that demography played an importantrole. While not the only answer to the problems posed by an ageingpopulation and declining birth rates, migration certainly couldmake a difference. Fears that labour migration would result in high-er unemployment among citizens in the host country were, in hisopinion, exaggerated. Especially when highly skilled migrant work-ers were taken into account, the effect could be the contrary – theircontribution could make the whole economy grow. The problem ofrecognizing foreign diplomas in many countries, though, still need-ed to be solved.He emphasised that for those reasons, we should welcome migra-tion but also make sure that the people coming to work in ourcountries were treated fairly and given the same fundamental socialrights as everyone else. He noted Belgium as an example where caregivers (a much-needed profession in our ageing societies) were pro-vided with good working conditions.Mr Hemingway mentioned that in order to have a successful influx,immigrants’ access to health care for all was of utmost importance.That included health care being offered in different languages andin different cultural contexts. Another important task he mentionedwas making sure that the children of immigrants succeeded inschool. Today, far too many did not finish their education.Lastly, he mentioned the important role of the media in this respect.Of course, the media were free to cover whatever they wanted, butthey should be careful about which words they used when describ-ing migration. There was a tremendous need to refrain from usingdiscriminatory and xenophobic language.38 5. Working Group Meetings 4-65.3 The BSPC Working Group on Migration andIntegration held its sixth meeting together withthe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in theplenary hall of the Castle in Schwerin from 27 till 28May 2019. Delegations from Åland, Baltic Assembly,Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Russia, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden participated in the meeting.The meeting was chaired by the Chairman of theWorking Group, Hans Wallmark, Member of theSwedish Parliament.5.3.1 Working Group meeting, 27 May 2019The Chairman of the Working Group, Hans Wallmark, remindedthat the Working Group had conducted two surveys of the govern-ments regarding its target issues and had received responses frommost governments. Subsequently, the group had decided to com-mission a political analysis based on the responses and statements.A first version had been received in May, with a revised version fol-lowing shortly thereafter incorporating comments and remarks bymembers of the Working Group.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 39Presentation by Ms Carola Veit on the results of theStatements and Answers of the Governments in the BalticSea Region to the surveys of the BSPC WG and the PolicyAssessment and Recommendations of the Migration Instituteof Finland on Baltic Sea Region Governments’ Immigrationand Integration Policyhttps://we.tl/t-VyXNJosad4Carola Veit, President of the State Parliament of Hamburg and BSPCWG Vice-Chair provided a presentation on the Results of the State-ments and Answers of the Governments in the Baltic Sea Region tothe surveys of the BSPC WG and the Policy Assessment and Recom-mendations of the Migration Institute of Finland on Baltic Sea Re-gion Governments’ Immigration and Integration Policy. She pointedout that this Working Group is a very good example of the collabora-tive approach to work at the BSPC. The speaker explained that theWorking Group on Migration and Integration had been establishedat the 26th BSPC conference in September 2017, nearly two yearsearlier, in the light of the so-called irregular immigration of 2015 and2016. In that respect, after listening to presentations on migrationalhistory, the aim of the group had been to rather target the integrationissue, looking for best practice examples. They had looked at severalsuch examples at their meetings, with the last having been held at Ka-liningrad in March. There, they had obtained a general overview aswell as a number of details on the Russian migration experience andintegration policy. This, she underlined, had been new territory forthem. Ms Veit also thanked Ms Valentina Pivnenko for allowingthem to take such a deep dive into the Russian migration policywhich was a very educational experience.The speaker noted that the Working Group had debated commonquestions to be included in the surveys which were sent to the re-spective governments by each delegation. That had been at the verybeginning. Their goal was to learn from the best practice examplesand develop proposals to improve cooperation regarding integra-tion. Afterwards, they had prepared a second survey, specifyingitems of interest, and had decided to prepare a more expert-level as-sessment, to get a significantly more professional and in-depth anal-ysis and interpretation of this data. They had received the this ex-pert analysis of the responses of the Baltic Sea governments and ad-ministrations on integration policy from the Migration Institute inTurku, Finland.For future work and discussion needs, Ms Veit offered a presentationconsisting of the findings by the Migration Institute and the secondquestionnaire, thus giving an overview of the assignment so far.40 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6The first catalogue of questions had been answered by 10 countriesand 4 regions, the second had received replies from 10 countriesand 3 regions. In the second round, the Working Group had aimedat comparing different costs of accommodation, numbers of appli-cants and measurements taken by the governments to better inte-grate asylum-seekers. The replies to the second round had been dis-cussed at the Working Group meeting in Copenhagen in the previ-ous year.It had become apparent that that a comparison of data was not easyas there was no common database.Ms Veit presented the topics of the questionnaire, pointing out thatthe Migration Institute had generated main subjects such as com-mon settlements or common practices and enhanced discussion onfinding more common ground in integration policy among BSPCgovernments.Addressing the surveys themselves, she noted that they had had toassume that the numbers would strongly diverge. Some demo-graphic comparisons had been possible, though. The percentage ofpeople with or without migrational background had been one ofthe questions. On the national level for example, the highest level ofinhabitant migration had been shown by Latvia and Estonia at 40per cent, followed by Sweden and Germany, Norway and Den-mark. On the regional level, it was interesting to know that in Ålandand Hamburg, one third of all inhabitants had a migrational back-ground. Regarding the age range of people with migrational back-ground, the largest group was between 20 and 24 years old, with theexception of Lithuania where the dominant age range was between51 and 64 years of age. Each nation around the Baltic Sea had itsown set of immigration and integration policies.Another question in the survey had concerned the requirements forasylum, dual citizenship and work permits. Advisory services formigrants, asylum-seekers and refugees had been differentiated bystate and beneficiary. For example, Lithuania offered a one-stopshop integration programme, unlike most other countries. With re-spect to languages, most regions and countries were offering lan-guage courses, while vocational training was more rarely on offer.They had also looked at the topic of family reunification. That hadbeen the field where the analysis of the Institute had taken the leadregarded detentions and involuntary evictions. They had receivedmore numbers regarding evictions. Nonetheless, it had been diffi-cult to compare these figures. Now, though, they had arrived at anoverview of comparable figures, based on the numbers of asy-lum-seekers in the various years of concern. The highest numbers in5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 41some countries, she pointed out, had been reached in the years2015, with Germany for instance taking in more asylum-seekersthan in 2016. Ms Veit also compared the numbers of asylum-seek-ers in Sweden and Germany, showing a very different development.Regarding voluntary returns, the numbers were highest in Germa-ny, followed by Poland and Sweden. In terms of evictions, the num-bers in Poland were significant, she said, noting the stark increase.Norway showed a decline of evictions from 2015 to 2017. Forcountries like Germany, Sweden, Estonia and Finland, the numbersof forced returns were first listed for 2015 and afterwards. In Nor-way and Poland, for instance, the number of forced returns haddropped after 2015.Regarding minors, the questions to the survey showed that eachcountry was trying its best to support the minors. The WorkingGroup had discussed best practices in the regions and countries, notleast at its latest meeting in Kaliningrad. In the survey, costs hadbeen another topic which had proved difficult to derive an over-view. Regarding accommodation, all countries and regions wereunited in the importance of volunteer work.Ms Veit moved on to the suggestions and questions posed by theMigration Institute, such as enhancing and stimulating conversa-tion among BSPC members. The politicians had to focus on whichpoints they could work further. The Institute had suggested that thequestions of the study should be improved, with emphasis on localdifferences as well as the diverging political goals. It had also provid-ed questions and suggestions regarding asylum policy. Ms Veit not-ed that these might be discussed at the Working Group’s next meet-ing, after proper preparation. The Institute had also elaboratedquestions on immigrant integration, specifically on the multifacet-ed character of immigration, working conditions, three-way inte-gration and public action.Ms Veit considered the future of the survey, that the overall goalshould be discussed. The question was whether the convergence be-tween the BSPC states and regions should be augmented or wheth-er the focus should be put on finding best practice examples or sim-ilarities. Ms Veit called for a decision on which matter was morecurrent, asylum seekers or immigrant integration. Regarding inte-gration, a consensus had already formed. Putting this together withthe analysis, the Migration Institute might be able to present the re-sults at the BSPC’s next conference or the Working Group’s meet-ing.During that meeting the Working Group also took note of the com-pilation of the governments’ statements and responses to the42 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6demands concerning migration and integration of the 27th resolu-tion (See chapter 7 of this report).The Working Group further agreed to hold the next meeting on 23- 25 October in Hamburg, back-to-back with the European Forumon the Integration of Migrants and Refugees which will take placeon 24-25 October 2019.The Working Group also underlined to hold two more meetings in2020. The first meeting in 2020 is planned for the end of Januaryin Berlin, the second meeting at the beginning of April on Åland toforward the final results to the BSPC to the 29th BSPC in Vilnius.The Working Group further on confirmed to publish a Second In-terim Report.5.3.2 Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth ForumDuring the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum – hostedby the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern -politicians and a number of experts made comprehensivecontributions to the topic of migration and integration.Building on this, the young participants, who had beennominated by the member parliaments, discussed the topicintensively with the members of parliament and experts inseveral rounds of discussions, taking various aspects intoaccount, and drew conclusions. The results will be presentedby 2 representatives of the young participants during theannual conference in Oslo and will be included in the furtherdiscussions of the working group.The main contents of the speeches and presentations are presented be-low:5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 43Opening of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth ForumSchwerin, State Parliament, Plenary Hall, 28 May 2019Chaired by Beate Schlupp, First Vice President of the State ParliamentOpening address by Ms Birgit Hesse, President of the LandtagMecklenburg-VorpommernThe Youth Forum was opened with the address by Ms Birgit Hesse,President of the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.She began by addressing the moving times the parliament – and shepersonally – had gone through recently, after the tragic loss of heresteemed predecessor, their colleague and friend Sylvia Bretschnei-der. She assured her listeners that they would keep her in mind,adding that some had said their farewells to Ms Bretschneider at thestate mourning ceremony, the first in the history of Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern, while others could express their grief in thebook of condolence in the castle.After only having been elected into office five days earlier, Ms Hes-se already had the opportunity to open this important internationalmeeting. She pointed out that it stood for two points dear to herheart: openness to the world and the involvement of young people.44 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6These points were of the utmost importance for a society thinkingabout and for the future, indicating the value of the forum for agood and socially balanced development. She hoped that the in-volvement of the young delegates from the BSPC member regionswould provide new perspectives and impulses. The dialogue be-tween established politicians and the younger generation should befruitful for both, perhaps especially with regard to the topic. Shenoted that “migration and integration” had also seemed predomi-nant in the run-up to the European elections of the previous daywhich had led to a political reorientation of the continent. Ms Hes-se was quite convinced that the results of these elections in the dif-ferent countries would also play an important role in the discus-sions at the brink of this meeting. She added that she was a Europe-an and proud to be a European.She was delighted to welcome the attendees to the castle, one of themost beautiful state parliament seats in Germany. Together with the‘Residence Ensemble’, it was also on the German tentative list as aUNESCO World Cultural Heritage Site. She went on to note thatthe plenary hall was a particular highlight of the castle. The heart ofthe political Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, it had been opened oneand a half years earlier by Ms Bretschneider. Meeting there, MsHesse stressed, underlined the importance of the Working Groupmeeting, since the federal state was committed to promotingcross-border cooperation, especially in the Baltic Sea region. Shealso mentioned the beauty in general of her state, noting that it wason the top as a tourist destination in Germany.Ms Hesse mentioned that, in her former political office as ministerresponsible for health policy, she had given a presentation at a BSPCStanding Committee meeting. There, she had focused on the chal-lenges of medical care in rural regions – a topic that had been pickedup by the annual BSPC conference in Rostock Warnemünde. Themeeting had taken place in Stralsund nearly four years earlier, at theend of May 2015. Pofessor Jānis Vucāns, she remembered, had beenboth at that meeting and was present that day. The presentation hadbeen an exceptional and gladly remembered experience for thespeaker.She concluded by wishing the attendees a successful meeting andfruitful debates, then yielded the floor to the first vice president ofthe Landtag Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Ms Beate Schlupp. MsSchlupp, as Ms Hesse pointed out, was both a member of the Work-ing Group and would serve as chairperson for the remainder of theopening section.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 45Opening address by Ms Beate Schlupp, Vice-President of theLandtag of Mecklenburg-VorpommernMs Beate Schlupp welcomed the attendees in her capacity as a mem-ber of the Working Group on Migration and Integration of the Bal-tic Sea Parliamentary Conference. Ms Schlupp further noted thatthe Working Group was special in being given three rather than twoyears of service while the present meeting was special because it wascombined with the Youth Forum. This, she went on, underlined theimportance of the topic of migration and integration which indeedwas a highly relevant political issue that had played a significant rolein the discussions around the European elections. The speaker alsoexpressed her gratitude for the high level of participation from thepartner parliaments for the sixth working group meeting and theBaltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum.Ms Schlupp stated that the focus of the entire session would be onthe integration of migrants – both in the labour market and inschools and training companies. There would be high-profile expertpresentations. All in all, she clarified that the goal was about work-ing out political recommendations for the BSPC resolution.As for the agenda, Ms Schlupp mentioned that Dr Stefan Rudolph,the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Secretary of State from the Minis-try of Economics, Employment and Health, would provide a firstoverview about the situation in that federal state with a specific fo-cus on the economy. Afterwards the Commissioner on Integrationof the Government Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Ms Dagmar Kase-litz, would focus on the issue of migration and integration frommore societal perspective. At that point, Ms Schlupp would handthe chair over to Mr Hans Wallmark, chairman of the WorkingGroup, who would welcome representatives from the Federal Em-ployment Agency, the Schwerin Chamber of Commerce and Indus-try and the Council of the Baltic Sea States.She also joined Ms Hesse in hoping that the attendees would enjoythe castle and its surrounding, welcoming the efforts to establish itas an UNESCO World Cultural Heritage Site. In particular, shehighlighted persons such as Prof Vucāns who had first seen the cas-tle before the fall of the Iron Curtain and could now see the chang-es made to it.Ms Schlupp extended a very warm welcome to the participants of theBaltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum. She urged them to activelyparticipate and to bring in their wishes and ideas. After all, migrationand integration were societal issues strongly connected to the future.That also meant that sustainable solutions had to be found.46 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6The speaker also noted that this was the third instalment of theYouth Forum, after two having been held in Kiel in 2017 and 2015,and she hoped that there would be more such forums, establishinga tradition.She also stated how painful it was for her to hold this meeting with-out the late Ms Bretschneider and noted that the book of condo-lence was still open.Opening address by Mr Hans Wallmark, Member of theSwedish parliament, chairman of the BSPC Working Group onMigration and IntegrationMr Hans Wallmark began by thanking the president and vice-presi-dent of the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern State Parliament for theirintroductions. He then noted that the BSPC in total was still deep-ly marked by the loss of their long-time colleague, Ms Sylvia Bret-schneider. She had been extraordinarily involved in the Baltic Seacooperation, in particular in the work of the BSPC. With her, theyhad lost one of the long-standing pillars of international parliamen-tary cooperation in the Baltic Sea region and a very good friend. MsBretschneider had been president of the BSPC from 2014 – 2015,a member of the Standing and Drafting Committee since 2002.From that time on, she had been on the BSPC observer team. Shehad chaired the Working Group on Sustainable Tourism and thentook on the duty as rapporteur on that topic. She had been the headof the delegations of her parliament. Moreover, she had representedthe BSPC at numerous events throughout the Baltic Sea region: theNorthern Dimension, the Conference of Presidents of Parliamentsof Europe in Oslo and the Parliamentary Assembly of the NorthernDimension in Reykjavik. She had fought with passion for theBSPC’s goals and positions, for a better environment, for the pro-tection of the Baltic Sea and again and again for the issue of migra-tion. Not only had she been intensely involved in this work, asidefrom her duties as President of the Landtag, she had taken part inmany events, but she also made the capacities of her administrationand parliament available for this work.It was very painful that she was no longer with them that day andthat her fervent wish to be present at this event had not been ful-filled. The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference would always re-member her with gratitude. He noted that Ms Veit had alreadyhonoured Ms Bretschneider and her commitment during the statemourning in Neubrandenburg and the previous Monday at the as-sembly of parliamentary presidents.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 47Mr Wallmark said that they had the opportunity to honour MsBretschneider’s memory in her very own plenary hall and askedeveryone to rise for a joint moment of silence.On the part of the BSPC Working Group on Migration and Inte-gration, he also extended his welcome to the attendees. As a mem-ber of the Swedish parliament, he noted that he was particularlypleased that this meeting and forum were being held in Schwerin,in this castle. Sweden and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern had histori-cally been closely connected for centuries. One of the dukes ofMecklenburg, for example, had been King Albrecht of Sweden 650years earlier. He had also been the founder of one of the strongestSwedish symbols, the three golden crowns. Every year, the neigh-bouring town of Wismar provided a reminder of this connectionwith its Swedish festival. In earlier centuries, the Baltic Sea regionhad often been marred by conflicts and up to some 30 years ago bythe Cold War. That day, they were meeting in a situation of closeand friendly cooperation, with the benefit of the entire Baltic Searegion being present. Even though the overall situation had becometense in recent years, parliaments had managed to work togetherand cooperate throughout. The BSPC had managed to work to-gether and cooperate throughout. The BSPC with its 22 memberparliaments and 5 parliamentary organisations had stood since1991 as a platform for cooperation, commitment and confidence topolitical dialogue between parliaments, governments and all civil48 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6societies in the Baltic Sea region. Its goal was to ensure peaceful andclose neighbourliness in close cooperation based on democracy, therule of law, human rights and equal opportunities for all. To thisend, the BSPC wanted to pursue all the possibilities of parliament,of governmental or social exchange for democratic dialogue amongneighbours. Achieving and safeguarding peace and overcomingconflict through dialogue was one of the more fundamental con-cerns. That was why it was so crucial for the BSPC to engage withthe topic of refugees, integration and migration. That was why theyhad been discussing this topic for years in the Standing Committeeof the BSPC and established this Working Group in Hamburg twoyears earlier. That was why the BSPC had adopted recommenda-tions in the previous year, unanimously calling for action in theirresolution.It was high time for young people from their member states were in-volved in this discussion process and to promote the decision-mak-ing in our parliaments. Recent electoral moments had also beenelectrified by discussions about migration and integration. In coun-try after country, this had happened. So, there was a reason to ap-proach this topic with great alacrity as the topic itself was very ex-plosive. Finding common ground or the smallest common denom-inator could be difficult in itself. That was why the issue had to beapproached with more low-key, resolute voices. We had to listen toeach other than to use short, sharp messages in 140 or 280 charac-ters.It was a well-known fact that they all had different positions on mi-gration. Some of their number had been receiving immigrants for aconsiderable time while other countries had dealt with emigrationrather than immigration. Mr Wallmark believed that their differenthistorical experiences could serve as a strength, as they enabledthem to discuss the problems from a multitude of different perspec-tives. By highlighting and discussing best practices, they could seethat they all had something to learn. Sharing information and learn-ing from each other was at the very heart of the Working Group. Inessence, it all boiled down to intensifying the dialogue on migrationand integration between the countries bordering the Baltic Sea andin our society, including the young generation.Parliamentary youth forums had already been successfully run twicebefore in Kiel, in each case on the topic of the respective WorkingGroup. In Mr Wallmark’s view, this was an ideal opportunity foryoung people to discuss an issue that would continue to challengeeveryone intensively in the future, despite all the calming of the cur-rent situation compared to the hustle and bustle of 2015. Theywould also have a lasting influence on society. The young people5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 49and the parliamentarians would be discussing a topic that in somecases had determined the outcome of parliamentary elections. Therewas no better place to debate such an issue than in the plenary hallof a parliament and no better group of people to discuss this withthan young people, the future decision-makers. Mr Wallmark saidthat the future was with them, inside a building marked by so muchhistory. He pointed out that the parliamentarians wanted to listento the young people, wanted to find further solutions together withthem. What the two groups would be doing on that day and thenext was a unique task – young people developing their ideas inconnection with the discussions with members of parliament,bringing them into the decision-making process of 22 parliamentsacross the Baltic Sea which would pass those ideas on to 22 govern-ments, to the Council of the Baltic Sea States and to other institu-tions. The parliamentarians wanted to pick up on the young peo-ple’s suggestions.The Standing Committee of the BSPC had planned that two of theparticipants attending this forum would present the entire forum’sresults during the BSPC’s annual conference in Oslo in August2019. The BSPC conference in Oslo would be on 25 – 27 August2019, offering dialogue, debate, resolutions, friendship and a strongwill to increase cooperation for a peaceful Baltic Sea.Sometimes, Mr Wallmark mused, members of parliaments weresubject to constraints they could not escape. His colleague, PyryNiemi, and Mr Wallmark himself had to be in Stockholm the nextday because they had to take part in a no-confidence vote which re-quired them to cast their votes in person. However, the chairmanassured the forum that they would deal very intensively with theyoung people’s results. The results of the discussions with expertsand with the representatives of the young generation would beclosely scrutinized. The parliamentarians supported the young peo-ple as far as possible.Mr Wallmark concluded his introduction quoting a message fromMs Sylvia Bretschneider to the first parliamentary youth forum ofthe BSPC several years earlier: ‘We would not get anywhere withoutyou. We want to listen to your experience, your appraisal and youropinions. We want to discuss them. It is going to be an exciting ex-perience.’50 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Dr Stefan Rudolph, Secretary of State inthe Ministry for Economics, Employment and Health inMecklenburg-VorpommernDr Stefan Rudolph was delighted that they could jointly discuss thetopic of migration and integration so as to be even more successfulin the future. As the forum would deal intensively with the topic ofintegration, he wanted to use the opportunity to thank them forthis – from the perspective of the state’s economy. Engaging withsuch a topic, looking for solutions helped better position the entireBaltic Sea region economically. When dealing with the topic of mi-gration and integration in the Baltic Sea area, that was not a banalundertaking but rather about the question of how to make the soci-eties of the region fit for the future, if they would accept the com-petition with other regions in the world. That was why here inMecklenburg-Vorpommern, also from the point of view of thestate’s economy, the question was not whether they had to deal withmigration and integration, whether they had to integrate, but rath-er it was only about how to better integrate, how to better learn tobetter work together.The speaker went on that he wanted to show the importance of thetopic of migration and integration for Mecklenburg-Vorpommern,for the state’s own economy, in three simple examples. He stressedthat it was not about the immigrants doing something good for theones already living in a place, but it was about the latter asking theformer for help. That would lead to a good joint future, in Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern and in the entire Baltic Sea region.The first example he mentioned concerned the aspect of the agingpopulation. Statistically speaking, the girls born these days in Meck-lenburg-Vorpommern might get to be 100 years old. That was ex-cellent, but this raised the challenge of how to associate high agewith comfort and well-being. Already today, in this federal state,they were facing the challenge of filling a nursing position – no mat-ter if it’s a trainee or regular position. That already took about 160days to even fill this vacancy. Accordingly, there was concern aboutbeing able to fill such positions. But with the population growingolder and older, it was known today that by 2020, in addition tothose that would have to be replaced, another 2,917 nursing posi-tions would have to be created in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. By2030, yet another 1,430 positions would be required. If one claimedthat they would advertise this among the extant population andthen they would find these workers, Dr Rudolph pointed out thatin 2018, there had been 880 young people leaving school that hadapplied for a vocational position. 880 individuals had wanted tolearn a vocation. The economy in 2018, though, had not offered5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 51880 positions but rather 10,810. This already highlighted the dis-crepancy between young people that were available for training andthe number of people that were needed.Looking at the entire Baltic Sea region, continuing to move into astable future required an answer to this challenge. That was why theYouth Forum was so important. Migration and integration in theBaltic Sea region could not be valued highly enough. Dr Rudolphextended his gratitude to the attendees for thinking intensivelyabout ways and options, about ideas to find solutions. Thus, theyprovided essential assistance to everyone, including, of course,themselves but also to the entire civil society.The topic of migration and integration was as important in thiscountry as in many other nations bordering on the Baltic Sea. In2015/2016, when the great challenges of migration and integrationhad been palpable, he had been state secretary of building, and thequestion had been how to organise living space in an uncomplicat-ed manner to master the situation. Dr Rudolph said that they hadmanaged to do so. The entire state government had come togetherwith many industrious helpers across the entire state. Thus, theyknew how dear this topic was to the citizens of Mecklenburg-Vor-pommern. That was clearly evidenced by the people.But primarily from the point of view of the economy, there was onedecisive step in migration and integration, namely the opportunityto offer the people coming here the chance to get a job. It was notabout just hailing them welcome and then just leaving them alone.They had to be integrated into the world of labour and society. Thistask of integration into the world of labour was a great challengefacing all of them.He wondered why that was the case. To him, the reason was that thepeople who had arrived and who were still arriving symbolized themelting pot of the Earth. The most diverse ways of thinking, themost diverse cultures, the most different approaches to daily work –all of these had to be unified into a chain of decisions so as to findthe best solution for the individual. That was why the State Minis-try of Economy had undertaken something that Dr Rudolph pre-sented with some pride: They had hired 22 employees who were de-voted to dealing concretely with the institutions for immigrants,not from an administrative position but as personal contact part-ners who were offering practical help, going to the authorities andcompanies. These ‘job navigators’ as they were calling them were in-dividually taking care of immigrants looking for a job or trainingposition. More and more, they were gathering positive experience.By that time, in the past twelve months, they had been able to offer52 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6employment to some 700 individuals from the main origin coun-tries of asylum-seekers. These were excelling in their new positions.In many cases, he conceded, this was in rather simple occupations,but while working in these companies, they were being trained,thus increasing their career opportunities in these enterprises.Regarding these specific qualification characteristics, he noted thathis colleague Al-Khouri would provide further explanations.In the task of integrating refugees into the labour market, the stateof Mecklenburg-Vorpommern had already achieved good results,yet it remained true that Germany as a whole needed a foundationto lift all federal states from the experimenting state. That was whythey required a system of immigration for qualified workers fromother countries to gain access to the German labour market. Dr Ru-dolph expected that such a system would be implemented in thisyear.He mentioned that he had to leave soon to go to Berlin where hewould be dealing with the question whether migration and integra-tion could focus solely on qualified labour or whether regulationshad to be implemented for potential trainees from respective othercountries. That day, in Berlin, they would be discussing a qualifica-tion standardisation.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 53Dr Rudolph reiterated how glad he was that the forum was takingon the topic of migration and integration. He had only touched ona small part of the entire topic. Much more had to be taken into ac-count, to be planned. Again, he thanked the attendees for helpingthe governments in solving a fundamental topic, to be able to headinto a more stable future.Presentation by Ms Dagmar Kaselitz, Commissioner onIntegration, associated with the Ministry of Social Affairs inMecklenburg-VorpommernMs Dagmar Kaselitz was happy to greet them in her capacity asCommissioner on Integration. That post had only existed since De-cember 2016 and was associated with the Ministry of Social Affairs.In the minister’s name, she relayed the latter’s greetings and grati-tude for the forum dealing with the topics of migration and integra-tion. In her post, she was working with the commissioners on inte-gration on the federal level as well as the state and communal level.She was contact person for all migrants and those who are workingon integration either full-time or as volunteers. Ms Kaselitz notedthat she was a member of the state’s advisory board on integration.To reduce barriers to integration, she was collaborating with col-leagues from other ministries, the Centre for Political Education andmany other social actors. She considered herself both an advisor aswell as a bridge-builder between the numerous networks and admin-istrations. The focus of her work, inter alia, was supporting volunteerwork, the cooperation with migrants and the protection of refugees.The speaker explained that she was active in the anti-discriminationwork and was supporting the reduction of racism, anti-semitismand violence. She was promoting inter-cultural understanding, sothat all people could live together, sensitive to each other’s culture.Furthermore, she was also working to expand the interculturalopening of all social aspects. One of her goals was for the task of in-tegration as a cross-section topic to be recognized at all levels andimmigrants as well as the majority ethnic group in society to alwaysbe included.In past years, the federal state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern hadvisibly become an immigration state. She pointed out that the num-bers she would mention in her presentation had been extractedfrom the immigration monitoring of the federal states in Germanyand the information from the Statistical Office of Mecklenburg-Vor-pommern. Specifically, they had been raised in 2017.54 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6In Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, among the 1.6 million inhabitants,there were 74,000 people without German citizenship. In 2012,that number had been 34,000. Within only five years, this meansan increase of 2.1 to 4.6 per cent of the population of the state. Mi-grants were coming from 142 countries. These included 13,400people from Syria but also 12,100 from Poland. In the years 2015– 2017, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern took in 32,300 asylum seekers.Among those, in 2015, 23,000 people had arrived. By comparison,in 2017, there had been 3,200. In particular, taking in refugees hadled in 2015 to overwhelming initiatives. There had been an impres-sive engagement by civil society and volunteers. Jointly assumingresponsibility, politicians and administrations on the federal, stateand communal levels had undertaken necessary decisions together,enabling a quick accommodation fit for human beings, medicalcare and social support for the new arrivals. Even today, state andcommunes coordinate their measures regarding integration, agree-ments between state governments and communal leading associa-tions are continued. The government parties of CDU and SPD inMecklenburg-Vorpommern had included topics of integration intheir coalition agreements for the current legislative period.The structures supported by the state regarding integration also en-compassed the advisory board on integration. With one vote each,it included welfare societies, the employer association, the Germanassociation of unions, the integration special services, the refugeecouncil, the service for German as a second language, the Muslimcommunities, the evangelical and catholic churches, the Jewishcommunity, the association of cities and municipalities, the confer-ence for communal commissioners on integration, the federal em-ployment agency, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Edu-cation, the Ministry of Social Affairs and finally Ms Kaselitz herselfas State Commissioner on Integration. Migranet, as the umbrellaorganisation of migrants, was represented with two votes in the ad-visory board on integration. Under the leadership of the advisoryboard on integration, the conception of the state integration meas-ures was currently being continued. The board expected the con-ception to be passed to the state parliament after the summer break.Ms Kaselitz said that those who demanded integration also had topromote integration. Integration required structures, consistentcontact persons at all levels, meeting places and people filling thoseplaces with life. For that, guaranteed financing was necessary. Theintegration of people was a vital task especially now, which wouldrequire much more time. Also needed was long-lasting financial en-dowment. At this point, the federal level was involved with a flat in-tegration allowance in the integration costs by states and municipal-ities. The state was passing on part of the federal money to cover the5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 55inherent costs to the municipal counties and independent towns.This distribution was often the subject of hard debates by the par-ties. Since 2016, the places actually taking in refugees were receiv-ing aid of 100 euros per year for each accepted refugee. Moreover,the state with its integration fund from 2016 – 2019 had contribut-ed a total of four million euros to promote integration projects. Forlong-term integration to succeed and participation to increase, itwas vital for the necessary support not to fail because finances mightrun low. It was important for them that the federal governmentcontinues to be involved in the financing of integration measures.For Ms Kaselitz, only this would allow the social cohesion to beguaranteed.Important structures for the state-level integration had been organ-ised by the federal government, such as integration courses, consult-ing for migrants, both for adults and minors. The state Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern here was supporting such consulting serviceswith further offices of its own. The project Integration by Qualifica-tion by the network Labour for Refugees was one such effort. Inte-gration special services in three branches had been established in thestate. Financial support continued to be provided by the state forlanguage courses and psycho-social consulting. An interactive maphad been developed as a welcome portal, listing all important con-tact points for refugees.At the municipal level, the integration structures were very di-verse, Ms Kaselitz pointed out. Numerous networks or round ta-bles had grown up around the topic of integration. Four out of sixcounties and two independent towns were connected via federaleducation program coordinators. For refugees who had been ac-cepted and granted safe shelter, so-called integration navigatorswere available for the first two years. Nonetheless, the speakerconceded that some counties no longer offered such navigator ser-vices while navigators had become full-time employees in otherdistricts. Five out of six counties employed commissioners on in-tegration or integration coordinators. The same applied for thetwo independent towns. Only three further places offered full-time integration officers. All extant integration officers, the mi-grant organisations, the refugee council and soon the state sportsassociation were forming the working group on migration in thecounty association.The Ministry of Social Affairs regularly invited the municipal com-missioners on integration. Organised by the Ministry of the Interi-or, there were follow-up conversations with all relevant ministriesfor the municipal commissioners and in particular for the refugeecouncil and representatives of churches and welfare societies.56 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Ms Kaselitz stressed that this enumeration of services regarding in-tegration in no way should be seen as complete. There were furtherinitiatives, such as by the Ministry of Education, or in the areas ofschools and universities or promoting projects. Other such initia-tives were being promoted by the Ministry of Economy as well as bythe job centres. She pointed out the state-wide organisation of theIntercultural Weeks, the Week Against Racism, the Day of the Ref-ugee, the Development Policy Days and other events which increas-ingly refer to topics of migration and refugees. Native people as wellas migrants were taking part together in such events.The speaker added her insight into the integration of children andteenagers. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, behind Saxony andBrandenburg, had the third-highest proportion of under-18-year-olds with a migrational background at 28.6 per cent of the popula-tion. The share of the under-18-year-olds with a migrational back-ground in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern had risen from 2015 to 2017saw the greatest rise compared with all other federal states. This ledto particular challenges regarding childcare institutions, school en-rolments from the first day, attending vocational preparation classesand subsequent vocational training. Especially clubs and associa-tions active in child and youth work, such as cultural and sports so-cieties, were active for these age groups.At the Conference of Integration Ministers in April 2019, Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern had addressed the participation of young mi-grants in the educational area and introduced an application to en-able children and youths from third-party countries with residentpermits to take part in club journeys to other countries. Here, anagreement on the EU level is required, similar to the one alreadymade for school journeys. This initiative was supported by all 16German federal states.Cohesion in society had to be lived and filled with meaning. For MsKaselitz, migrant organisations were important partners. In Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern, more than 50 clubs of migrants had come to-gether under the umbrella organisation Migranet e.V. At their thir-teenth annual conference this year, they had celebrated their tenth an-niversary. The speaker considered it a great benefit to have an interestgroup of migrants in the federal state, with such a wide variety ofcountries of origin as well as languages, cultures and religions. Theyhad become an indispensable partner for many actors in the state.The state government appreciated them deeply and that they were co-operating so well. With their great competence and personal experi-ence, she considered migrants irreplaceable partners in questions ofintegration. They were politically active and, among others, broughttheir resolutions to public awareness. In this year, resolutions were5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 57passed on the following topics: a call to vote in the municipal and Eu-ropean elections, connected to the demand for municipal votingrights for everyone living and working in the state; a reinforced sup-port for language teaching in child care institutions and schools aswell as a call for individual access by children and youths with migra-tional background to all educational levels. The representatives of mi-grant organisations had expressed their opposition to the planned de-tention prior to deportation in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Theyhad demanded, as part of the implementation of the Istanbul Con-vention, that women be protected from violence, no matter their res-ident status. There had been comprehensive calls for equal rights formigrants but also for lesbians, homosexuals, transsexuals and inter-sexuals – groups that were often the target of discrimination. Mi-granet had actively participated in the foundation of the umbrella or-ganisation of migrant organisations for eastern Germany.She further noted that there was also cooperation with the umbrellaorganisation of female migrants. As Commissioner on Integration,Ms Kaselitz had been preparing since the previous year with activepartners the expert conference on integration. In 2019, it would beheld in November on the topic of the contribution by migrant or-ganisations and religious communities for coexistence in Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern. This was how she honoured the great commit-ment by migrants and the partially already ongoing inter-religiousdialogue in the state.Nonetheless, in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, high social engage-ment and volunteer work were sometimes opposed by xenophobia,right-wing populism and racial discrimination. People who still hadnot found their place in German society, she noted, were less openfor a tolerant coexistence with people with a migrational back-ground. The opportunity to forge contacts with foreign-born peo-ple in one’s personal environment was often low in as sparsely pop-ulated a state as Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Diversity, the speakersaid, could not be experienced as daily reality in many regions. Thetight focus on media reporting – which she viewed as not always re-sponsible – did not contribute to the improvement of political dia-logue. So, there were indeed state-specific and eastern Germanpoints of view. The panel of eastern German commissioners on in-tegration was therefore a vital tool. Ms Kaselitz noted that the pan-el regularly met to discuss specific topics.The success of integration was of immense importance for the fu-ture of society and the country. The speaker addressed the youngparticipants of the forum, calling on them to commit to unified andsolidary action of the countries represented at this event and all Eu-ropean nations. Responsibility had to transcend borders.58 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Meeting Part I: Vocational/occupational integrationof migrants, 27 May 2019Schwerin, State Parliament, Plenary Hall, 28 May 2019Chaired by Hans Wallmark, Chairman of the WGThis part of the event featured a series of expert presentations on thesubject vocational/occupational integration of migrants as well as apresentation on the involvement of young people in the work of theCouncil of the Baltic Sea States:Presentation by Mr Thomas Letixerant, Managing OperationalDirector of the Regional Directorate North of the FederalEmployment Agencyhttps://we.tl/t-13SzT4337hThomas Letixerant began by clarifying his task as taking a particularlook at the labour market and vocational training situation of refu-gees in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. He said that in April 2019, un-employment in general in the state had been as low as never beforesince reunification. For the first time in an April, the state had lessthan 60,000 unemployed persons, a reduction from the previousyear by 9 per cent. Unemployment among migrants had alsodropped significantly on a year-by-year basis, by 8.2 per cent.Among refugees, the number of unemployed individuals had gonedown by 390.At the same time, the number of employed persons had risen inMecklenburg-Vorpommern, to a record level. The same could besaid for the demand for workers. Enterprises in the state had a la-bour demand that was equally higher than ever before. Develop-ments in the labour market for refugees, he stressed, had to be seenin light of the overall very positive situation on the labour market.So, it was a good framework for the situation affecting refugees.The number of unemployed refugees had varied in the past year,currently at 3,040. At the end of the preceding year though, it hadbeen as high as 3,610 individuals. In other words, Mr Letixerantsaid, there had been a continuous decline of the number of unem-ployed people. At the same time, though, the number of refugeesmoving from unemployment into the first labour market were in-creasing steadily month by month. This was happening in largernumbers than had been the case in the preceding two years.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 59He noted that this was a very nice situation, although it was of in-terest which sectors could absorb refugees – i.e. where refugeescould find occupation. To some degree, this was similar to the over-all picture of insurable employment in the state. Mecklenburg-Vor-pommern was a tourist destination. Accordingly, the hospitalitysector offered most opportunities. As such, the highest number ofjobs taken up by refugees were in this sector, with more than a quar-ter of refugees working in hospitality – much like a good share ofthe overall working population.Looking more closely at the sociodemographic characteristics, MrLetixerant explained what the refugees had to offer. Trying to re-duce it to the most simple, he attempted to describe the ‘typical’ ref-ugee – although he immediately cautioned that this could only bedone in a statistical approach. Such a refugee was male, rather youngand had not completed full vocational training – going by Germanstandards. This in turn posed a huge challenge. While there hadnever been so high a demand for labour as at the moment, the prob-lem was that companies required skilled workers. Very few job post-ings were made for unskilled labour. So, this was the reverse propor-tion in demand as the refugees were offering. Very little formaltraining was available, yet the enterprises needed people with suchformal training. This, he said, was one of the reasons for the mis-match in the German labour market. This meant that the – consid-erable – task was to raise the vocational level of the refugees, allow-ing them to take on skilled labour positions.Looking at the market for vocational training of refugees – by Ger-man standards -, there had been 458 refugees looking for a trainingposition in the preceding year. In a little more than a third of thecases, the agency managed to place the refugees through the60 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6German dual training system. He conceded that this was not a per-fect situation and stressed that the agency was continuing to workwith these people who had yet to find a training position. Therewere quite different measures to prepare people for vocational train-ing; these were intended to allow the individuals still looking to ac-tually find placement in the upcoming year. This was the clear goalfor the agency since the most important precondition for enteringthe German labour market was completed vocational training. Therisk of unemployment was more than five times higher for peoplewithout such completed training.After presenting these figures, Mr Letixerant moved on to describesome of the experience that the employment agency had gatheredregarding the success factors for integration into the labour or voca-tional training market. He underlined that he was only consideringthis aspect since it was an important part of the overall, further-rang-ing integration into society.From the agency’s point of view, it was vital to inform the refugeesearly on about the value of jobs and vocational training in Germa-ny. In the countries of origin, there was little knowledge about thespecifics of the German labour market or non-existent. The particu-larities of the so-called dual vocational training had to be explainedduring the consultations at the agency. Acquiring the German lan-guage continued to be a significant obstacle to integration in workand training. Offers were required which would allow the individu-als to put what they had learned in the morning into practice in theafternoon, or a similar arrangement. What mattered was that thelessons could immediately be applied. In working life, the companyitself was the best environment where the recently acquired knowl-edge could be reinforced.More than 70 per cent of refugees, though, already had had work-ing experience in their countries of origin. By saying that they hadnot completed their vocational training, this was only correct whenapplying the German standard. Nonetheless, the refugees had al-ready worked; some of them might have certificates proving specificskills. Yet most of the time, they did not have the certificates availa-ble as they had remained in the home country. So, it was up to theemployment agency to bring such skills to the forefront. Thesecompetencies had to be made usable, but the agency equally had todetermine what was necessary to provide a goal-driven further qual-ification measure for these people. What was needed were qualifica-tion offers which ideally supplemented the training-on-the-job, upto providing formal qualifications which could be implemented af-ter starting in a job.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 61Among the tools available to the employment agencies, there was awide variety of measures. Mr Letixerant mentioned traineeships butalso the option of the worker being granted a leave of absence fromhis post to complete a training course, with the agency offeringcompensation for the loss of wages. It also offered courses of theirown, with 100 % of the costs being covered. This wide-ranging po-sitioning applied not only to vocational training but also to job po-sitions.Furthermore, he noted an offer called ‘My Skills’ with which skillsacquired through vocational training could be made visible. The of-fer consisted of a PC-based test. Mr Letixerant added that he hadtaken the test himself, finding out that he might not be ideally suit-ed for a hospitality position because of his personal skill set. Hestressed that the test was targeted at thirty possible vocations, show-casing the experience that the new arrivals had brought with them.On that basis, good opportunities for vocational training could bedetermined.The speaker said that this situation could only be solved by realizingthat no-one could do it all on their own. The offers from the em-ployment agency had to be bundled in networks with other meas-ures. In the area of undirected migration, a wide variety of actorswere interconnected into a network, with the job navigators at thehub of this web. The navigators could, if not coordinate, then sup-port this network and the exchange of information.Mr Letixerant summarised the obstacles and success factors: lan-guage – the environment to apply the language -, offers for qualifi-cation – at a low skill level and widely available, even in a state likeMecklenburg-Vorpommern that might be large in size but wassparsely populated. In fact, the state generally could only providesuch offers in the population centres. In addition, particular offerswere needed for female refugees. So far, the integration of femalerefugees had proven to be the most difficult among all groups of ref-ugees, as Mr Letixerant admitted. There were many diverse reasonsfor this. He highlighted that they knew that if the women in thefamilies were not reached by these offers, then there was a high riskthat sustained integration measures would fail. The agency hadcome to realize this over the past decades and now had to deal within a different, better manner.62 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Ms Stefanie Scharrenbach, Head ofDepartment on Regional Economic Policy and InternationalAffairs at the Schwerin Chamber of Commerce and IndustryMs Stefanie Scharrenbach began by providing a brief introductionto the system of chambers of commerce and industry in Germany.In Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, there were three chambers of com-merce and industry, representing some 85,000 companies. It wastheir duty to advise and inform on all relevant matters, offering pro-fessional education and their platform to share experiences. In Ger-many, all companies were members of a chamber of commerce andindustry, with the exception of freelance professionals or such busi-nesses with their own chambers, e.g. craftsmen, culture workers andothers.The umbrella organisation was the Association of Chambers ofCommerce and Industry (IHK) in Berlin and Brussels. In addition,there was also a network with chambers abroad, with offices in morethan 80 countries.Considering the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern regions, with the Bal-tic Sea in the north and the harbour in Wismar, the region wasdominated by a strong wood industry cluster and of course an im-portant focus on international trade. The sectors of foodstuff, lifesciences and renewable energies were strong, as were logistics andtourism. In addition, the state had a rich historical heritage.German chambers of commerce had different business divisions aswell as public functions, mostly in vocational training. Ms Schar-renbach herself was responsible for regional economic policy andinternational affairs. The former meant that the chambers werecampaigning for positive economic conditions and environments,trying to strengthen the location’s competitiveness and providingbasic information about regional economic policy. To that end, theywere putting together reports, statistics, analyses of the economicsituation and development.International affairs meant everything associated with the interna-tionalisation of economy, all kinds of questions concerning customtariffs, international contracts, shipping and the like. Furthermore,the chambers were supporting companies with export and importactivities. They also provided business partners and furnished enter-prises with information about foreign markets.Ms Scharrenbach moved on to a recent analysis of the risks of eco-nomic development. The chambers were regularly asking theirmember companies what the highest risk for their economic5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 63development was. The most recent analysis was from the presentmonth, May 2019. The risk most often stated by the firms was thelack of skilled labour. Such workers were needed at all levels of qual-ification. The background of this situation was the high unemploy-ment rates in 1999 of 18.2 per cent, shrinking in 2009 to 13.5 percent and in 2019 to 7.1 per cent. The speaker noted that this mightsound like a high rate of unemployment, also in comparison withother federal states. But this situation was existential for the compa-nies. One had to keep in mind that in the 1990s, young, educatedpeople had left the region, while in the 2000s, there had been lowbirth rates. This had led to a demographic change and the currentsituation of both a skills shortage and an aged population beyondthe labour market. This challenge would become more and moreintense as the chambers could project how many more peoplewould leave the labour market in the coming years.Moreover, there were structural problems in the state: small compa-nies, few headquarters, low R&D rates in the enterprises. Therefore,the economy definitely needed people from other countries in orderto be competitive in these times of internationalisation and digital-isation. As mentioned by other speakers, language was very impor-tant. Work was the best form of integration possible in any region.She added that the chambers of commerce and industry were ofcourse very much in favour of migration and integration.As such, the chambers worried quite a lot about migration and in-tegration in the region. The companies were more than willing togive jobs to refugees, but that was difficult, she added, because theyounger men needed to earn money. They understood that an ap-prenticeship or vocational training was very important in this re-gion and country, but they were saying that they did not know howlong they would be staying in Germany. What was offered to these64 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6people was focused on staying for the long term. This, Ms Scharren-bach pointed out, was not attractive for people who would stay forsome years before returning to their home countries. To her, thiswas one of the reasons for the comparatively low rate in vocationaltraining.The chambers did not just look at the refugees coming into the re-gion but at all new arrivals and in addition were trying to attract im-migrants. For one thing, there was single European labour market,allowing the freedom of movement of workers. Ms Scharrenbachnoted that this was not fully completed across the EU yet. Moreo-ver, there was not yet any sufficient framework for legal migrationinto the German labour market. She referred back to Mr Letixer-ant’s mention of the Immigration Act for Skilled Labour currentlybeing discussed in the German Bundestag.At the chambers of commerce, they were currently facing three ma-jor challenges: First of all, they were trying to navigate the compa-nies through the current regulations so they would get the employ-ees they needed. In addition, they were trying to improve the regu-lations wherever possible. The second challenge was lobbying for amore liberal legal framework for migration. She stressed the impor-tance of the third major challenge: facilitating integration in the re-gion. Ms Scharrenbach conceded that the companies were not wellprepared for migrants working at these firms.Regarding the challenge of explaining and improving the liberal le-gal framework for migration, she reiterated the incomplete natureof the single European labour market. Sometimes, it was difficult toacquire a job in Germany: While such positions were on offer, anapplicant’s skill certificate first had to be accepted – for which thechambers of commerce and industry, among other offices, were re-sponsible. There was the option of attracting migrants fromthird-party countries with a Blue Card EU, but this was not attrac-tive for every company because the aforementioned Blue Card EUonly applied in Germany if a holder had a German university de-gree or a recognized degree from a foreign university as well as ahigh annual gross salary. Only in some occupations, a lower salarythreshold was permitted. But in general, considering Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern with its smaller companies and a strong tourismsector, this was not a tool that was very useful for local enterprises.Then, a third tool was the ‘EU Posting of Workers Directive’, whichallowed employees to be posted in a region temporarily rather thanpermanently. This aimed to ensure a level playing field and avoid‘social dumping’, but the directive came with a great degree of bu-reaucracy. She mentioned the complicated and cumbersome A15. Working Group Meetings 4-6 65portable document which was important regarding the ‘socialdumping’ aspect but better solutions could and should be found tocontrol receiving the same pay in the same workspace.She referred back to the recognition or acceptance of foreign skillcertificates and the challenge of lobbying for a more liberal legalframework. A new Immigration Act would be the first ImmigrationAct ever in Germany, adding that a great deal of pressure was need-ed to push such a law through in the country.The third major challenge to be tackled by the chambers of com-merce and industry was facilitating integration in their region. Thespeaker said that this was one of her favourite work areas as it al-lowed her to meet people from different cultures, to work with chil-dren and tell them how important intercultural exchange and diver-sity were. Ms Scharrenbach herself had been active in refugee reliefin 2015 and 2016. She thought it highly interesting to see a compa-ny open itself to migrants, recognizing that diversity was an addedvalue helping them with their competitiveness. It was this end thatthe chambers of commerce were working on, providing informa-tion to enterprises, offering consulting, implementing interculturalworkshops. Here, she stressed that companies were not yet suffi-ciently prepared and that such workshops were needed to impressupon companies the need for intercultural diversity. The chamberswere also offering language courses, especially for the tourism sec-tor. The speaker noted that even in an area of heavy tourism such asMecklenburg-Vorpommern, most people only spoke German, sothe native inhabitants also required language courses. In addition,the chambers organised all kinds of events for networking, high-lighting best practices, job fairs, for refugees, migrants and others.One institution she focused on next were the welcome centres. Shesaid that there were different tools for exchanging best practices.What was needed more were people who worked full-time in theintegration business, accompanying employees to the chambers ofcommerce. Ms Scharrenbach noted that most of her colleagues onlyspoke German, which was also the case in various administrative of-fices. Therefore, a companion and translator was welcome and help-ful. That person could also help with housing, childcare and differ-ent tasks needed when arriving in a new region and starting a jobthere.In conclusion, Ms Scharrenbach referred to the chamber of com-merce’s diversity charter. She pointed out that the Working Groupwould convene at the Chamber of Commerce the following daywhich was also Diversity Day. This had been instituted to highlightthe importance of diversity.66 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Mr Shady Al-Khouri, Regional Coordinatorfor Labour Market Integration at the Ministry for Economics,Employment and Healthhttps://we.tl/t-OSiJzobNOxMr Shadi Al-Khouri started by saying that he was a member of theproject ‘Labour Market Integration of Migrants’, situated at theMinistry of Economy. In May 2017, the ministry had put down thefinancing for an agreement with the Regional Direction North ofthe Federal Employment Agency and the regional job centre Vor-pommern-Rügen. The goal was to speed up and optimise the inte-gration of people with a migrational background. He referred backto Mr Letixerant mentioning that there were 22 job navigators inthe state. These were part of the aforementioned agreement andwere financed by the respective fund.Job navigators were special employment agents located at the jobcentres. They were the first contact partners for unemployed peoplewith a migrational background in Germany and who were regis-tered there. Mr Al-Khouri pointed out that there was a great num-ber of contact partners and employment agents at the job centresdealing with the topic of work and vocational training. The particu-lar nature of the job navigators was that these provided very closeand intensive care. Their primary task was the integration into thefirst labour market or the first vocational training market. To thatend, they disposed of various support tools or can access such toolsfrom other offices in this field. The job navigators were distributedacross the entire state, covering each region.The Ministry of Economy had three regional directors, among thoseMr Al-Khouri himself, a state coordinator and a project officer whowas also a scientific advisor. The tasks of the regional directors en-compassed first of all being the contact person of regional and su-pra-regional players to the state government, such as companies,chambers, networks, associations and educational institutions. Fur-thermore, they served as mediators between the employers, institu-tions and the state government. Any problems arising at lower levelswere communicated to the government so as to find solutions. Thedirectors were also tasked with picking up on the employers’ de-mands and finding ways of meeting those. Finally, they supportedvarious measures by the active players, including the authorities andassociations.Summarizing these tasks, Mr Al-Khouri saw them as facilitators ofcommunication. In order to acquire information, means of com-munication had to be established. As such, they learn from the5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 67actors about existing problems, which aspects needed improvementand what was required. At the same time, the directors had need ofcommunication channels to direct their offers to those requiringthem. To that end, they had created flyers, providing general infor-mation about the project as well as respective contact information.These had been distributed across nearly the entire state Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern.The primary means of communication with persons with a migra-tional background, the speaker pointed out, was generally throughsocial media. Accordingly, a Facebook page had been created for theproject. This provided a great deal of information, such as offers, jobfairs or events. The page also offered a back channel for migrants toask questions or give feedback on the offers; if problems occurred,the operators sought to resolve these. Regarding the events, the pro-ject had decided that video clips would serve as the best way to in-vite people to these events. Respective invitational clips were beingcreated for each of the project’s events and posted to the Facebookpage.Another channel was the project’s own website, also filled with in-formation and contact data. The website was part of the Ministry ofEconomy’s web offer. Among the information offered were a num-ber of presentations and more videos.On 11 November 2018, the project had organised a state confer-ence of experts, entitled ‘From Refugee to Specialist’. The event hadbeen attended by more than 200 participants, among them 60 com-panies and a large number of educational institutions. High-rank-ing experts had held informative speeches about, among other68 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6topics, the labour market, the social situation as well as the poten-tial Immigration Act and the situation of refugees in Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern. At this specialist conference, employers hadhad the opportunity to directly converse with the operatives dealingwith integration, asking about funding for support measures anddiscussing possible solutions for their employees with a migrationalbackground. Those employers who had yet to hire migrants couldalso inquire about the possible obstacles and how to overcome these.At the conference, some 10 people with a migrational backgroundhad been presented as ideally integrated into the first labour market.In their respective presentations, they had described their own pathsto success.One of the communication channels the project had developed wasan annual meeting to exchange experience; that had so far been im-plemented twice, in the spring of 2018 and 2019, respectively. Joband welcome navigators met at these events to talk about integra-tion measures, to learn from each other and to develop new ways offurther improving integration. Mr Al-Khouri judged that the inte-gration was already going very smoothly.He further clarified the tasks of the navigators. Unlike the job nav-igators, the purpose of the welcome navigators was to bring peopleinto vocational training and to integrate. As such, the latter had lessoptions at their disposal than the former, but they were situatedwith various institutions, among them the chambers in Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern.Apart from gathering information from a wide variety of sources,including employers or educational institutions, the project hadequal need to acquire information from the other side, i.e. the peo-ple with migrational background. To that end, the project had de-veloped a series of events entitled ‘Talk the Job’ which primarily in-vited migrants to discuss vocational training and jobs, allowingthem to pose their questions to experts, describe their problems,and the project members either tried to resolve the issues on thespot or arranged for individual meetings at job centres or other in-stitutions. These events had been well attended, and on some occa-sions, very difficult questions had been raised about how to get jobsand what issues the people with migrational background had expe-rienced in practice.From these events, the project had derived several findings. Primaryamong these was that migrants had very little information, most ofall about vocational training in Germany. Mr Al-Khouri regrettedthat people with migrational background did not value vocationaltraining very highly in general. People were wondering, he said,5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 69why they had to work at some place for another two years only toreceive a certificate. After all, in many cases, the respective peoplehad already been doing that job for e.g. 10 years, perhaps as a paint-er, without having undergone vocational training. This was a hugeproblem.In that respect, Mr Al-Khouri mentioned the situation in Syria, asrepresentative of many migrants from Arab countries. In Syria,care-giving occupations were university-trained jobs. The same ap-plied to laboratory assistants, for instance. In Germany, on the oth-er hand, these were positions with vocational training. In otherwords, these were highly qualified jobs for which people went touniversity in other countries.For that reason, the project had put together six video clips thatprovided information on the labour market, the vocational trainingcontract, gross and net salary, how to act in cases of sickness or onholiday. The topic of recognizing foreign qualifications had alsobeen a vital topic in this series; for this video, the guest speaker hadbeen from the project ‘Integration through Qualification’. Finally,the indispensable topic dealt with had been professional educationin Germany; here, the project directors had spoken about vocation-al training in Germany as well as the Vocation Information Centres(Berufsinformationszentren, BIZ) of the federal employment agen-cy in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. These videos were being pro-duced in both German and Arabic, with a length of 10 minutes atthe most and were available on the website of the Ministry of Econ-omy. Mr Al-Khouri further mentioned that these videos could beused for consultation sessions and provided assistance in that pro-cess. More videos were currently planned and would be released inthe future.In March 2019, the project had conducted an event together withthe Health and Care Office in Neubrandenburg. This event hadbeen an information event for care-giving jobs since there was a sig-nificant need for labour in this area. Part of this event had been‘speed-dating’. Three healthcare institutions from the city of Neu-brandenburg and ca. 15 people with migrational background aswell as other interested parties had been invited. There had beenseveral informational speeches, with the employers introducingthemselves, followed by individual conversations with the migrants.Mr Al-Khouri believed that seven or eight of the participants hadhanded in their job applications right at the event.Moreover, Mr Al-Khouri explained, the project was also present atjob and training fairs, providing support for people with migration-al background who asked them for help arising from conversations70 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6with employers. In addition, there was another project financed bythe Ministry of Economy, ‘Löwenpitch’: It organised events whereemployers were presented and afterwards rated by the attendees.Most of the time, the events were attended by people looking forvocational training or jobs, and they could decide which employerthey preferred. This was followed by conversations between bothpartners. Mr Al-Khouri’s own project and the job centres had coop-erated in guiding migrants to these events.In January 2019, four language courses had been started in the busi-ness park Gallin/Valluhn, to the south of Schwerin. There, six en-terprises with some 70 employees with migrational background hadcollaborated to assist said employees to make up their language de-ficiencies so that they could fully execute their work functions. MrAl-Khouri clarified that these were not ordinary language courses asoffered by many other institutions; instead, these were conducted inparallel to the jobs and at the work site. Thus, travel and having tofind the time were obviated. The language courses were financedboth by the companies and by the Ministry of Economy.Moving to the last part of his presentation, the speaker explainedwhat options for support the state government offered for compa-nies in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. First of all, he mentioned theadvisory services on further education, GSA, a subsidiary companydealing with the development and structure of the labour market.Its primary task was to advise employers on how to further developtheir employees, how to sign them up for further education; anoth-er area of advice was consulting on qualification measures. Further-more, GSA offered assistance in applying for financial supportfunds.One of these financing options was offered by the education chequeswhich were financed, inter alia, from ESF funds. They were availableto employees who had applied for further education with their em-ployer. An example of this would be the language courses previous-ly mentioned; the course represented further education. Here, twoaspects had to be distinguished: On the one hand, there were fur-ther education measures at the end of which no certificate ofachievement was awarded but only a certificate of attendance. Somelanguage courses were only targeted at providing job-related infor-mation rather than achieving a certificate like B1 or B2. These werefinanced at 50 per cent from the Ministry of Economy while theother 50 per cent were contributed by the enterprise. Funding forsuch measures was capped at a maximum of 500 euros.Apart from these options, there were the large support measuresconcerning further education courses ending in a certificate of5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 71achievement, such as the aforementioned B2 level. A B2 level certif-icate was recognized everywhere, Mr Al-Khouri underlined. Thefunding cap here was set at 3,000 euros, again financed at 50 percent from the ministry and 50 per cent from the company in ques-tion.The speaker went on to speak about projects promoting integration,among them ‘Slalom+’. This project was much like dual vocationaltraining, consisting of language courses financed by the Federal Of-fice for Migration and Refugees (Bundesamt für Migration undFlüchtlinge, BAMF) while at the same time – as soon as the partic-ipants were able to communicate at a basic level, i.e. understandwork instructions -, they were immediately brought into trainee-ships or jobs. This was conducted in parallel. Since 1 September2015, ‘Slalom+’ had been initiated. By the end of 2018, 2,266 indi-viduals had made use of the project. Of those, 960 had a migrationbackground and 617 had been refugees.Mr Al-Khouri moved on to the so-called ‘IntegrationsFachDiensteMigration’ (‘Integration Special Services Migration’, IFDM) whichwere split into three parts, for the east, north and west of Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern. These special services were also supported bythe Ministry of Economy and were tasked to advise refugees, deter-mine skill levels. They were cooperating with the job centres and theproject ‘Integration through Qualification’, which also served torecognize and accept foreign vocational certificates, as well as vari-ous companies and institutions.Finally, the speaker spoke about the ‘Health and Care Office’(HCO) project he had mentioned previously. The HCO projecthad been launched in 2015, primarily responsible for acquiring andretaining skilled labour in the caregiving and medical areas, such ashospitals, rehab or care facilities, doctor’s office and the like. Assuch, it served as the first contact point for people who had worked,for instance, as doctors in other countries. These were advised andguided through the employment agency via job navigators. Theconsulting offices of the project were located in Greifswald, Neu-brandenburg and Schwerin. By March 2019, some 249 people hadbeen consulted as part of the project.He concluded by pointing out that a great deal of work was beingdone to master the task of integration and achieving the currentnumbers. Of course, their goal was still to improve, he added.72 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Ms Kaarina Williams, CBSS Secretariat,responsible for young peoplehttps://we.tl/t-A9rGsoCGpnMs Kaarina Williams began by noting that she had only startedworking for the secretariat in Stockholm in January of that year, asa senior adviser for the regional identity portfolio, the CBSS’ long-term priority. Nonetheless, she could look back on a long history ofBaltic Sea cooperation as she had worked for many years in Schle-swig-Holstein in the state’s department for European Affairs on Bal-tic Sea issues. In both capacities, she noted, she had also been fol-lowing the work of the BSPC.Furthermore, she pointed out that she would not be talking aboutmigration but rather provide a short overview of the CBSS’ activitiesin the youth area. The speaker began by briefly outlining the Councilof the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) as an organisation of 11 governmentsaround the Baltic Sea, with three long-term priorities: regional iden-tity, safety and security as well as a sustainable and prosperous region.Currently, the organisation’s chair was held by Latvia and would soonbe handed over to Denmark at the start of July.Zeroing in on the priority Ms Williams was working on, she ex-plained about the respective focus points: culture, young people’saffairs and higher education. The work was about gathering andconnecting actors as well as launching and supporting projects.Here, their goal was to foster a sense of belonging and to highlightthe cultural identity and diversity in the Baltic Sea region, thusstrengthening the social cohesion.She next expanded on the focus point of young people’s affairs. Onthat occasion, she addressed the young attendees of the Youth Fo-rum, encouraging them to take a look at the event she was present-ing – the Baltic Sea Youth Dialogue – and to take part in it. The callfor participation would open in June of that year via the CBSS web-site. Ms Williams explained that this was an annual event to whichsome 20 – 25 young people between the ages of 18 and 25 were in-vited to talk about the region’s common history and different as-pects of the regional identities. The next instalment of the eventwould be held in Berlin, on 15 – 19 October. The main topic wouldconcern the thirty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall and how theBaltic Sea region had experienced this time period. Other topicswould also be discussed, and respective details would soon be re-leased on the website. The speaker further pointed out that theevent was being organised in cooperation with the Körber Founda-tion in Hamburg – an organisation long experienced in youth work5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 73that also facilitated history contests. She described the Octoberevent as a ‘big summit’ of which the CBSS workshop would only bea small part, but she stressed that the participants would also be ableto take part in the other events, listening to the interesting speakersthat had been invited.74 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Meeting Part III: Vocational training and school -integration of migrantsSchwerin, Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 28 May2019Chaired and moderated by Carola Veit, President of the State Parliament of Hamburgand Vice-Chair of the WGOpening address by Mr Siegbert Eisenach, Chief ExecutiveOfficer, Schwerin Chamber of Commerce and IndustryMr Siegbert Eisenach opened by declaring that the countries in theBaltic Sea region were very important trade partners and marketsfor the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern companies. There already werebilateral relations and strong contacts between companies andcountries in the federal state. Furthermore, the Chamber of Com-merce supported the development of this well connected and inno-vative economy in the Baltic Sea region. Therefore, meetings likethis were very important.In recent years, the topics of migration and integration had been ofparticular importance and both were gaining more and more valuefor the economy. The scarcity of skilled workers was becoming in-creasingly obvious in various industry sectors. Improving integra-tion conditions for immigrants in this important sector was vital forfacing this problem, and the best way to find solutions was throughinternational cooperation. Mr Eisenach could not imagine a betterday to talk about this issue than this since the Chamber of Com-merce was celebrating the 17th German Diversity Day, dedicated tomore diversity at the workplace. The German Collaboration Char-ter of Diversity had been signed at this Schwerin Chamber of Com-merce, underlining diversity as an opportunity to create economicbenefits. However, the Schwerin Chamber of Commerce and In-dustry had joined forces to improve the conditions for economicgrowth and developing in different fields.In short, Mr Eisenach mentioned an example from Schwerin, theFehmarn Belt Fixed Link, which would replace the ferry service be-tween Rødby and Puttgarden. This was one of their aims for goodinfrastructure between Germany and Scandinavia, and the speakerpointed out that this was one of the most important infrastructureprojects in the whole of Europe. The chamber was supporting this5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 75project to integrate the people and connecting businesses. Thiscross-border project was one of the most important of its kind inthe northern part of Europe and would form a framework for eco-nomic growth and coordination in this area.In that context, and as the chair of the FBCC, the Fehmarn BeltBusiness Council, since 2015, it was the main goal for the peopleand companies to come together, growing the entire economic area.This FBCC was a trinational consortium, representing 400,000companies and entrepreneurs in the northern part of Germany,Sweden and Denmark. The Schwerin Chamber of Commerce wasthe substantial voice of the business and the natural contact plat-form for the governments, for politicians and administrations inthis cross-border issue between the axis of Hamburg, Schwerin,Lübeck and the southern part of Scandinavia, the greater Copenha-gen area with Skorny and Malmö on the northern part.This early involvement of business, he stressed, was essential tomake the Fehmarn Fixed Link crossing a success from the very firstday. He had to underline that the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link was oneof the main tools to build the Baltic Via across the Baltic Sea.76 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Last but not least, Mr Eisenach mentioned the Chamber’s annualmatch-making forum, the Baltic Business Forum. In 2017, the top-ic had been Denmark and Sweden while the 2018 event concernedthe Baltic Sea. In 2019, the focus would be on Poland. It would beheld from 17 – 18 November 2019. The goal was to build an indus-trial bridge between Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Szczecin andStettin on the other side.He concluded by saying that he hoped for interesting presentationsand fruitful discussions to work towards establishing a strong net-work in the future.Presentation by Mr Peter Todt, Deputy General Managerand Head of Department, Training, Schwerin Chamber ofCommerce and Industryhttps://we.tl/t-J8ARRjdMauMr Todt began by referring to Mr Eisenach’s introduction to the maintasks of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, representing some25,000 companies and other members. The speaker went on to say thathis own responsibility lay in vocational training for commerce and in-dustry. Said training was organised as a dual system through a relation-ship between companies and vocational training schools.He said the chamber had much to offer. On the one hand, qualifiedemployees and young professionals for the companies, and on theother hand, a future for the state’s school-leavers. The organisationand support of the training was the most important task for thechamber, as Mr Todt viewed it. Involved were 1,200 training com-panies in this chamber’s region, the western part of Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern, i.e. companies looking to train young people in145 professions. In Germany in total, some 350 vocations were be-ing taught. Per year, about 1,500 new vocational contracts wereconcluded in the chamber’s system. Overall, some 4,500 contractswere active each year.The chamber was trying to prepare companies for vocational train-ing. Their task at this time, before the start of the training itself, wasto look after and supervise training materials while during the voca-tional training, the chamber was supporting both the trainees andthe companies, organising interim and final examinations. After theexams, the development for the young employees must not be5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 77finished. The chamber was offering future training and re-trainingopportunities as necessary. Mr Todt commented that he liked thesystem, valuing the relationships as much as the qualifications.The companies were responsible for the practical training and skillswhile the vocational training schools provided theoretical knowl-edge. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry was charged withexaminations, supplying the contracts and supervising trainingfirms and trainees. One third of the training, Mr Todt explained,took place in the schools, teaching the theoretical basis for the oth-er two thirds of the time spent at the respective enterprise, learningthe skills and abilities. In the region, there were five vocationaltraining schools. After two or three years of training, examinationswere held, the graduates of which were skilled workers.Regarding the integration and support of young people with migra-tional backgrounds, he admitted that this process was sometimesdifficult. The chamber tried to present and explain the system. Butwhile German school-leavers had had several years to understandthe system, the foreign young people have half to a full year to com-prehend it. As much as Mr Todt appreciated the system, it was notfor everyone to understand. Some wondered why they needed threeyears to get the same wages as full professionals. The chamber ex-plained the process, assisted with it and organised some preparatorycourses for the main vocational training. Finally, they also providedhelp with the details of the training contract.For some years, the chamber had dealt with foreign trainees in theirregion, facing typical problems such as the educational background,the command of the German language – specifically whether thetrainee understood the subjects in the vocational school and couldanswer the exam questions -, the culture in the training company aswell as that of the trainee and the educational culture at school. MrTodt noted that the had been in Barcelona the previous week to findSpanish people to start training in the summer of 2019. He washoping to gather 25 Spaniards for this task.The chamber had some experience with integration, going to backto the so-called ‘Spätaussiedler’ from 1990 to 2000 – people of Ger-man nationality who had been living in regions that had becomepart of other countries after World War II. In addition, there werethe children of business partners of the region’s companies in thechamber’s system. From 2012 to 2018, an international programmecalled ‘MobiPro’ had been in place. Since 2017, the refugees hadalso gone into the system. At its peak, there had been 26 nationali-ties and more than 244 trainees under contract.78 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Mr Todt went on to describe the current situation. Seven countriesor regions were represented, mostly young men were among the ref-ugees (72 per cent male). With regard to vocational training, agewas an interesting question. 24 per cent were between 15 and 25years old. Also of concern were other issues such as who could signa contract, who would stay in the country for the time of the train-ing and who would stay for work after the examination.The main problem was the critical school certificates. Specifically,he mentioned whether enough papers were handed in, whetherthese could be understood and whether they were dealing with thesame levels of education in the foreign and German systems. Therehad been a lot of young people without documents, and some doc-uments were lacking qualifications. This, the speaker went on, wasnot only the problem of the Chamber of Commerce and Industrybut also of the companies interested in signing the contracts. Thevocational training was sometimes hard even for Germans, especial-ly in the theoretical part. For the refugees, the German language wasan added complication.Here, he referred back to the MobiPro project. There, they hadstarted with language levels A1 and A2, but that had not proved suf-ficient. Instead, B1 or B2 were necessary to follow the vocational5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 79training school in some subjects. At this point, a great number offoreign young people were enrolled in vocational training. Mr Todtalso stressed that the local companies were open to hiring foreignersas well as refugees. Some networks between companies and voca-tional training schools were in place. Furthermore, only the day be-fore, two intercultural training courses had been held at the cham-ber to help solve problems.At this point, there were 145 foreign trainees under contract. Hebelieved vocational training could be successful for all and a path tointegration. They needed skilled labour for their companies, and toMr Todt, that was a good basic motivation and also a basis to createa future of their own.Presentation by Ms Petra Voss, principal, vocational trainingschool Schwerin-Technikhttps://we.tl/t-eLC4vcympyMs Petra Voss began by introducing herself as 57 years of age, hav-ing worked as a teacher since 1984. She taught mathematics, phys-ics at a vocational school. In 2010, she had completed her Master ofArts in school management. Since 2013, she had been the principalof the Berufliche Schule Technik (vocational school technology).The school itself had been in existence since 1971 and currently had1,700 students from 37 countries, including Syria, Afghanistan,Iran, Iraq, Eritrea, Egypt, Ecuador, Croatia, Morocco, Armenia andRussia. The teaching staff consisted of 74 teachers and 3 school so-cial workers.The school was separated into four different departments: a special-ised upper secondary school, a part-time vocational school, profes-sional preparation and a technical college. In the vocational school,various professions were taught, among them metal engineering,motor vehicle technology, electrical engineering or computer sci-ence.A new building was being constructed for the school at a cost 31million euros, most of it financed by the state of Mecklenburg-Vor-pommern. Ms Voss added that this was the largest constructionproject in Schwerin and was planned to be completed in 2021.She went on to speak about the education at the school. Most mi-grants were students at her school for two years for professionalpreparation. In the first year, the only school subject was German,80 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6with 25 lessons a week. The course was completed with an examina-tion called the Deutsches Sprachdiplom (German Language Diplo-ma). In the second year, school subjects were the basics, such asmathematics, German, sports, social studies as well as practical andtheoretical training. After the two years, the migrants graduated andcould move on to start an apprenticeship.The greatest challenge for vocational schools was language skills, MsVoss went on, especially the writing and the technical language weredifficult for the students. For that reason, the students also receivedtwo hours of German lessons each week on top. In some situations,the school needed the help of translators, for example when therewere problems or discussions with parents or companies about thelearning results.She said that refugees, in their experience, had a different tempera-ment from Germans. The former were very quickly hurt in theirhonour or wrongly accused. At that point, they would prove impul-sive and talk very loudly. Often, the refugees had problems withpunctuality, respect for women, observing social limits. All of theseaspects served as further challenges for the teaching staff.Principal Voss next spoke about school projects, such as ‘Our Schw-erin – I live here’. Students had gone to the top of the televisiontower, to get a new perspective on the city. Another project hadbeen in 2016 when students took part in a sports contest whereGerman and migrant students had competed against each other. In2017, a joint project had been organised with the specialised uppersecondary school and a professional preparation class. Together,they exercised sports and ate traditional food, to reduce prejudice.In another project, there had been a trip to Rostock, Warnemündeand the Baltic Sea.Other projects at the school were the welcome days where the stu-dents with migrational backgrounds were welcomed to the schooland could introduce themselves as well as their homeland. All thestudents could get to know each other. Further projects included atheatre workshop, a visit to a farm and bakery – where the enterpris-es presented their work to the students, trying to gain employeesand apprentices -, a tour to Hamburg and an education fair. News-paper articles had documented the many activities.The school social worker provided additional support. A few daysearlier, they had visited the exhibition ‘Which Country Do WeWant To Be?’ in Schwerin. The students spoke about the freedom ofexpression, freedom and security, individual development and equalopportunities. The social workers supported the schools when they5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 81changed schools, assisting with letters to companies that would re-place the predecessors. Furthermore, the social workers offered helpwith problems with other students, teachers or the authorities. Theyalso informed the students about offers for leisure time. Many stu-dents were coming to Germany without their parents. They werewatching the news to catch some information about their familiesback home. In such cases, the school social workers also providedassistance, listening to their stories and being there for them.Ms Voss finally spoke about collaboration and cooperation. Her vo-cational school was collaborating with child protective services andthe youth welfare offices, in case problems arose in school. Anothercooperation was with the Chamber of Commerce and Industry aswell as with the Chamber of Crafts. The school offered informationabout the dual vocational training system; through the cooperation,they sought to find traineeships and training companies. Finally, theschool was working together with the National Centre for PoliticalEducation, as part of which the latter had provided an offer of politi-cal education for young refugees in vocational schools in Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern. The individual modules covered diverse subjects,such as fundamental human rights, politics, women’s issues, educa-tion. All of those left plenty of rooms for discussion with the students,not least about their everyday experience. The project was run by aSyrian and a German employee of the country’s headquarters for po-litical education. The peer-to-peer approach was particularly impor-tant. The Syrian employee shared the experience of being a refugeewith the young people, yet at the same time used his competency as acultural mediator. The lessons were predominantly held in German.82 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Presentation by Ms Brigitta Bollesen-Brüning, Niels-Stensen-Schule Schwerin, secondary schoolMs Brigitta Bollesen-Brüning said her institution was a privatecatholic school in Schwerin, with students ranging from first gradethrough secondary school. They could reach the school certificate of‘Mittlere Reife’. The school had been founded in 1735. Like manyof its kind, it had been closed during the Nazi period and reopenedduring the GDR’s existence. In 2004, the initiative of a local parishalong with interested parents made it possible to reopen this school,first as a primary school and from 2006 also as a secondary school.In 2015, with the refugee crisis reaching its peak, a large number ofnew people had come to Schwerin from Syria and Afghanistan, es-pecially young men searching for something to occupy themselveswith.The school tried to support and help them. Some children who hadcome with their families had been enrolled in the school as well as anumber of unaccompanied minors. The school had decided to meetthese challenges and at the same time express their Christian atti-tude. First, they had to find teachers able to teach German as a for-eign language; Ms Brüning noted there was a respective certificate.They had started with 6 students, ending up with 10 at the comple-tion of the term. The following year, about 18 – 20 young migrantswere added, and in the present, 25 – 28 students with migrationalbackgrounds were studying at her school.Their experience included both success and failure. Some studentscould not and would not integrate into school life. Ms Brüning un-derstood their problem, explaining that they had been between 13and 16 years of age, had lived in their own countries up till then andhad gained both positive and negative experiences during their jour-ney to Germany. As such, they had been adults in children’s bodies.That had made it difficult and sometimes impossible for them tounderstand why they were not allowed to act as they usually did inclass, to leave the school premises at any time or to smoke whenev-er they wanted to.Students were integrated into the school class system sometimes bytheir age, sometimes according to their intellectual skills and some-times their language skills. This distribution system had not alwaysbeen successful. Of the 40 – 45 people who had joined the school,some 25 had attended classes regularly for two years. In the preced-ing year, one young man had passed the final exam of higher educa-tion, the German ‘Abitur’, after having studied at Ms Brüning’sschool for three years. Several others were trying to follow suit, butthe exams had not been completed yet.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 83Presentation by Mr Asem Alsayjare, State Centre for PoliticalEducationMr Asem Alsayjare began by saying that he had come from Syria,also as a refugee, at the end of 2015. Since then, he had finished hisstudies and begun working at the Federal Centre for Political Edu-cation. He said that this speech would focus on the joint projectwith secondary schools that had already been mentioned earlier. Incooperation with the schools, Federal Centre for Political Educa-tion had developed a seminar on political education for refugees atvocational technical schools. These classes were open to migrantsand refugees in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Courses had been heldin German, with English and Arabic translation provided as need-ed. The seminar had consisted of six modules: What’s Politics?, De-mocracy and Basic Rights, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Regionaland Cultural Studies, School Education and Profession, Participa-tion and Engagement in Society, Men and Women in Society. Ontop of that, additional time had been granted for participants to dis-cuss their everyday experience and to answer any questions of theirs.The project had been conducted by a two-member team of a Syrianand a German colleague from the Federal Centre for Political Edu-cation. Here, the Syrian colleague could share the experience of be-ing a refugee while serving as a culture and language intermediary.Because all of the students had been new to Germany and had notbeen fluent in the language, the project had worked with many pic-tures and simple concepts. In many classes, informal discussionshad been held. In addition, several offers for language learning hadbeen provided as extracurricular activities. Mr Alsayjare noted thatthe students had been visibly relaxed when talking about their ownpersonal interests.Three years of experience in various classrooms allowed several ob-servations to be made, which he split into four sectors. The first ofthese concerned student characteristics. Many students had had un-realistic expectations of life in Germany. Many of them had come tothe country as unaccompanied minors, with the hope that theirfamilies would be able to follow them. Students had different back-grounds influenced by their diverse countries of origin as well astheir culture and milieu in their former societies. Whether the newarrivals had come by plane or on foot had proved a distinctive effect:Those who had fled on foot had experienced more intensive fearcompared to those who had flown in. Another factor was the schoolsituation: Some refugees, such as many Syrians, had been to schoolfrom the start, while others had only had subsidiary protection sta-tus. It had still been unclear whether they would be permitted tostay in Germany. Furthermore, there had been a difference between84 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6those who had come with their families and those who had arrivedunaccompanied. The latter had had to shoulder considerably moreresponsibilities than the former.The second sector of concern dealt with integration issues. Withseveral classes consisting only of migrants and refugees, it had beendifficult for these youths to establish contact with Germans. Thishad been particularly noticeable on the schoolyards where the twogroups had remained separate even after two years of schooling.School teachers had organised a number of projects to facilitatecontact with German students; these had worked very well in somelocations. Initiatives to bring German and migrant students togeth-er in school or during extracurricular activities would facilitate inte-gration and help eliminate preconceptions and prejudice. Thiscould be accomplished through sports projects, field trips and cul-tural offerings. Introducing students to the possibilities for partici-pation in the community was recommended since many studentssought community engagement but were unsure where and how ex-actly to go about it.Mr Alsayjare moved on to the third sector: vocational or education-al programmes on student concerns. Some students had wanted toget a job as quickly as possible, without completing their vocationaleducation, because they simply wanted or needed to send money totheir parents at home. Students with unclear perspectives to remainshould have their cases decided as soon as possible, the speakercalled for. Otherwise, their options remained limited. Some stu-dents who had already turned 18 had been uncertain what wouldbecome of them as they had not been permitted to stay at the voca-tional school. Mr Alsayjare said that students should be placed ininternships so that they would at least have some idea of the workenvironment in German companies.The final sector was about vocational or educational programmecharacteristics and recommendations. After some students hadstarted their vocational education, they had not had any problemswith the practical application but instead with the language andtheory. Extending the period of language study at the vocationalschool was desirable. In that regard, he noted that some teachershad recommended developing students to the B2 language level atschool. Many teaching staff believed that two years were insufficientfor academic and technical preparation and advocated for a three-year term. Additionally, the speaker called for more teachers with amigrational background of their own. One could consider the pos-sibility of employing assistant teachers with a refugee or migration-al background as language and cultural intermediaries. For thatpurpose, one might hire not only teachers from an Arabic-speaking5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 85background. Such teaching staff would serve as positive role mod-els, as had also been demonstrated through the project in question.The presentations were followed by a panel discussion moderated byCarola Veit and attended by members of parliament, young partici-pants and experts, which deepened and discussed the contributionsmade by experts.Afterwards, several alternating intensive discussion rounds and a live-ly exchange of views took place between the young participants, themembers of parliament and experts on the entire subject area withinthe framework of a so-called World Cafe format.Finally, the participants of the Youth Forum elected Rama Akid fromGermany and Sāra Zdanovska, Latvian Youth Parliament as thoserepresentatives who will present the results of the Youth Forum duringthe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Oslo.86 5. Working Group Meetings 4-65. Working Group Meetings 4-6 8788 6. 2nd Intergovernmental Survey6. 2nd Intergovernmental SurveyThe BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration haslaunched a second survey. The Statements and Answers of Åland,Denmark, Estonia, Finland, German Bundestag, Hamburg, Latvia,Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland and Russiacan be found are published on the BSPC Website under the follow-ing link:https://www.bspc.net/bspc_anhang_statementsbspc27/The previous survey of the year 2018 had been published under thefollowing link:https://www.bspc.net/answers-of-the-governments-bspc-wg/The Standing Committee and the working group have commis-sioned a political science analysis by the Institute for Migration inFinland. The Policy Assessment and Recommendations by MattiVälimäki, Migration Institute of Finland4 are attached in Annex 1.477.. SSttaatteemmeennttss ooff tthhee ggoovveerrnnmmeennttss iinn tthhee BBaallttiicc SSeeaa RReeggiioonn 897. Statements of the governmentsin the Baltic Sea RegionThe working group’s recommendations for action, which were in-corporated into last year’s 27th resolution, were forwarded to thegovernments of the member parliaments for their comments as partof the overall Mariehamn resolution. The governments of Åland,Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland and Russia have sent the fol-lowing statements and answers to the recommendations in the 27thBSPC resolution regarding the issue of Migration and Integration1. ÅlandMigration and IntegrationIn recent years, approximately 1000 people per year have migratedto Åland and as a result, almost half of the population aged 30 – 39is born abroad. Even if some emigration occurs, net immigrationhas been positive. Today in Åland there is about 65 different nativelanguages and almost 100 different nationalities.A successful integration leads to the immigrants being happy andwanting to stay on Åland Islands and hopefully access the labormarket. The trade and industry in Åland have had some difficultiesto find employees and therefore wish for a faster integration.To some extent the integration is made difficult because the legisla-tive competence is divided between Finland and Åland. The appli-cable law depends on the person‘s passport status. People seekinghumanitarian protection are subject to Finnish integration legisla-tion. Other persons are subject to Åland’s integration legislation.Because Åland does not have jurisdiction in the case of residencepermits, the Finnish Migration Agency will come to Åland a few daysevery six weeks to receive and prepare residence permit applications.A visit to the Migration Agency is perceived as complicated. One has tomake a written booking in advance. To facilitate the procedure, theGovernment of Åland buys services via the city of Mariehamnthrough the information office Kompassen (Compass). Kompassen is notonly supporting immigrants to do their booking to the MigrationAgency. The office also serves immigrants with general information90 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Regionabout the local society and, if needed, refers immigrants to otherauthorities.An important part of the integration is of course to understand thelanguage and having general knowledge about the society. There-fore, as a labour market policy action, education in the Swedish lan-guage (Swedish for Immigrants, SFI) is offered to persons outside the la-bour market who are registered at the Employment Office (AMS). Foremployees, with the employer‘s permission, there is an opportunityto study Swedish part-time, partly at working hours and partly inleisure time.The SFI course also provides social information about, for example,rights and obligations in the labour market, how health care is or-ganized in Åland etc. The course also includes an introduction to theÅland development and sustainability agenda. The government has also ar-ranged general conversations with quota refugees in Arabic to raiseand discuss differences in, for example, gender equality and familyroles between Syria and the Nordic countries.As a new member of the society, it takes some time to develop newrelationships and participate in new networks. As many jobs areadded through networks, it is particularly important to develop aworkable system for guidance and validation of knowledge andcompetence. Therefore, the government has a validation service atthe Ålands Gymnasium (Ålands Upper Secondary School). This year thegovernment has also decided to finance a three-year activity with ca-reer guidance for adults. The activity starts in August 2019 with thename VISA vägen (SHOW the way). Migrants are assumed to be a largepart of the target group for validation and guidance activities.The government of Åland also supports various integration effortsin order to create changes in attitudes and develop methods that re-duce alienation. As an example, lectures and workshops have beenarranged all around Åland in attitudes, identity and equal value toeducate teachers, students and parents. It has also been arrangedlectures about people fleeing, cultural clashes, misunderstandings,prejudices and exclusion to the third sector and to civil servants.Associations can seek additional funding from the government forspecial integration initiatives. For example, integration has been ar-ranged through football, integration through work or integrationthrough open preschool.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 91RefugeesÅland has received 73 quota refugees since 2015. In the beginningonly the city of Mariehamn received quota refugees, but later oneight municipalities have also received refugees. Four of sixteen mu-nicipalities received a total of 26 persons in the autumn of 2018.The decision to receive or not receive refugees is taken by the mu-nicipal council. A contract is then signed between the municipalityof Åland, which intends to receive refugees and the Centre for Econom-ic Development, Transport and the Environment (NTM-centralen) in Finland. Eachmunicipality has its own integration program in order to support agood integration into Åland society.With the aim of continuously improving the reception of refugees (be-fore, during and after the reception), the government of Åland main-tains a continuous dialogue with receiving municipalities, ÅHS (ÅlandHealth Care), AMS (Ålands Employment Office), Medis (course organ-izer for language and integration training) and the third sector. Thoseorganizations form a coordination group for which the government isthe convener. The coordination group decided to apply for the launchof the EU project “En säker hamn” (a secure port, mustering for strength for the munic-ipalities, authorities and the third sector to develop cooperation in the reception of refugees andintegration in Åland). The project was accepted and started in March 2018with support from the AMIF Fund (Asylum, Migration and Integra-tion Fund). The government of Åland is the responsible authority forthe project and twelve other organizations are involved. Because of thisproject, the support from and the cooperation between these organiza-tions has been given an opportunity to be more effective. The projectsactivities focuses on quota refugees but the activities and measures willalso benefit other immigrants in Åland.Examples of activities within the project:• Health care procedures are reviewed. Among other things,staff are trained in• intercultural communication• how different residence permits provide different rightswithin healthcare• how to use different support such as images, languageapps, interpreters, etc.• An interactive website www.integration.ax has been devel-oped with a FAQ page containing questions, answers andlinks sorted under different themes. Through this channel(which is now available in more than 20 languages) you alsocan promote integrational events.A flow chart for the health review of refugees has been developed in-cluding cost allocation and compensation.92 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region2. EstoniaStrengthen cooperation in the field of migration and integrationSuccessful labour market inclusion of third country nationals is oneof the major challenges today in Europe and in countries borderingthe Baltic Sea. Therefore, in 2018 in partnership with the NordicCouncil of ministers Estonian offce, UNHCR, the Johannes Mih-kelson Centre and the Estonian Ministry of Interior labour marketinclusion initiative was launched to foster the development of amore coherent strategy to ensure successful labour inclusion of thirdcountry nationals.Every year a conference is organised by the Nordic Council of Min-isters Estonian offce, in cooperation with EMN Estonian ContactPoint in Tallinn University, Ministry of Interior and University ofTartu. Conference aims to be a platform where best practices andlatest research in the field of migration in the Nordic and Balticcountries are shared.Increase the offer of migration-specific advisory services and languagetrainingIn 2017 migration advisors service was launched. Advisors mainpurpose is to support foreigners settling in Estonia and to be a part-ner to employers, entrepreneurs, educational institutions and toothers who invite foreigners to Estonia.Consider migration and security perspectives in relevant other politi-cal agendasEstonian immigration policy has historically aimed at facilitatingsettlement of those foreigners in Estonia, whose residence here isconsistent with the public interest and preventing the entry of for-eigners into Estonia who may be a threat to public order or nation-al security. The facilitation of the migration of people who contrib-ute to the development of the Estonian state and society, and devel-opment of legal and administration solutions to support such mi-gration is one of the main objectives in the field of migration. In2017 wide-range immigration working group was established. Theaim of this working group is to continue developing systematicsolutions mainly related to the labour migration.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 93Seek holistic and multi-facetted solutions to the challengesEstonia has contributed on the EU level to different measures in thefield of migration. For example, Estonia has participated in the EUrelocation and resettlement activities stemming from the 2015 mi-gration crises and have admitted 206 persons in the need of inter-national protection (141 from Greece, 6 from Italy and 59 formTurkey). Furthermore, we are participating in different formats ofcooperation and dialogue on migration with third countries, for ex-ample process of implementation of Joint Valletta Action Plan.Government of Estonia has also made a decision in December 2017to admit up to 40 persons from Turkey during both the years of2018 and 2019. Estonia will continue to plan and develop differentmeasures and continue to contribute to agreed measures on the EUlevel in the field of migration.We have yearly contributed to the Frontex missions – approximate-ly 200 police and border offcials a year. During the 2018 a total of218 were provided. We have also contributed to the EU naval oper-ations EU-NAVFOR Med/op Sophia. Currently with 3 offcials ofDefence Force. Contributions to the Frontex missionshave also involved technical help and transportation means. As anexample: during one month of 2018 one airplane was provided forSpain, until the march 2019 one patrol ship is operating in Greece,there were 52 cameras sent to Bulgaria and Greece. During the year2019 there are 3 persons planned to provide for as EASO experts.Estonia is a long-time supporter of UNHCR activities. Respectingthe Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) principles, Estoniamakes its unearmarked voluntary contributions to the UNHCRevery year. Estonia has allocated 100 000 EUR in support of UN-HCR programs in the year 2019. Apart of this contribution, Esto-nia continues to support various UNHCR operations throughoutthe year. As mentioned, Estonia has been contributing to the EUFacility for Refugees in Turkey (4,3 million EUR) as well as to theEU Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causesof irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa (EUTF forAfrica) from the beginning (1,6 million EUR), mostly to NorthernAfrica. We are planning to continue this practice. In addition tothat, we have contributed to the EU Regional Trust Fund in Re-sponse to the Syrian Crisis (the ‘Madad Fund’).94 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region3. FinlandIn general terms it can be mentioned that the recommendations re-garding migration issues are taken into account via different mobil-ity partnerships.Recommendation # 24; it can be stated that the Ministry of the In-terior’s theme paper (SM:n teemapaperi) outlines a comprehensiveapproach on migration management and the inclusion of all policysectors.Recommendation # 20; it can be stated that bilateral and multilat-eral migration dialogues are continuously ongoing in many areasand especially within EU context. Furthermore, Finland has a reg-ularly agreed dialogue on migration with Russia.In addition, during 2018–2019 Ministry of the Interior has imple-mented ChemSAR-project with Interreg funding with the aim todevelop Operational Plans and Procedures for Maritime Search andRescue in Hazardous and Noxious Substances (HNS) Incidents.As for the rest (integration-related), the recommendations fall main-ly under the sector of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Em-ployment.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 954. German BundestagThe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference calls on the governmentsin the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the European Union, re-garding migration and integration (18-24), to:18. acknowledge objective differences in the political system as well asin the historical and cultural background due to the scars of the Sec-ond World War, continue discussions and reflections about flight andmigration, and share best governance practices to raise awareness inour societies;The German Government supports active civil society and govern-mental exchange in the Baltic Sea area in the field of migration.Cultural and historical heterogeneity particularly underscores theneed for forums and bodies such as the CBSS and the EU Strategyfor the Baltic Sea Region. Migration and its causes in the Baltic Seaarea were examined as early as the first ministerial conference of theCBSS in 1992. Since then, the German Government has supportedexchanges on migration between expert bodies and close coopera-tion at state level. Along with the exchange among young people inthe Baltic Sea area, this plays a key role in raising awareness.From 4 to 6 September 2018, analysts from the police forces andcoastal and border protection authorities of all countries borderingthe Baltic Sea met in Stockholm to share information and discussrisks and trends in the area of irregular migration and cross-bordercrime as part of the Baltic Sea Region Border Control Cooperation(BSRBCC) forum. An additional regional forum in this area washeld from 30 to 31 May 2017 in close coordination between theMinistry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and the Icelandic Presidencyof the CBSS under the title “Soft Security and Migration in the Bal-tic Sea Region”. Within this framework, participants discussed theexperiences of the states bordering the Baltic Sea with the migrationmovements of 2015-16 and talked about measures for better gov-ernance. In the area of migration and trafficking in human beings inthe Baltic Sea area, the specialised conference “Following the tracesbetween migration and human trafficking – from exploitation tointegration” was held in November 2018 within the scope of theCBSS-funded project Trafficking along Migration Routes (TRAM):Identification and Integration of Victims of Trafficking among Vul-nerable Groups and Unaccompanied Children.The German Government is continuing its work in the CBSS TaskForce against Trafficking in Human Beings under the current96 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionLatvian Presidency. It is represented here by the following minis-tries: the BMAS, the BMFSFJ and the BMI.19. initiate a Baltic Sea-wide data basis on integration conditions andmeasures to improve the public discussion on a factual basis;At European level, the Common European Asylum System (CEAS)is currently being revised to make it efficient, resilient and solidari-ty-based. Uniform standards throughout the EU and the alignmentof reception conditions and asylum benefits are key issues here. Thissystem would involve all of the EU Member States in the Baltic Seaarea. The German Government will continue to advocate for such asystem at EU level.20. intensify the dialogue on migration and integration between thecountries bordering the Baltic Sea;The German Government supports effective management of migra-tion in the EU. This can only be achieved through enhanced coop-eration, including in the Baltic Sea area. Security begins at the bor-ders. The German Government’s aim is thus to improve the protec-tion of external borders. The German Government wants reliableand comprehensive cooperation and communication between theEU and the countries of origin and transit for irregular migration.In this context, the German Government calls for consistent com-pliance with the Dublin III Regulation.Intensive exchange in the Baltic Sea area could also be fostered re-garding integration measures such as integration courses and occu-pation-related language courses, which have been expanded into anintegrated language programme and are conducted by the FederalOffice for Migration and Refugees (BAMF). Expert bodies are a keyelement for duplicating successful models here.21. increase the offer of migration-specific advisory services and lan-guage training in order to intensify integration efforts;It is the stated aim of the German Government to improve the lan-guage skills and qualifications of refugees to enable their successfulparticipation in the labour market and integration into society. Avariety of measures, programmes and regulatory instruments exist7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 97to this end. In September 2018, 77,000 refugees participated inFederal Employment Agency measures. Almost half of these benefi-ciaries took part in activation and vocational integration measures,especially measures such as “Prospects for Refugees” (PerF) and“Competence assessment, early activation and language acquisi-tion” (KompAS), both of which are specifically tailored to the targetgroup of refugees.With the establishment of occupation-related language courses, aregulatory instrument for job-related German language training hasbeen created for the first time. The Ordinance regulating job-relat-ed German language courses (legal basis: § 45a Residence Act) en-tered into force on 1 July 2016 and replaced the temporary ESF-BAMF job-related language training programme by the end of2017. The occupation-related language courses are the federal offer-ing for occupation-related language qualifications from Level B1 toLevel C2 of the Common European Framework of Reference forLanguages (GER). They build upon the integration courses offeredby the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community(BMI) as a foundation for language acquisition (Level A1 to LevelB1 GER); together with them, they comprise the integrated lan-guage programme.The “Integration through Qualification” (IQ) support programmehas been working for years on the goal of improving labour marketopportunities for immigrant communities. In January 2015, theprogramme was expanded to include the guideline “ESF trainingand qualification within the context of the Recognition Act”, whichencompasses not only training and qualification but also advisoryand guidance services on recognition and qualification. Intercultur-al training course offerings for key actors in the labour market (es-pecially employment agencies and job centres) and, since the begin-ning of 2019, thedevelopment of regional support offerings regarding the immigra-tion of skilled workers are additional focal areas for this nationwideprogramme.22. enlarge projects for advising and supporting volunteers, local in-stitutions and civil society organizations working in the field of inte-gration and taking into account the unifying and integrating role ofsports;In view of the integrating role of sports, the Federal Ministry forFamily Affairs, Senior citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ)98 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Regionprovides EUR 5.4 million in annual support to the German SportsYouth (DSJ) on the basis of a framework agreement. The DSJ is theyouth organisation of the German Olympic Sports Confederation(DOSB). Approximately 90,000 sports clubs are organised into ap-proximately 80 member organisations, with almost 10 million chil-dren and young people as members. Because of this, the DSJ is ac-tive in almost every area of activity in youth and social policy.Low-threshold offerings to harness the integration power of sportare a focal point of its activities. The Federal Ministry of the Interi-or, Building and Community supports the DOSB through the Fed-eral Office for Migration and Refugees, and is providing EUR 11.4million in funding to the “Integration through Sport” programme.23. consider migration and security perspectives in relevant other po-litical agendas such as trade, labour rights and environmental preser-vation;The BMAS has strengthened the area of labour rights from the an-gle of migration. In 2017, the “Integration through Qualification”(IQ) support programme was expanded to include advisory struc-tures on the issue of fair integration of refugees. The aim is to makeinformation about working conditions, labour rights and advisorystructures for refugees in Germany available. Between November2017 and June 2018, an information centre were established inevery federal state, and in the second half of 2018 advisory serviceson these issues began throughout Germany.24. seek holistic and multi-facetted solutions to the challenges posedby current refugee and migration policies which include a well-coor-dinated combination of migration management, humanitarian assis-tance, political solutions, European and international collaboration,fair trade agreements and development assistance;The German Government supports the European Union’s val-ues-based trade policy (see the European Commission’s Trade forAll strategy). Agreements with developing countries are structuredasymmetrically and accompanied by trade assistance to foster em-ployment, growth and prosperity in partner countries. In addition,trade policy plays a part in maximising synergies between differentpolicy areas in order to create incentives for third countries to coop-erate on migration and refugee issues.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 995. HamburgWith regard to paragraphs 18 to 21, and 23 to 25 of the ResolutionHamburg supports the approach to improve the intercultural sensi-tivity of relations, establishment of a common data analysis tool onintegration conditions, the suggestion to expand dialogue in thisarea and developing joint solutions.Hamburg plans to develop an integration monitoring system bybuilding on the integration concept “Wir in Hamburg! – Teilhabe,Interkulturelle Öffnung und Zusammenhalt” (We in Hamburg! –participation, intercultural openness and cohesion), with more than140 indicators for measuring the success of integration. Additional-ly Hamburg is participating in the expansion of the existing su-pra-regional monitoring system operated by the federation and thefederal states.Language training and migration-specific advisory services areamong the central aspects of integration policy in Hamburg. Al-though the federation is responsible in principle for these areas,Hamburg uses its own resources to close gaps where target groupsare not reached by what the federation offers. In addition, Ham-burg advocates at the federal level the improvement and expansionof existing provisions.With regard to paragraph 22 of the Resolution“Forum Flüchtlingshilfe” (Hamburg’s forum for support for refu-gees) supports all volunteers working to help refugees by providingfunding, information, information events, forums for dialogue,training and a major annual event. Migrant organisation are sup-ported, for example by provision of exhibition stands at the “Akti-voli” volunteers fair.In 2016 the “Active City” Masterplan was launched in Hamburg. Itaims to encourage people in the city to lead more active daily livesbut also to implement special projects to promote recreational andcompetitive sport. “Active City” will implement 26 of the projectsplanned in the context of Hamburg’s bid to stage the 2024 Olym-pic Games that offer the greatest benefit to the population and thecity.100 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionIn 2017 and 2018 Hamburg funded HSB (Hamburg sports feder-ation), the voluntary federation of sports clubs and associations inHamburg, with €400,000 annually from Hamburg Parliament’s In-tegration Fund. These grants are hypothecated to projects in thearea of integration.The German Olympic Sports Federation (DOSB) initiated the “In-tegration durch Sport” (Integration through Sport) project, fundedjointly by the federation and DOSB, which assists the sports feder-ations in the federal states with focusing more on integrating peoplefrom migrant backgrounds. For years the HSB has been making abig contribution to integration through this project and the“Willkommen im Sport” (welcome to sport) programme. The HSBsupports its member associations financially with offering and run-ning special measures that appeal both to refugees and to Hamburgresidents from migrant backgrounds. Examples of HSB projects inthe area of integration include a workshop to develop the involve-ment of migrants at all levels of a sports association, the IntegrationCup 2017 involving sportsmen and women from Germany as wellas from migrant backgrounds, and an integrative chess competi-tion.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 1016. Latvia102 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region7. LithuaniaNo answers regarding Migration & Integration7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 1038. Mecklenburg-VorpommernPara Conference Reso- Statement of the Government Meck-lution lenburg-Vorpommern18 acknowledge ob- During the development of the integration con-jective differences cept for the implementation of number 344 of thein the political coalition agreement, consultations are held insystem as well as various committees (including the “Landesinte-in the historical grationsbeirat” and its thematic working groupsand cultural back- on social integration, day care, school, transitionground due to the from school to work, occupational integration andscars of the Sec- health), which include questions on migration asond World War, well as methods for (intercultural) sensitization ofcontinue discus- society5. Corresponding considerations are to besions and reflec- reflected in the integration concept of the statetions about flight government of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.and migration,and share bestgovernance prac-tices to raiseawareness in oursocieties;19 initiate a Baltic The aim of a more fact-based public discussion onSea-wide data ba- the conditions of integration matches the activitiessis on integration in the context of the ongoing further developmentconditions and of the integration monitoring of the states, inmeasures to im- which the Ministry of Social Affairs, Integrationprove the public and Equal Opportunity of Mecklenburg-Vor-discussion on a pommern participates.factual basis;20 intensify the dia- The state government is open to dialogue andlogue on migra- participates in appropriate opportunities.tion and integra-tion between thecountries border-ing the Baltic Sea;5 Paragraph 344 of the coalition agreement 2016-2021 for the 7th parliamentaryterm of the Landtag Mecklenburg-Vorpommern: “The coalition partners willcontinue the integration concept of the state in cooperation with all thoseinvolved.”104 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region21 increase the offer The state has further expanded its offer of migra-of migration-spe- tion-specific advisory services as part of its promo-cific advisory ser- tion of migration counseling. In the dual budgetvices and lan- 2018/2019 700,000 euros per year are availableguage training in for this area. With regard to language teaching,order to intensify the country does not sponsor its own courses, butintegration ef- assumes responsibility for complementary servicesforts; (travel costs, language mediation pools). For thispurpose, 242,000 euros per year are available inthe aforementioned double budget.Within the framework of the ministerial confer-ences, the state also advocates that the professionallanguage support benefits all immigrants with atleast subordinate access to the job market.The state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Fed-eral Employment Agency and the job centers arejointly pursuing the goal of optimizing and accel-erating the occupational integration process of mi-grants and of achieving sustainability. Measurestaken to achieve this aim include:• The Health and Care Office (HCO) project in-itiated and funded by the country. It is aimed atimmigrants who have already completed medicalstudies, medical or nursing education in theircountry of origin with the goal of gaining ade-quate and sustainable employment, primarily inMecklenburg-Vorpommern. The HCO supportsdoctors, pharmacists, nurses and other health pro-fessionals in fulfilling the necessary conditions fortheir professional recognition. For this purpose,additional qualification requirements are identi-fied, suitable educational measures are initiatedand individual career paths and perspectives areplanned with those seeking advice. In this context,offers of language and vocational qualificationare developed and implemented.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 105• The three nationally supported migration inte-gration services (IFDM) advise, accompany andsupport, in close coordination with the job centers,adult migrants with access to the labor market in-dividually on questions of vocational integration.This ranges from an individual competence assess-ment, to advice on the next integration steps (lan-guage support, measures for sponsors, integrationprojects, internships) up to induction coaching. Atthe same time, the IFDM works closely with em-ployment services / job centers, employers, othercounseling centers such as the IQ Network, NAF-plus, the Migration Social Counseling Service, theeducation / integration course organizers andother stakeholders. As a result of increased immi-gration, the three IFDMs were realigned and in-creased in number as of July 1, 2016 in order tomeet the increased demand at around thirty loca-tions across the state.• In particular, the SLALOM + projects at vari-ous locations throughout the country, for examplein Rostock, Güstrow, Bad Doberan andStralsund, are implementing the idea of d ual inte-gration. The integration into German culturewith the focus on language (BAMF integrationcourse) is combined with the integration into theGerman labor market (SLALOM +). Partici-pants with an escape background will learn thebasis for their existence on the German job mar-ket with a language course. Once the necessarybasic language level has been attained, these par-ticipants will be offered parallel, tailor-made of-fers for integration into the German labor marketin SLALOM +.106 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region• Accompanying the implementation of the pro-fessional recognition laws of the federal and stategovernments through counseling and support forrecognition seekers is a central task of the nation-wide funding program Integration through Qual-ification (IQ). The aim of the program is the sus-tainable improvement of labor market integra-tion of adult immigrants, inter alia through thecoordination of regional support services and thestrengthening of the intercultural competence oflabor market integration actors. The program isfunded by the Federal Ministry of Labor and So-cial Affairs (BMAS) with funds from the Euro-pean Social Fund (ESF).22 enlarge projects Since 1990 the sports organization of the state,for advising and the “Landessportbund Mecklenburg-Vorpom-supporting volun- mern”, supports the bringing together of people inteers, local insti- our state as part of the Federal Integrationtutions and civil through Sport program and with the support ofsociety organiza- the state government, in particular the Ministrytions working in of Education, Science and Culture. The unsala-the field of inte- ried and full-time employees create encountersgration and tak- and bring movement into the integration process.ing into account They operate integration through sport with a va-the unifying and riety of measures.integrating role ofsports; Special club offers for people with a migration back-ground are just as effective as mobile sports offers orthe exercise of sports offers from the countries of ori-gin in order to promote intercultural opening.The Integration through Sport program initiatesthe opening up of sports clubs and associations formigrants, asylum seekers and socially disadvan-taged people, and helps to win them over as newclub members.The Landessportbund Mecklenburg-Vorpom-mern provides sports associations and associa-tions with funds from the Federal Office for Mi-gration and Refugees as well as the Ministry ofEducation, Science and Culture Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern for the implementation of in-tegrative measures. In particular, fees for instruc-tors, hall rents, travel expenses, small sports equip-ment, language mediators, program costs and ex-penses of volunteers in sports are subsidized.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 10723 consider migra- The main objective of the labor market and em-tion and security ployment policy of the state government of Meck-perspectives in lenburg-Vorpommern is the non-discriminatory,relevant other po- equal participation in the working lives of aslitical agendas many native and immigrant people in Mecklen-such as trade, la- burg-Vorpommern, regardless of their age, gender,bour rights and religion, nationality and ethnic origin.environmentalpreservation; The aim is to exploit and use the qualificationalpotential of all potential employees and self-em-ployed persons and to reduce barriers to integra-tion in order to increase the employment rate in asustainable manner and at the same time coun-teract a shortage of skilled workers and apprentic-es in the state.The state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Fed-eral Employment Agency and the job centers arejointly pursuing the goal of optimizing and accel-erating the professional integration process of mi-grants and of achieving sustainability.24 seek holistic and As part of the integration ministers‘ conferencemulti-facetted and / or of federal and state meetings on the topicsolutions to the of integration, refugee and migration policy issueschallenges posed are discussed.by current refugeeand migration The European Commission has already put for-policies which in- ward legislative proposals to strengthen the Com-clude a well-coor- mon European Asylum System (CEAS) and pro-dinated combina- posed measures in the areas of legal immigrationtion of migration and integration, which the country welcomes. Themanagement, hu- following improvements are planned in the areamanitarian assis- of the Common European Asylum System:tance, politicalsolutions, Euro- • Establishment of a viable, fair system for deter-pean and interna- mining the Member State responsible for examin-tional collabora- ing applications for asylum;tion, fair tradeagreements and • making greater convergence in the EU asylumdevelopment as- system and reducing asylum hopping: The Com-sistance; mission will propose further harmonization ofasylum procedures to eliminate more equal treat-ment and incentives across the EU to seek asylum,especially in a few Member States;108 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region• preventing secondary movements within theEU;• new mandate for the EU Asylum Agency;• strengthening the Eurodac system for betterstorage and transfer of fingerprints.The European Commission will also tackle severallegal immigration and integration policies, in-cluding:• A structured resettlement system: The Commis-sion will present a proposal for the design of theEU resettlement policy. It provides for a horizon-tal mechanism with common EU rules on recep-tion and distribution, the status of resettled per-sons, financial support and measures to curb sec-ondary movements.• A reform of the „EU Blue Card“ Directive: Therole of the Directive in an EU-wide immigrationpolicy could be consolidated through commonrules, including more flexible eligibility require-ments, improved licensing procedures and morerights for highly qualified third-country nation-als.• The Commission will present an EU action planfor integration.Migration pressure remains a central concern ofEuropean citizens despite the crisis that has beenovercome. Adequate migration management willcontinue to be a challenge for many years and re-quires a comprehensive response.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 1099. Polandstrengthening cooperation in the field of migration and integration,taking into account all Baltic countries to better meet similar tasksThe Ministry of Family, Labor and Social Policy of the Republic ofPoland does not cooperate in the field of integration only with thecountries of the Baltic Sea Region, since there is no specific workinggroup or platform dedicated to this issues. Therefore the coopera-tion is carried out with countries of the European Union in frameof the existing structures.The dialog on integration between European countries has been in-tensified recently under European Integration Network. While databasis on integration measures and conditions has been developed in2009 as European Website on Integration. The offer of migra-tion-specific advisory services and language training in order to in-tensify integration efforts has increased, since implementation ofthe Asylum, Migration and Integration Found (AMIF) in Poland.From mid-2018 all voivodships have been carrying out on their ter-ritory integration projects. The projects include among others: Pol-ish language courses, providing counselling and assistance in mat-ters like legalization of stay, legal rights and obligations, health, psy-chological and social care, childcare and family reunification, pro-viding adaptation courses for foreigners regarding Polish values andrights, providing support for schools in the field of working withforeign children, as well as activities supporting independence andself-sufficiency of foreigners.Projects for advising and supporting volunteers, local institutionsand civil society organizations working in the field of integrationand taking into account the unifying and integration role of sportswill be enlarged in the nearest future. New open call for proposalsunder AMIF has been published on the governmental websites. It isaddresses to all potentially interested stakeholders on the local level,including civil society organizations. It is expected that new projectswill start to be implemented at the turn of 2019 and 2020.110 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region10. RussiaINFORMATIONregarding the Migrants in Russian Federation (March 2019)1. According to the Federal State Statistics Service 28 292 internallydisplaced persons arrived in the territory of the Russian Federationin 2015, 25 359 in 2016, 19 327 in 2017, and 13 795 in 2018. Mostof the internally displaced persons come from Georgia, Kazakhstan,Moldova, and Uzbekistan.In 2015 there were 237 780 people who received temporary asy-lum. The vast majority of them came from the territory of Ukraine– 234 360 people, Syria – 1924 people., Afghanistan – 693 people,Georgia – 457 persons, Uzbekistan – 91 people.In 2016 temporary shelter received 313707 person, the majoritywere Ukrainians – 311134 people, Syrian – 1302, from Afghan-istan – 572, from Georgia – 292, from Uzbekistan – 79 persons.In 2017 228 392 people received temporary asylum. The leadingcountries remained, from Ukraine 226044 people, from Syria –1317 people from Afghanistan – 417 people, from Uzbekistan – 82people.In 2015 790 people received refugee status, in 2016 – 770 , in 2017- 598 persons.The amount of the daily allowance to citizens of internally displacedpersons and refugees is 800 rubles: 250 rubles per day for food; 550rubles per day for accommodation. (The money is transferred fromthe state budget to a special settlement account, where they go topay for food, housing. The needy don’t get cash.)2. Federal Law (February 19, 1993 N 4528-I Art. 6 point 3) pro-vides lump-sum payment addressed in the amount of not less than100 rubles per person. Those in special need receive 150 rubles foreach family member.3. Citizens recognized as refugees have the right to receive a mone-tary allowance, the amount of which is set for each region separate-ly. (In Moscow 2000 rubles per month).7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 111The Russian Federation is a multinational country, on the territoryof which representatives of 193 nationalities live (according to theall-Russian population census of 2010). At the same time, the stateof interethnic relations in the country is significantly influenced bymigration processes.The emergence of closed ethnic enclaves on the territory of the Rus-sian Federation creates conditions in which its informal jurisdictionoperates, generally accepted norms of behavior and Russian laws areignored. In fact, these areas fall out of a single cultural and the legalframework of the state.According to information of constituent entities of the Russian Fed-eration, bodies of state power and bodies of local self-government,activities in the above area are carried out in the following areas:- implementation of state and municipal programs in the field ofharmonization of interethnic and interreligious relations;- organization of monitoring in the field of inter-ethnic and in-ter-confessional relations on the territory of municipalities;- holding various events with the participation of representativesof national associations and national cultural autonomies (sem-inars, round tables, festivals of national cultures, national holi-days, etc.).);- working with media for coverage of issues related to these prob-lems.Among the best practices and priorities on topical issues of imple-mentation of the state national policy and prevention of intereth-nic and interfaith conflict situations held in 2018 by the interestedterritorial bodies of Federal bodies of state power, Executive bodiesof state power of the subjects of the Russian Federation and localauthorities, the following can be highlighted.In the Moscow region “The United migration center of the Moscowregion” created, in the course of activities which the user is workingon building an effective system of interagency cooperation and in-teraction of authorities with institutes of civil society.The effective work of the segment of the state information mon-itoring system in the sphere of interethnic and inter-confessionalrelations and early warning of conflict situations was organized inSt. Petersburg, which allowed to provide access to it employees ofExecutive authorities, in due time to reveal and promptly respondto the emergence of conflict and pre-conflict situations.112 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionIn the Leningrad region for arriving migrants developed an appli-cation “MigrantLenObl”, which is available for download in theGoogle play service, as well as on the Internet resource migrantle-nobl.ru.In the Chukotka Autonomous District youth associations, includ-ing those of a sporting nature, are in the sphere of preventive atten-tion.Working meetings are held with their leaders and coaching staff onpreventing the involvement of young people and migrants in inter-ethnic, social, political and religious conflicts.It is worth noting a balanced approach to solving the problemsof ethnic enclaves in the Chelyabinsk region, where the work ofthe authorities together with the police in the Chelyabinsk region,identified priorities and directions for preventive work, built a sys-tem of response measures at various levels.Almost all regions of the Russian Federation are working on thesocial and cultural adaptation and integration of migrants. In par-ticular:1. Assistance to migrants in mastering the Russian language. In theregions set up centers for testing the knowledge of Russian lan-guage, history and fundamentals of legislation of the Russian Fed-eration, preparation for exams, school for studying of the Russianlanguage and culture for children of migrants. Such centres exist inalmost all regions.2. Cooperation with leaders of national communities and religions ofthe regions, their participation in the work of Advisory bodies (pub-lic councils) of the territorial bodies of Federal Executive authori-ties, heads of administrations of municipal areas and urban districts:Arkhangelsk, Belgorod, Kaluga, Kemerovo, Moscow, Murmansk,Nizhny Novgorod, Novgorod, Omsk, Ryazan, Tula region, Repub-lic Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia, Komi Re-public; Kamchatka Krai, Krasnodar.3. For the implementation of projects and activities for ethno-culturaldevelopment, international cooperation and strengthening the uni-ty of the Russian nation for non-profit organizations in the budgetsof the following subjects of the Russian Federation provides subsi-dies (grants for the implementation of socio-cultural projects andprograms): the Republic of Buryatia, Mordovia, Tatarstan, Udmurt;edge: Altai, Kamchatka, Stavropol; region: Kostroma, Moscow, Pen-za, Pskov, Rostov, Ulyanovsk; Khanty-Mansi Autonomous district.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 1134. In order to achieve the goals of social and cultural adaptation andintegration of migrants, information materials for migrants (memosfor foreign citizens arriving in the region): the Republic of Adygea,Komi; Altai, Khabarovsk; Kaluga, Kemerovo, Leningrad, Omsk,Smolensk, Ulyanovsk; St. Petersburg, Sevastopol have been pre-pared and distributed in printed form or published in journals withthe involvement of local experts in the field of migration legislation,employers, representatives of the media, socially oriented NGOs,Diaspora leaders.5. Activities are carried out to prepare foreign citizens for the exam inthe Russian language for employment and for citizenship of the Rus-sian Federation. Classes are held on the basis of language centers ateducational institutions (Republic of Adygea, Komi, Sakha (Yaku-tia); Ivanovo, Kaluga, Kemerovo, Kostroma, Murmansk, Novgorod,Omsk, Orenburg, Tula, Yaroslavl; Krasnoyarsk, Perm region).6. In the following regions the Centers of testing on knowledge ofRussian language, history and bases of the legislation of the RussianFederation (examinations in Russian, history of Russia, bases of theRussian legislation) carry out the activity: republics of Adygea, Al-tai, Bashkortostan, Buryatia; areas Amur, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Kem-erovo, Tyumen, Ulyanovsk; Krasnoyarsk Krai.7. The Governor of the region (region) (head of the Republic) has apermanent Advisory body – the Coordinating Council on intereth-nic relations. Various aspects of migration policy and preventionof ethnic tension are periodically discussed. Coordination councilsoperate in the following regions: Belgorod, Ivanovo, Orel, Yaroslavl,Penza, Smolensk; Republic of Mordovia; Stavropol territory.Thus, the issues of combating the social exclusion of migrants, spatialsegregation and the formation of ethnic enclaves are considered bypublic authorities and local governments of municipalities of theRussian Federation in the general complex of issues of social andcultural adaptation and the integration of migrants arriving in theregion.114 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionInformation and reference materialsof the Ministry of Internal of Russian Federation (March 2019)Since the accession of the Russian Federation to the 1951 Conven-tion relating to the status of refugees at the end of 1992, a systemof granting asylum to foreign citizens and stateless persons based ongenerally recognized norms of international law has been graduallyestablished.The main normative legal act regulating the legal status of foreigncitizens and stateless persons (hereinafter — foreign citizens) seekingor receiving asylum in the territory of the Russian Federation is theFederal Law (February 19, 1993 No 4528 I) “On refugees” (herein-after — the Federal law). It sets out the basic Convention principlesfor the protection of asylum-seekers, such as the confidentiality of in-formation on asylum-seekers and the principle of “non-refoulement”.The current legislation of the Russian Federation does not containgrounds for refusal of admission to the procedure of refugee recog-nition and temporary asylum.Depending on the location of the person intending to seek asylumin the territory of the Russian Federation, the State bodies provid-ing access to the refugee recognition procedure are:- diplomatic missions or consular offices of the Russian Federationif the foreign citizen has not yet arrived on the territory of the Rus-sian Federation;- border body of the Federal security service at the checkpoint acrossthe State border of the Russian Federation when crossing the Stateborder of the Russian Federation by a foreign citizen in accordancewith the legislation of the Russian Federation and internationaltreaties of the Russian Federation;- border body or territorial body of Federal enforcement authorityin sphere of internal affairs in case of forced illegal crossing of theState border of the Russian Federation at the checkpoint or outsidethe checkpoint through the State border of the Russian Federation;- territorial authority of Federal Executive authority in the field ofinternal Affairs (further - territorial authority of the Ministry ofInternal of Russia) in case of stay on the legal basis in the territoryof the Russian Federation.In the event of a finding of foreign citizens, asylum-seekers, in theareas of additional restrictions (transit zones of airports, the Federal7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 115penitentiary service, CSIH, etc.), unit for migration, the territorialbodies of the MIA of Russia will ensure that the necessary measuresto ensure access to the asylum procedure for such foreign citizens.Taking into account the difficulties of keeping foreign citizens inspecial temporary detention facilities, measures are being taken toreduce the period of consideration of applications for refugee rec-ognition and applications for temporary asylum.During the consideration of applications for refugee recognitionor applications for temporary asylum, the reasons, circumstances,information and information provided by a foreign citizen whenapplying for asylum are comprehensively considered and studied,the socio-economic and political situation in the country of citizen-ship (former place of residence) of the foreign citizen who appliedfor asylum is analyzed.The above-mentioned Federal law regulates economic, social andlegal guarantees for the protection of the rights and legitimate in-terests of refugees.In accordance with article 5 of the Federal law, the refugee statusof a person under eighteen years of age and arrived on the territoryof the Russian Federation without their parents or guardians, orthe determination of its other legal provisions in the territory ofthe Russian Federation is carried out taking into account the inter-ests of such person in accordance with normative legal acts of theRussian Federation after receiving information about the parents orguardians of the child.Persons recognized as refugees or who have received temporary asy-lum, and the members of his family who have arrived with himhave the right to social protection, including social security, on anequal basis with citizens of the Russian Federation, receiving as-sistance in the device of children of such persons in the state ormunicipal preschool educational organizations and educational or-ganizations, professional educational organizations and educationalorganizations of higher education on an equal basis with citizens ofthe Russian Federation.Four temporary accommodation centres for foreign citizens andstateless persons who have arrived in search of asylum or have al-ready been recognized as refugees are currently operating on a per-manent basis on the territory of the Russian Federation. In suchcenters, social and domestic arrangement of persons of this catego-ry, providing them with food and medical care at the expense of thestate is organized.116 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionThe government of the Russian Federation, approved the State pro-gram of the Russian Federation “Realization of state national pol-icy” (December 29, 2016 No. 1532) (hereinafter - state program),responsible executor of which is determined by the Federal Agencyfor the Affairs of Nationalities. In the part concerning the Ministryof internal of Russia, the State program provides for two activities:“Reception and maintenance of refugees and persons applying forrecognition as refugees” and “Reception and maintenance of inter-nally displaced persons” of the subprogram “Socio-cultural adapta-tion and integration of migrants in the Russian Federation”.In 2018, 15.9 million rubles were spent on the implementation ofthese measures, in 2017 - 21.4 million rubles.The guarantee of “non-refoulement” is one of the fundamentalprinciples for the protection of foreign nationals seeking asylum,recognized as refugees or granted temporary asylum. Article 10 ofthe Federal law guarantees that a person applying for recognition asa refugee or recognized as a refugee or who has lost refugee status orhas been deprived of refugee status cannot be returned against hiswill to the territory of the state of his citizenship, while maintainingin that state well-founded fears of becoming a victim of persecutionon the basis of race, religion, citizenship, nationality, membershipof a particular social group or political opinion and the inability toenjoy the protection of his or her nationality or unwillingness toenjoy such protection because of such fears; or, without having acertain nationality and being outside the country of his or her for-mer habitual residence as a result of such events, a person cannot ordoes not wish to return to it because of such fears.For reference : In 2015, 152 489 persons applied for asylum in the territory of the Rus-sian Federation, in 2016 — 26 409, in 2017 — 14 087.The Russian Federation has accumulated considerable experience inthe mass influx of refugees into its territory.The first flow was caused by the consequences of the collapse of theSoviet Union and the aggravation of the socio-political situationin a number of new post-Soviet States-the former Soviet republics(Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Tajikistan, Moldova), the aggrava-tion of interethnic relations in the new States.In 2008, as a result of the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict, resi-dents of South Ossetia and the interior of Georgia came to the ter-ritory of the Russian Federation in search of asylum for several days.In early 2014, due to the large-scale use of military force in Do-7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 117netsk and Lugansk regions, as well as the deterioration of the po-litical and economic situation in Ukraine, the forced migration ofUkrainian citizens to the Russian Federation increased sharply, andsince March 1, 2014, as a result of subsequent events in Ukraine,Ukrainian citizens began to arrive in the Russian Federation insearch of asylum.For reference: application for recognition as a refugee or a statement on temporaryasylum in the territory of the Russian Federation in 2014 turned 271 020 citizens ofUkraine, in 2015, -149 962, in 2016 - 088 22, 2017 - 9 547.Just for asylum have addressed more than 450 thousand citizensof Ukraine (455 566), of which 422 896 recognized as refugees orgranted temporary asylum.With the coordinated actions of Federal Executive authorities andauthorities of subjects of the Russian Federation the mechanisms al-lowing were developed and approved by the Government of Russia:- to carry out the distribution and transportation of Ukrainian ref-ugees;- to compensate to subjects expenses on social and household ar-rangement in points of temporary placement, vaccination andmedical care;- provide targeted financial assistance to certain categories ofUkrainian citizens living with Russian citizens;- provide this category of persons with various long-term residencestatus in Russia as soon as possible.Totally, about 18 billion rubles were allocated for the complex ofmeasures for the reception of refugees from Ukraine in 2014 - 2016,of which about 70 percent was directed to the financial support of576 temporary accommodation points (12.2 billion rubles).For reference: Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation (22 July 2014No. 693) “On the provision of other inter-budget transfers from the Federal budget tothe budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation for the provision of tar-geted financial assistance to citizens of Ukraine with refugee status or who have receivedtemporary asylum in the territory of the Russian Federation and living in residentialpremises of citizens of the Russian Federation in 2014 and 2015”.Ukranian citizens in 2014-2016 were provided with free primaryhealth care and specialized, including high-tech, medical care, pre-ventive vaccinations.118 7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea RegionFor reference: Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of 31 October2014 No. 1134 “About rendering in 2014 - 2016 of medical care in the territory ofthe Russian Federation to citizens of Ukraine and the stateless persons who constantlylived in the territory of Ukraine, forcibly left the territory of Ukraine and arrived to theterritory of the Russian Federation in an emergency mass order, and compensation atthe expense of means of the Federal budget of the expenses connected with rendering tothem in 2014 - 2016 of medical care, and also expenses on carrying out to the specifiedpersons of the preventive vaccinations included in the calendar of preventive vaccinationson epidemic indications”.Citizens of Ukraine were assisted in ensuring the passage and trans-portation of Luggage to the place of stay in Russia, including freemeals on the way. More than 66 thousand Ukrainian citizens (66058 people) were transported and equipped. Basically, transporta-tion was carried out from the Republic of Crimea, Sevastopol, Ros-tov and Belgorod regions.For reference: Within the framework of the implementation of the decree of the Gov-ernment of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2014 No 691 “On approval of the distri-bution of citizens of Ukraine and stateless persons by subjects of the Russian Federation,permanently living on the territory of Ukraine and arrived on the territory of the Rus-sian Federation in an emergency mass order”.Significant preferences were created for the citizens of Ukraine indetermining their legal position in the territory of the Russian Fed-eration. Thus, the decision to grant temporary asylum to citizensof Ukraine during the period of emergency mass arrival was takenwithin a period not exceeding 3 working days from the date ofapplication (In accordance with the decree of the Government ofthe Russian Federation of July 22, 2014 No 690 “On granting tem-porary asylum to citizens of Ukraine on the territory of the RussianFederation in a simplified manner”).In 2018, people from 75 countries applied for asylum in the Rus-sian Federation.As a result, the territorial bodies of the Ministry of Internal of Rus-sia at the regional level adopted and considered applications forrefugee recognition and applications for temporary asylum in theterritory of the Russian Federation, received from 7.9 thousand for-eign citizens and stateless persons.As of January 1, 2019, 572 refugees and 76.8 thousand personswho received temporary asylum were registered in the territorialbodies of the Ministry of internal Affairs of Russia.7. Statements of the governments in the Baltic Sea Region 119More than half of the registered refugees are from Afghanistan, 24.5per cent from Ukraine, 5.4 per cent from Georgia, 3.5 per cent fromMoldova and 3.3 per cent from Uzbekistan. The vast majority offoreign citizens with temporary asylum in the Russian Federation arecitizens of Ukraine -97.6 %, Syria -1.1 %, Afghanistan — 0.6 %.In 2018 the President of the Russian Federation approved the newConcept of the state migration policy of the Russian Federation(hereinafter — the Concept). This document is a strategic vector ofactivity of the Russian authorities in the field of migration. The con-cept is designed to create comfortable conditions for resettlement toRussia for permanent residence of our compatriots from abroad, aswell as clearer rules for entry, obtaining the right of residence, workand acquisition of Russian citizenship for foreigners. The conceptwill enhance Russia’s migration attractiveness and strengthen na-tional mechanisms for regulating migration flows.The concept regarding the implementation of one of its main di-rections in the field of assistance to foreign citizens seeking pro-tection on the territory of the Russian Federation (paragraph 27),involves maintaining high standards and further development ofmechanisms to assist foreign citizens seeking protection on the ter-ritory of the Russian Federation, in accordance with internationallegal obligations of Russia and taking into account the interests ofRussian citizens.The main office for migration, Department of internal Affairs of Rus-sia carried out the development of the draft Federal law “On asylumin the Russian Federation”, and also related to his adoption of draftFederal laws. The bill sets out the basic Convention principles forthe protection of asylum-seekers. The proposed criteria are based onthe international obligations of the Russian Federation relating to theConvention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment. Also take into account international expe-rience and the experience obtained during the reception of citizens ofUkraine arriving in the emergency mass procedure.In accordance with the decree of the Government of the RussianFederation of December 16, 2017 No 1569 “On amendments tothe paragraph of the Regulations on the Federal Agency for na-tionalities” powers to carry out functions on the development andimplementation of state national policy, state policy in the field ofsocial and cultural adaptation and integration of foreign citizens inthe Russian Federation, as well as regulatory and legal regulationand provision of public services in the field of state national policy,social and cultural adaptation and integration of foreign citizens inthe Russian Federation are entrusted to the FADN of Russia.120 8. Political Recommendations8. Political RecommendationsBased on the deliberations of the working group, as well as the in-put from experts and young participants the following recommen-dations have been incorporated in the draft resolution of the 28thBSPC in Oslo 25-27 August 2019:The participants, elected representatives from the Baltic Sea RegionStates*, assembling in Oslo, Norway, 25-27 August 2019,call on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and theEU,Regarding Cooperation in the Region, to1. strengthen trust among all Member States of the Council ofBaltic Sea States (CBSS) through further concrete efforts andmeasures;2. intensify the early involvement of the next generation in policyand decision-making processes via concrete measures of thegovernments to reinforce the foundations of trust and securityin the Baltic Sea Region as an element of foreign policy;3. continue cooperation within the framework of the NorthernDimension, cross-border cooperation programmes betweenEU member states and Russia as well as Interreg Baltic Sea Re-gion programme, and actively engage in developing new gener-ations of these programmes for the future.4. develop possible synergies and optimisation potentials betweenthe different formats and institutions by reviewing the existingcooperation formats within the framework of the current CBSSreform process and to consider the consolidation of differentformats;5. establish fruitful professional cooperation on the basis of inter-national law - such as has existed very successfully for decadesthrough institutions such as HELCOM in the field of environ-mental policy - in a comparable way in other policy areas aswell;8. Political Recommendations 1216. further strengthen measures to combat terrorism and violentextremism in line with human rights obligations and the rule oflaw – recognising that the effective fight against terrorism andviolent extremism is an important pillar for the preservation ofdemocracy and that parliaments have a key role to play in thiscontext as well as in the awareness of all the measures taken tocombat terrorism at the international level.Further political recommendations are planned to be discussed inthe next working group meetings and presented with the final re-port during the 28th annual conference 2020 in Vilnius.122 List of MembersList of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Sweden Mr Hans Wallmark Mr Ralph HermanssonChair of the WG Swedish Delegation to theNordic CouncilMr Pyry Niemi RiksdagenSE-100 12 StockholmSwedenTel: +46 8 786 6015Mobile: +46 708 86 3361ralph.hermansson@riksdagen.seParliament of Free Ms Carola Veit Ms Friederike Lünzmannand Hanseatic City of Vice-Chair of the WGHamburg Parliament of the FreeMr Michael and Hanseatic City ofWestenberger HamburgAdministration of theParliamentSchmiedestraße 220095 HamburgTel.: (+49 (0) 40) 4 2831-1352Fax: (+49 (0) 40) 4 2731-2271internationales@bk.hamburg.defriederike.luenzmann@bk.hamburg.deParliament of Åland Mr Johan Ehn Ms Maj FalckAssistant to the ParliamentThe Åland ParliamentPB 69AX-22101 MariehamnÅland IslandsTel: + Tel +358 18 25 353maj.falck@lagtinget.axjohan.ehn@lagtinget.axList of Members 123Member Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Denmark Ms Karin Gaardsted Ms Louise EgholmHattensThe InternationalSecretariat,The Parliament ofDenmark, Christiansborg,DK-1240 Copenhagen K,DenmarkTel. +45 33 37 55 00Dir. +45 33 37 33 32Louise.Hattens@ft.dkParliament of Estonia Ms Urve Tiidus Ms Regina SeppForeign RelationsDepartmentRiigikogu of the Republicof EstoniaLossi plats 1A,15165 Tallinn,EstoniaTel: +372 631 6397GSM: +372 53089818Regina.Sepp@riigikogu.eeParliament of the Mr Johannes Schraps Ms Dr Nicole TepasseFederal Republic of Deutscher BundestagGermany Division InternationalParliamentary AssembliesPlatz der Republik 111011 Berlinnicole.tepasse@bundestag.deTel: +49 30 / 227-32553Ms Maria Tolppanen, Mr Mika Laaksonen/Parliament of Finland Ms Maarit ImmonenSubstitute: Mr Kari The Parliament of FinlandKulmala, FI-00102 Eduskunta,Chairman of the FinlandFinnish delegation to +358 9 4321the BSPC mika.laaksonen@eduskunta.fimaarit.immonen@parliament.fi124 List of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Latvia and Prof Jānis Vucāns Ms Ingrida SticenkoBaltic Assembly Senior Adviser,Saeima InterparliamentaryRelations BureauSecretary of the Latviandelegation to the BalticAssemblyTel: +371 6 7087335Ingrida.Sticenko@saeima.lvMs Anete KalnajaSecretariat of the BalticAssemblyCitadeles Street 2, room616Riga LV-1010,LatviaTel: +371 67225178anete.kalnaja@baltasam.orgParliament of Lithuania Mr Valerijus Simulik Mrs Renata GodfreySeimas, Gediminas Ave53, 2002 VilniusLithuaniaTel: +370 5239 6220Renata.Godfrey@lrs.ltParliament of N.N. Mr Georg Strätker, MrMecklenburg- Julien RadloffVorpommern Tel +49 385 525 1530/2619Tel +49 385 525 1531(International Secretariat)Landtag Mecklenburg-VorpommernLennéstr. 119053 SchwerinGermanyGeorg.Straetker@landtag-mv.deinternational@landtag-mv.deList of Members 125Member Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactNordic Council Mr Ulf Leirstein, Ms Jenny Pentler/Mr ArneMrs Karen Klint Fogt BergbyNordic CouncilVed Stranden 18DK-1061 Copenhagen KDenmarkTel: +45 33 96 04 00jepe@norden.orgarfber@norden.orgParliament of Norway Mr Stein Erik Lauvås Mr Thomas FraserThe NorwegianParliament0026 OSLONorwayTelefon: +47 23 31 3591/+47 40 45 54 50thomas.fraser@stortinget.noParliament of Poland Mr. Grzegorz Mr Piotr KoperskiMatusiak, MP Secretary of theDelegation of the SejmSubstitute: Mr. Jacek and the Senate of theProtas, MP Republic of Poland to theBSPC,International andEuropean Union AffairsOffice,Chancellery of the Senateof the Republic of Poland6 Wiejska Str.00-902 Warsaw,PolandTel +48 22 694 95 65mob.: +48 603 793 722koperski@nw.senat.gov.plState Duma of the Ms Valentina Ms Yulia GuskovaFederal Assembly of the Pivnenko SecretaryRussian Federation InterparliamentaryRelations DepartmentState Duma of the FederalAssembly of the RussianFederation1 Okhotny Ryad St.RU-103012 MoscowRussian FederationTel +7 495 692 2626fax +7 495 692 3513guskova@duma.gov.ru126 List of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Schleswig- Ms Aminata Touré Ms Jutta Schmidt-Holstein Mr Wolfgang Baasch HolländerHead of DivisionState Parliament ofSchleswig-HolsteinischerLandtagPostfach 712124 171 KielGermanyTel +49 431 988 1159jutta.schmidt-hollaender@landtag.ltsh.deWG SecretariatMr Bodo BahrSecretary General of the BSPCSchlossgartenallee 1519061 SchwerinGermanyMobile: +49 171 5512557bodo.bahr@bspcmail.nethttp://www.bspc.netMr Ralph HermanssonSwedish Delegation to the Nordic CouncilRiksdagenSE-100 12 StockholmSwedenTel: +46 8 786 6015Mobile: +46 708 86 3361ralph.hermansson@riksdagen.se5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 127Annex 1Baltic Sea Region Governments’ Immigration andIntegration PolicyPolicy Assessment and RecommendationsAuthorMatti Välimäki, Migration Institute of Finland6Turku, 23 May 2019Contents1. Introduction ........................................ 972. Data and policy analysis ............................... 973. Quantitative overview of the responses .................... 984. Qualitative analysis .................................. 994.1. Populations and legislations ........................... 994.2. Immigration policies ............................... 1024.3. Immigrant policies ................................. 1075. Conclusions and recommendations ...................... 111References ............................................ 114Appendices ........................................... 1166 The assessment, recommendations and opinions expressed in this policy analysis are those of theauthor and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Migration Institute of Finland or theBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference and its institutions. Author’s contact details: mtaval@utu.fi.128 5. Working Group Meetings 4-61. IntroductionThe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference’s (BSPC) Working Groupon Migration and Integration conducted two surveys—one in 2018and one in 2019—amongst the BSPC member governments (14governments from the Baltic Sea Region responded to the surveys).The main goal of the surveys was to map the immigration and im-migrant integration policies and procedures in the region, learnfrom the best practices and develop proposals to improve coopera-tion in planning migration and immigrant integration policies.In the spring of 2019, the BSPC general secretariat commissionedthe Migration Institute of Finland in Turku and researcher MattiVälimäki to assess and analyse the responses submitted by the re-spective governmental bodies of the Baltic Sea Region states. Thepresent review provides a summarising assessment of different poli-cy areas and suggests some future considerations for the WorkingGroup on Migration and Integration and for the BSPC membergovernments.2. Data and policy analysisThe following data were used for this analysis:• Primary material: The BSPC member governments’ responsesto the survey conducted in the autumn of 2018 by theBSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration7.There were 15 questions in the survey. 10 BSPC membercountries and 4 regions provided responses for this survey.The document containing the responses of all the membergovernments has a length of 186 pages.• The themes of the survey included policies and regulationsconcerning asylum, dual citizenship, work permits, advisoryservices for immigrants, courses provided by the govern-ments, benefits provided for migrants, family reunification,evictions, unaccompanied minor asylum applicants, month-ly costs per different categories of migrants, accommoda-tion, and involvement of volunteers. For full list of ques-tions, see Appendix I.7 The BSPC member governments’ responses to the 2018 survey can be found on the BSPC web page:http://www.bspc.net/answers-of-the-governments-bspc-wg/ (accessed 19 April2019).5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 129• Secondary material: The BSPC member governments’ responsesto the additional survey conducted in the spring of 2019 bythe BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration8.There were 9 questions in the survey. 10 BSPC membercountries and 3 regions provided responses for this survey.The document containing the responses of all the membergovernments has a length of 81 pages.• The themes of the 2019 survey included policies and regula-tions concerning numbers of asylum applicants, voluntaryreturns, evictions, and forced returns. In addition, monthlycost per month of different categories of migrants were in-quired, as well as the practices of the governments of com-bating occurrences of social control in the migrant popula-tion, measures to prevent formation of segregated migrantcommunities, best practices that have proved beneficial forsuccessful integration, and best practices of programs onlanguage and culture education. For full list of questions,see Appendix II.This analysis includes the following:• A quantitative overview of the BSPC member governments’responses to the 2018 and 2019 surveys• A qualitative analysis regarding the BSPC member govern-ments’ responses on the following:(1) Immigration policies, i.e. entry policies(2) Immigrant policies, i.e. policies concerning the rights andresponsibilities of immigrants• An overall assessment highlighting suggestions for the fu-ture3. Quantitative overview of the responsesThe 2018 and 2019 surveys represent a substantial overview of thecurrent practices of entry and immigrant policies in the BSPCmember states and regions. The focal points of the surveys are (1)the reception of asylum seekers and (2) immigrant integrationmeasures. For context, in 2015 and 2016, Europe saw an increase inthe number of asylum applications, making asylum seekers a crucial8 The BSPC member governments’ responses to the 2019 survey can be found on the BSPC web page:http://www.bspc.net/bspc_anhang_statementsbspc27/ (accessed 19 April2019).130 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6concern for the BSPC member governments. In addition, the stat-ed purpose of the Working Group on Migration and Integrationemphasises finding the best practices in immigrant integration.9The responses indicate how the inflow and outflow of migrants varyconsiderably amongst the BSPC member states; the scope and goalsof the legislation concerning immigration and integration in eachcountry varied as well. Some governments provided rather detailedresponses to the questions, whereas others were more concise. Re-gional governments often referred to the practices of their respectivenational legislations and policy practices, which is why the presentassessment also highlights the country practices more than the re-gional governments’ viewpoints. However, in future surveys and as-sessments, the intra-state differences are worth considering, e.g. interms of integration policy practices.This analysis does not focus on comparing the financial support im-migrants receive or costs of immigration and immigrant policies.Even though these issues were dealt with in the questionnaires, theanalysis of the answers would require a separate review to put thedifferences between practices of the countries into perspective. Thiswould include, e.g. taking into consideration the standard of livingand the cost of living in each BSPC member state. The responsesshould also be more commensurable than those received by thesesurveys. For instance, some of the responses to cost-related ques-tions were relatively succinct, especially in the 2018 survey.4. Qualitative analysisThe basis for the following assessment is the thematic and analyticalseparation between immigration and immigrant policies. The dif-ference between these two policy realms is elegantly put by Geddesand Scholten: ‘immigration policies concern themselves with con-ditions regulating territorial access by non-nationals and access tokey social institutions such as the labour market and welfare state’.Immigrant policies, on the other hand, ‘mark an attempt to re-or-ganise and re-imagine the organisational and conceptual bounda-ries of a given community and create capacity to include or excludenewcomers’.10 To put it bluntly, immigration policies concern them-selves with regulating the entry of non-nationals into a nation-state’sterritorial space and jurisdiction, whereas immigrant policies9 See the Appendices for lists of the questions for both surveys.10 Geddes & Scholten 2016, 11, 14.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 131address the rights and responsibilities of non-nationals. Immigrantintegration measures are part of immigrant policies.The two policy domains are also somewhat parallel because, e.g.family reunification regulations concern both the rights of immi-grants in a host society and the possibilities for entry of potential im-migrants in origin countries. The immigration policy arrangementsin prospective host countries can also have an impact on immi-grants’ decisions of where to go. However, migrants’ motives formoving from one country to another often cannot be distilled intoa single factor, such as lack of working opportunities. On the con-trary, individual migratory decisions often contain complex deci-sion-making patterns, and grasping those motives combines theconsideration of multiple individual and structural factors.114.1. Populations and legislationsThe BSPC member countries differ greatly in terms of the aspectsinfluencing their policies and, in particular, their immigration andintegration decision-making. The differences can already be seen inthe population sizes which range from 144.5 million inhabitants inRussia and 82.8 million in Germany to 1.9 million in Latvia and1.3 million in Estonia. Notable similarities also exist, however, re-garding age structures and fertility rates. In all the member states,populations are ageing and fertility rates have been decreasing inpast decades. Population growth and population projections are rel-atively moderate in most of the countries, and growth has even beennegative in some countries in recent years. Population projectionsfor 2050 (medium variant) compiled by Population Pyramid indi-cate population decreases of millions of people in Germany, Polandand Russia. Norway and Sweden, on the other hand, are likely toexperience notable increases in population12 (see Table I).11 See, e.g. de Haas 2011.12 Population Pyramid 2019.132 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6TABLE I. Population, immigration, emigration, net migration andasylum applications in the BSPC member states.13* In 2017.13 Data compiled by research assistants Elina Jokinen and Ellen Nieminen. Sources: Eurostat,Migration data portal, national statistical offices, Population pyramid, Statista, survey conducted inthe spring of 2019 by the BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration, UnitedNations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and United Nations Economic Commissionfor Europe (UNECE).nedewSaissuRdnaloPyawroNainauhtiLaivtaLynamreGdnalniFainotsEkramneD1.01*5.4410.833.58.29.18.285.53.18.5)8102,snoillim(noitalupoP5.11.00.09.04.1-0.1-4.03.00.07.0)7102,%launna(htworgnoitalupoP,snoillim(0502rofnoitcejorpnoitalupoP9.116.8211.337.64.26.15.478.51.13.6)tnairavmuidem6.711.87.11.513.42.318.412.67.415.11)7102,%(kcotstnargimlanoitanretnI843006,01007,4791795473002,4592991262)7102,sdnasuoht(stnargimE396,711009,162505,1670,62171,03-922,21-449,994890,71920,1782,336102-noitargimteN968,89009,112634,1943,12755,72-808,7-080,614428,41852,5136,427102-297,05775,302997,41-363,44A/NA/N524,553382,61A/N486,818102-snoitacilppamulysA778,261A/N523,21051,13192823946,674874,23622613,125102-939,82A/N913,21064,3524053545,547646,548662,66102-666,52A/N870,5065,3995593386,222640,5801005,37102-540,81A/N011,4035,2583571081,481549,209021,38102-5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 133The largest age group of foreigners in all the countries that differen-tiated their population with migration background according to agewere those of working age, especially those between 25 and 40 yearsold. This may be regarded as possibly desirable because this group ispotentially capable of making a living through labour market par-ticipation and thus integrate more successfully into the society of acountry of residence. On the other hand, in countries where thenumber of immigrants of working age is high, an increase in thenumber of immigrants of retirement age is also expected if immi-gration occurs in a permanent manner instead of a temporary orcircular fashion. In addition to the ageing populations in all BSPCcountries, the ageing immigrant population puts even more pres-sure on decision-making regarding how to secure services and op-portunities for older age cohorts. For instance, the needs of non-na-tive language speakers should be considered in elderly care services.All respondents did not, however, provide the same level of detail intheir responses, and some respondents provided no data on theirpopulations.14 Moreover, it would have been useful to define whatwas meant by the phrase ‘population with migration background’in the question on population statistics in the 2018 survey becauseit can mean more than one thing: people who hold a foreign nation-ality, those born abroad or whose parents are born abroad, or thosewho speak as their mother tongue a language other than the officiallanguage of the country of residence.In some countries, such as the Baltic States, Germany, Poland andRussia, emigration has been relatively high in the 2010s (see TableI), which may cause social concerns, such as the loss of skilled work-ers (the so-called brain drain phenomenon) or a decline in the de-pendency ratio. Apart from the European Union (EU) memberstates’ involvement in the Schengen free-movement area and bilat-eral visa agreements between different BSPC member states, emi-gration decisions are commonly derived, on one hand, from theemployment and study opportunities available or from relation-ships between origin and destination country residents, and, on theother hand, from the deterioration of livelihoods in origin coun-tries, and the accumulated social or other forms of capital in origincountries.In addition to the differences in the number of emigrants, the num-ber of immigrants and their regions of origin also vary considerablyfrom one BSPC country to another. For instance, in the 2018 sur-vey, the responses of the Baltic countries, Poland, Finland and14 For instance, Estonia, Germany, Norway and Russia had deficiencies in the responses they providedon their populations.134 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Russia, report populations ‘with migration background’ being lessthan 5 per cent of the total population, whereas in Norway, Swe-den, Germany and Denmark, the figures are between 10 and 25 percent. These figures may, however, also be influenced by differentways of compiling statistics of the population ‘with migration back-ground’.The state of immigration legislation in the BSPC member countriesdiffers as well. All have some kind of legislation regarding immigra-tion and immigrant issues, as is common practice in highly devel-oped countries. The regulatory framework ranged from Aliens Actsand immigration laws to administrative decrees. Some BSPC mem-bers have a separate law on asylum seekers (e.g. Germany, Latviaand Poland) or immigrant integration (e.g. Finland and Germany),while others have integrated the sections on asylum seekers and in-tegration into their Aliens Acts or decrees. In the EU member statesbelonging to the BSPC, citizens of other EU member states and thefour (non-EU) European Free Trade Association (EFTA) memberstates belonging to the Schengen Area15 (Iceland, Liechtenstein,Norway and Switzerland) residing in other member states are sub-ject to different provisions than the non-EU/Schengen nationals.Moreover, since the late 1990s, the EU’s Common European Asy-lum System (CEAS) has increasingly influenced national immigra-tion and immigrant regulations, especially in the area of asylumpolicies and family reunification.16 The EU’s European Commis-sion has also agreed on recommendations for immigrant integra-tion. However, there are differences in the immigrant integrationlegislation and procedures which will be discussed in Section 4.3.Labour migration policies, on the other hand, are still largely with-in the national decision-making power.15 The 26 Schengen countries are: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden andSwitzerland.16 On the CEAS, see Geddes & Scholten 2016.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 1354.2. Immigration policies4.2.1. Acceptance requirements for internationalprotection beneficiariesThe United Nations (UN) Refugee Convention of 1951 and its1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees are the most im-portant bases for assessing an asylum applicant’s eligibility for inter-national protection in the BSPC countries’ legislation.17 The UNConvention defines the refugee status, which is widely accepted aspart of international law, and many BSPC member states mentionthis definition in their responses. The core ideas of the 1951 UNRefugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol are the (1) non-refoule-ment principle and (2) the definition of refugees. The non-refoule-ment principle asserts that people should not be returned to a coun-try where they face threats to life or personal freedom. The UN Ref-ugee Convention definition of refugees states the following:[O]wing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, national-ity, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country ofhis nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of theprotection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the coun-try of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to suchfear, is unwilling to return to it.18This definition thus emphasises the fear of persecution while leavingout, e.g. the persons seeking international protection on grounds oflosing their livelihoods and those unwilling to return due to con-flicts, wars or environmental disasters taking place in their countryof origin.In the EU member states, the international protection provision de-rives strongly from the EU Qualification Directive19 which encom-passes the protection status for (1) refugees on the grounds definedin the UN Convention on Refugees and for (2) people who are eli-gible for international subsidiary protection. The international sub-sidiary protection can contain eligibility for international protec-tion on humanitarian grounds due to, for instance, inhuman con-ditions, threat of violence or threat of the death penalty that mayoccur if people return to their country of origin. For example, Swe-den recognises the death penalty, torture, internal armed conflictand environmental disasters as reasons for asylum.17 United Nations 1951, 1967.18 United Nations 1951.19 European Union 2011/95/EU.136 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Residence permits provided in the BSPC countries on grounds ofsubsidiary protection are often temporary, whereas residence per-mits based on the UN Convention status are often permanent orlong term. In the BSPC countries which are also part of the EU, theEU’s CEAS operates similarly regarding the minimum standards inasylum reception processes and the services and facilities providedduring the assessment of asylum applications.20 The Council of Eu-rope’s European Convention for the Protection of Human Rightsand Fundamental Freedoms21 also contains elements which protectinternational protection seekers, e.g. from being returned to inhu-man conditions. All the BSPC governments have signed this Con-vention document.The BSPC governments may find it useful to discuss whether thepractices concerning the definitions of subsidiary protection can bestandardised within the BSPC region. Another issue worth consid-ering in the broader international cooperation framework is thepossibility of a coordinated joint action of the BSPC governmentswhen discussing possible future reassessments of international pro-tection statuses in bilateral and multilateral negotiations and meet-ings.4.2.2. Work permit proceduresSome need exists for foreign workers in all the BSPC member states’labour markets, and the need is often particularly crucial in sectorssuch as the construction and health care services. According to EUlegislation, EU citizens have the right to freedom of movement andhave unlimited access to the labour markets of other member coun-tries. The EU and EFTA country citizens do not need a visa or aspecific residence permit for entry or employment in an EU/EFTAmember country. However, a valid passport or identity card is nec-essary for registration, which is obligatory in some EU countries af-ter residing for a certain period (usually from 3 to 6 months) in thecountry.In all the EU member countries, non-EU/EEA residents immigrat-ing on the basis of working are obliged to apply for a work permitbefore entering an EU/EEA member country. In some countries,they also need to separately apply for a residence permit. Work per-mits usually are issued on a temporary basis. In general, labour mi-grants from outside the EU/EEA area are expected to meet certain20 See, e.g. European Commission 2019.21 Council of Europe 1950.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 137criteria, varying according to the BSPC state, to obtain a residencepermit. The most common criteria are the following:1. There should not be workers with similar qualifications andavailability for recruitment in the national and EU/EEA area(availability assessment is conducted by public authorities).2. Salary and working conditions should be equivalent to the na-tional standards (assessment is conducted by public authori-ties).3. Employment needs to enable the workers to support them-selves during their stay in the host country (assessment is con-ducted by public authorities).Asylum seekers and people who have been granted residence per-mits on the basis of international protection and family reunifica-tion have the right to work in several countries, either without awaiting period or after a certain period of time (often a few months).In summary, most BSPC member states tend to favour and protecttheir own citizens from extensive labour market competition and,in some cases, their labour markets from the deterioration of na-tional working life standards. The EU/EEA member states also givepriority position to other EU/EEA citizens regarding work permitprocedures. Of the non-EU/EEA citizens, highly qualified peopleand international students are often given the benefit of a fast-trackprocedure in pursuit of increasing the flexibility and competitive-ness of labour markets.4.2.3. Family reunificationThe right to family life refers to the right of all individuals to havetheir established family life respected and to have and maintainfamily relationships. This right is recognised in many internationalhuman rights instruments, is adopted in one form or another inmany highly developed nations’ legislations, and is also provided forin the EU directive on family reunification.22 The survey responseson family reunification concentrated for the most part on the rightsand position of asylum seekers and refugees. Nonetheless, it is worthnoting that family reunification regulations also concern other mi-grants. Furthermore, if family reunification regulations and proce-dures also apply, e.g. to labour migrants and international students,22 European Union 2003/86/EC.138 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6their viewpoints should be considered as well when formulating orassessing these policies.Every BSPC country grants family reunification to a certain degree.However, the laws of each BSPC state contain limitations, condi-tions and differences in definitions of family, which vary, amongstother things, as to the kind of relationship or the type of residencepermit. A clear disproportion exists between the rights of the citi-zens of the Schengen Area and the so-called third-country nation-als. For example, even with bilateral visa agreements in force, oftenthe rights of third-country nationals to family reunification is limit-ed in many ways, such as requiring documentation of adequate le-gal income of the sponsor to support family members (e.g. in Esto-nia, Finland and Norway), documentation of health insurance (e.g.in Germany and Latvia) or the ability to speak the basics of the na-tional language (in Germany). Residence permits on grounds offamily ties for third-country nationals are often granted on a tem-porary basis, which may have a negative impact on the likelihood ofintegration into the host society.The beneficiaries of international protection are often providedwith the possibility to reunite their families. An unaccompaniedminor asylum seeker who is granted international protection usual-ly has the right to reunite with parents arriving from a foreign coun-try. There are also exceptions to this general rule, however. For in-stance, since July 2016, a temporary act (in force until July 2019) inSweden limits the rights of family reunifications for those who areeligible for subsidiary protection. The same kind of restrictions wereadopted in Germany in 2016.In some states, a period of residence has been defined after whichthe asylum seeker or refugee has the right to apply for family reuni-fication (e.g. in Latvia, the deadline is 2 years). In most countries,family reunification is provided to the members of the so-called nu-clear family, i.e. spouses and (minor) children. The migration ofnon-residents on the basis of family ties is possible only in excep-tional cases, e.g. in the case of other relatives or common-law spous-es. BSPC governments would find it worthwhile to discuss whetherthe current family reunification regulations provide in effect suffi-cient circumstances for the right to family life to be fulfilled for mi-grants living in their jurisdictions.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 1394.2.4. Removals and returnsIf the conditions of the residence permit in a country are (no longer)fulfilled, the authorities may order a removal or return of foreignersto their country of origin or former residence. A responsible author-ity depends on the type of removal or return in question. This maybe, e.g. a deportation following a negative asylum decision, removalof a person residing without a residence permit or expulsion of anon-national who has committed a crime. Finland’s survey responseon evictions also mentions the category ‘refusal of entry’. In theBSPC countries and regions, the authority that handles removalsand returns is usually the central office responsible for immigrationor border control operating under the authority of a ministry or aspecial agency responsible for, e.g. residence permits for foreign la-bour. Schleswig-Holstein’s response states that, in this region, the‘County Immigration Office’ (Kreisausländerbehörde) is responsible fordeciding to pursue an eviction.For removals and returns, foreigners also presumably have somekind of opportunity to appeal the decisions of the authorities. How-ever, only Denmark and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern’s responsesmention this possibility. Moreover, deportations and returns can beeither voluntary or enforced by nature. In voluntary returns, thepersons are usually given a set period of time by which they mustleave the country. Enforced cases, in turn, involve one or more es-corts, usually police officers.A problem with regard to the responses on ‘eviction activities’ is re-lated to the term ‘eviction’ used in both the 2018 and 2019 surveys.The comparability of the figures given by the respondents on evic-tions is questionable because there may be difference in the way therespondents understand the word ‘eviction’. Does the term refer toremovals or returns, and is the term understood as expulsion? Thisproblem with the interpretation of the word was also raised in sev-eral responses to the 2018 question. Furthermore, in the 2018 sur-vey, about half of the respondents did not provide an answer toquestion 11, which asked about the number of evictions. However,the BSPC 2019 questionnaire clarified this theme, and the topicwas detailed by asking for the number of voluntary and forced re-turns in addition to the number of evictions. (See Table II.)140 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6TABLE II. Evictions, voluntary returns and forced returns in theBSPC member states and regions, 2015–2017.23* The provided number of ‘deportations’. ** The sum of the provided number of‘accompanied returns’ and ‘ensured returns’. *** The sum of the provided number offorced returns ‘ins Herkunftsland’ and ‘in Drittstaaten’.23 Data compiled by research assistant Ellen Nieminen. Source: Survey conducted in the spring of 2019by the BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration.dnalÅH-SV-MgrubmaHnedewSaissuRdnaloPyawroNainauhtiLaivtaLynamreGdnalniFainotsEkramneDsnoitcivEA/N0752021A/NA/N966,31551,5A/NA/N888,02*182631A/N5102-A/N0485681A/NA/N640,02627,4A/NA/N573,52*034011A/N6102-A/N83321652A/NA/N349,42982,3A/NA/N669,32*509521A/N7102-snruteryratnuloVA/NA/N4453721162,31A/N406,11761,144522,1023,730749544615102-A/NA/N1777522414,61A/N855,71954,196720,1600,45138,17936716102-A/NA/N665306740,9A/N742,12865451678225,92083,1725697102-snruterdecroFA/NA/N0021***466414,3A/N378788,7801293A/N855751**2845102-A/NA/N648***508827,3A/N786770,803343A/N125,1351**5136102-A/NA/N794***806561,4A/N318434,521781A/N773561**0947102-nietsloH-giwselhcS=HS;nremmoproV-grubnelkceM=V-M5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 141The number of returns and removals varies considerably between theBSPC member states and regions. For example, from 2015 to 2017,the evictions were fewer than 200 per year in Estonia and between120 and 286 in Hamburg; however, the annual figure during thissame period was between 20,000 and 26,000 in Germany and be-tween 13,000 and 25,000 in Poland.24 The most significant explana-tory factors are presumably the differences between the countries inthe number of asylum applications and overall immigration becausecountries with a higher number of asylum applications and immigra-tion usually also have a higher number of removals and returns.For voluntary and forced returns, the trend was largely similar, al-though the figures provided by many countries and regions on vol-untary and forced returns were remarkably low in many instances.In Poland, however, the number of voluntary returns was significant(11,000–22,000 per year in 2015–2017), notwithstanding that thenumber of asylum seekers in the country was considerably lowerthan, e.g. in Germany or Sweden, where the number of voluntaryreturns was also high (in 2015–2017, Germany had 29,000–55,000, and Sweden had 9,000–17,000 per year). The relativelyhigh number of forced returns in Norway (5,000–8,100 per year in2015–2017) was noteworthy as well as the relatively low number offorced returns in Sweden (3,400–4,200 per year in 2015–2017),despite the relatively high numbers of asylum seekers and immi-grants in the country (see Table II). Nonetheless, further investiga-tion into national and regional practices and legislation is necessaryto assess the different factors influencing these figures.4.3. Immigrant policies4.3.1. Dual citizenshipRegarding dual citizenship regulations, the countries vary in the lev-el of restrictiveness and detail. Denmark, Finland, Latvia, Poland,Russia and Sweden allow dual citizenship at least to some extent.Most of these countries define the requirements for acquiring dualcitizenship in different levels of detail. Latvia, e.g. allows dual citi-zenship only for certain nationalities: citizens of the EU, EEA orNATO member states, or Australia, Brazil and New Zealand. Den-mark and Sweden stated they had no special conditions for acquir-ing dual citizenship.24 Figures according to the responses to the 2018 survey.142 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6In some member states, different regulations also allow exceptionsto the general rule of not allowing dual citizenship. For instance, inLithuania and Estonia, one might acquire citizenship if the personapplying for citizenship holds refugee status or is a beneficiary of in-ternational protection granted by these states or any other EUmember state. Germany indicated that ‘multiple citizenships shouldbe avoided’. However, Germany does allow dual citizenship if itsquite demanding conditions are met by the applicants. In addition,Norway allows multiple citizenships only in exceptional cases, butthe country is potentially preparing a regulation allowing dual citi-zenship in the future. In summary, it seems that BSPC memberstates are systematically following the general trend of most devel-oped countries in recent decades to gradually decrease the restric-tions regarding dual citizenship, although examples to the contraryremain.254.3.2. Unaccompanied minor asylum applicantsIn recent decades, many comparative studies and surveys have beenpublished on unaccompanied minor asylum applicants. These stud-ies are worth consulting by BSPC governments.26 In 2015, therewere close to 100,000 unaccompanied minor asylum applicantsregistered in the EU countries but in 2017 the number had de-creased to close to 30,000 applicants. Of the BSPC members, Ger-many and Sweden have been among the receivers of the highestnumbers of minors applying for asylum. In the EU member states,the unaccompanied minors mostly consist of young boys of 16 and17 years of age. Only small proportion of the total is under 14 yearsof age. The percentage of unaccompanied minor girls has in recentyears often been between 10 to 15 percent of the total number ofunaccompanied minors. In 2017, the main countries of origin ofthe unaccompanied minor applicants in the EU were Syria, Af-ghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea and Somalia.27All BSPC countries and regions have special procedures for recep-tion of unaccompanied minors and means of supporting their inte-gration.28 The legislative framework in the member states and re-gions is mainly based on the Declaration of the Rights of the Child,the UN Refugee Convention and the EU acquis. Reception and careduring the minor asylum applicant’s status determination varies but25 Blatter, Erdmann & Schwanke 2009; Vink & Bauböck 2013.26 See, e.g. Kohli & Mitchell 2007; Björklund 2015; European Migration Network 2018.27 European Migration Network 2018.28 Russia did not provide response to the 2018 survey’s questions on unaccompanied minor asylumapplicants.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 143there are significant similarities in the systems of the EU memberstates due to the EU’s CEAS and Union’s acquis framework. In mostcountries, unaccompanied minors are assigned a representative orguardian whose task is to ensure that the child’s best interests areconsidered during the asylum process. A guardian may be a volun-tary citizen (e.g. in Denmark and Finland) or a state or municipalemployee (e.g. in Estonia, Germany and Latvia). Volunteer guardi-ans are paid at least in some countries by the government for theirduties. Lithuania’s system differs slightly from the others, since ac-cording to its response, the public Refugee Reception Centre acts asguardian for unaccompanied minors.In all member states and regions, unaccompanied minor asylum seek-ers are accommodated in their own accommodation units with inten-sive support. Services provided in these facilities for people under theage of 18 are generally more extensive than for adult asylum seekers.In some form or another the following services seem to be available inall countries and regions which provided their response to the ques-tions on minor asylum applicants29: temporary accommodation, in-tensive care and guidance services, different kinds of education (e.g.language, culture orientation and school preparatory courses), socialsecurity and health care. However, for example, the integration andlanguage courses and services may differ considerably in different re-gions, municipalities and cities of a given country. As the Mecklen-burg-Vorpommern response highlights, at least in the case of Germa-ny, ’support measures in the school sector and professional sector areorganized by the individual federal states’. Several of the respondents(e.g. Norway, Sweden and Poland) state that the aim is to provide asconvergent services as possible to minors of their own country. How-ever, based on the responses to the surveys, it is impossible to comparein detail the differences in the coverage of the services in the differentBSPC countries or regions. It could be considered among the BSPCmember states and regions if there is possibility to come up with min-imum standards of reception facilities and above mentioned servicesfor minor asylum seekers.All the BSPC countries and regions that have answered the ques-tions on minor asylum applicants, have some kind of legislationthat allows age assessment of minors. Usually the authorities mayrequest a medical age assessment when it is not possible to definewith certainty whether the person is over or under 18 years of age.This procedure is used especially in the cases where an unaccompa-nied minor is not able to present valid ID document. The medicalage assessment is voluntary, but in many countries a person who29 Russia did not provide response to the 2018 survey’s questions on unaccompanied minor asylumapplicants.144 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6refuses to take part in the assessment is considered automatically anadult. The medical assessment usually consists of dental x-ray and/or wrist x-ray. The results of medical assessments are in many coun-tries reported to be used with caution, and they are often only oneof the factors the authorities consider in the overall age assessment.Also it is mentioned in several responses that if there is a reasonabledoubt about the asylum applicant’s age, the applicant will be con-sidered a minor.When an unaccompanied minor asylum applicant reaches the ageof 18 or is declared by the authorities to be an adult, he or she usu-ally moves immediately to adult reception facilities and receptioncenters. In some states (e.g. Finland and Sweden) there is a specialtransition period during which a person who is between 16 and 17years of age is intensively trained for independence and taking re-sponsibility for one’s own life. This practice could also be consid-ered in those BSPC countries and regions where it is not yet in use.Also the differences between the practices and legislations concern-ing detaining and deportation of unaacompanied minors in theBSPC member states and regions should be compared in order topossibly find common good practices that secure the basic and hu-man rights of the children.4.3.3. Services provided for immigrantsProvision of advisory services and training courses is crucial for theestablishment of a reception process for asylum seekers which takesinto consideration the basic and legal rights of the persons arrivingand provides sustainable and flexible integration trajectories for allimmigrants. In all the BSPC states and regions, advisory and legal as-sistance to foreigners, asylum seekers and refugees were differentiatedby the status of the beneficiary. These services exist to a certain extentin each state and region. In some countries, asylum seekers have ac-cess to legal assistance at various stages of the asylum application pro-cess, especially at the appeal stage. However, in some other countries,such as Germany, publicly paid legal aid is not available or is quitelimited.Some of the respondents in the 2018 survey only raised legal or otherkinds of advisory services for asylum seekers and refugees and did nottalk about advisory services designed for other immigrants. However,information is likely provided for other groups of immigrants aswell—at least as an online service. Nonetheless, most of the respond-ents referred to certain kinds of general immigrant information ser-vices, usually provided by branches of one or more ministries, such as5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 145the Citizen Service at the Danish Immigration Service in Denmark orthe Finnish Immigration Service in Finland.All BSPC countries and regions offer some kind of language coursesand civic education for immigrants. Vocational training, however,was mentioned less often by the respondents. The responses focusedon integration services for asylum seekers and refugees, which wereusually free of charge. In more than half of the states, asylum seekershave a duty to participate in this public integration training. If an asy-lum applicant does not take part in these courses, a reduction in theapplicant’s social benefits is prescribed in several states. In Poland,participation was exclusively voluntary. Other immigrants than asy-lum seekers, both third-country nationals and EU citizens, are alsoprovided with education on language, employment and social andcultural aspects of the host society. For third-country nationals, thosetaking the training must pay for it, but participation is voluntary. Theintegration procedures in Norway and Sweden differ from otherstates; i.e. all foreign nationals between 16 and 55 years of age whohold a permanent residence permit (Norway) and all ‘people who re-cently received a residence permit’ (Sweden) have both the right and ob-ligation to participate in integration training. The primary objectivesof the BSPC countries’ integration policy measures for immigrantsappear to be learning the host country’s language and gaining em-ployment in the short- to medium term.One best practice example to be considered in other BSPC states isthe system in Lithuania where there are three foreigner integrationcentres in the country’s three largest cities.30 These centres aim to pro-vide ‘one-desk’ services for foreigners and to facilitate a wide range ofservices at one office to speed up integration into society and the la-bour market. More information on best practices for immigrant inte-gration was collected in the 2019 survey of the Working Group onMigration and Integration.31 Information on the most successful in-tegration practices can also be found, e.g. in the Organisation forEconomic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the NordicWelfare Centre reports on integration policies and indicators, and theopen access edited volumes published in the International Migration,Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe (IMISCOE) Research Se-ries.32 Unfortunately, it is not possible to address the best practice ex-amples in detail in the context of this assessment.30 The centres are in Vilnius, Kaunas and Klaipeda.31 The responses for the 2019 survey are available at http://www.bspc.net/bspc_anhang_statementsbspc27/ (accessed 10 May 2019). See the responses to questions 8 and 9.32 The OECD reports on immigrant integration are available at http://www.oecd.org/els/mig/integrationpoliciesandindicators.htm (accessed 10 May 2019). See also MIPEX2019; Nordic Welfare Centre 2019; Scholten, Entzinger, Penninx & Verbeek 2015; Garcés-Mascareñas & Penninx 2016a.146 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6Certain issues might still need to be further clarified in future assess-ments and surveys with regard to advisory, legal assistance and inte-gration services in the BSPC member states and regions. The an-swers did not, e.g. tell much about the educational background ofthe authorities providing information and legal advice or what theiroperational principles are. It would also be useful to know how na-tional trade unions, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) orlocal employers are involved in providing advice and integrationservices for immigrants. However, most governments mentionedthat voluntary civil society members who organise different activi-ties or services for immigrants are supported by public funds. Theamounts allocated differed considerably amongst countries. Most ofthese services provided by organisations and volunteers were relatedto asylum seekers or support for integration.4.3.4. AccommodationResponses to accommodation for immigrants focused on servicesand challenges related to asylum seekers. Every country provides ac-commodation of some form to the asylum seekers whose applica-tions for asylum are being assessed. Responses from many countrieshighlighted the impact that the type of residence permit asylumseekers hold had on housing opportunities and the services availa-ble. Usually, in BSPC countries, asylum seekers waiting for a deci-sion can first be housed in state-financed reception facilities organ-ised by municipalities, state immigration services or NGOs. Theservices offered at these reception centres vary from country tocountry but may include food provision, language courses, trainingon social and cultural integration, social and health care services ordistribution of social support.In some countries, such as Germany, asylum seekers are usuallyobliged to live in a reception centre for a certain period of time(from 6 weeks to 6 months in Germany) before being allocated aplace for regional accommodation, usually organised in collectiveaccommodation facilities. In some cases, such as in Finland, in ad-dition to the reception centre, asylum seekers are allowed to live inprivate accommodation (e.g. with a relative or a friend) during theasylum process. These situations are assessed on a case-by-case basisby the employees of the reception centres to ensure, inter alia, thatthe housing conditions are decent. If a foreigner is detained, mostcountries have a special kind of detention centre for accommodat-ing these people where services, the movement of residents andmore are restricted.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 147Unaccompanied minor asylum seekers, on the other hand, usuallyhave separate reception centres or units in many of BSPC countries.These facilities often provide broader services and support, e.g. ineducation, social integration and organising the lives of minor asy-lum seekers in their new country of residence. It might be reasona-ble to examine, in collaboration with the BSPC states, whetherthere are still countries where unaccompanied minors live togetherwith adult asylum seekers and whether these practices should bemodified.If people are granted asylum or an alternative international protec-tion status, they can usually live in a reception centre for a certainperiod of time. These people are then normally expected to move totheir own homes. In some countries, such as Finland and Sweden,the reception centre’s employees and municipal authorities activelysupport persons who have been granted residence permits in thepracticalities of finding and moving into a private accommodation(e.g. a new apartment). Especially for those minor asylum seekerswho have been granted a residence permit, support for moving totheir own home is well planned.BSPC states and regions would find it worthwhile to discuss defin-ing common minimum standards for accommodation and servicesprovided by the reception facilities for asylum seekers. The possibledifferences in the level of accommodation and services providedwithin countries, e.g. due to the service provider in question, shouldalso be considered critically to achieve equality between asylumseekers living in different centres. These kinds of standards have al-ready been discussed and formulated amongst EU member states.5. Conclusions and recommendationsSimilarities and differences of contextual frameworks impact theBSPC member governments’ abilities, means and goals in immigra-tion and immigrant policy. Different historical legacies, such as theCold War era minority and immigrant policies can also influencethe approaches and regulations adopted by the states. In addition tohistory, different present-day realities in both predominantly mi-grant sending or migrant receiving countries and members andnon-members of the EU have an effect, e.g. on the immigrant inte-gration, asylum and family reunification policies and administrativepractices. In the Baltic countries in particular, the scale of148 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6emigration has been substantial to the extent that it poses a threatto the reproduction of populations and the sustainable economicand social development of these countries.33The Working Group on Migration and Integration determines as itsobjective ‘to elaborate political positions and recommendations per-taining to migration and integration’.34 To support this endeavour,the assessment concludes by providing the following reflections andsuggestions based on the findings.Reflections and suggestionsOn asylum policy1. EU asylum policy makes a significant contribution to the asy-lum reception systems and legislation of the EU member states.It would be worth considering whether the BSPC member statesthat are not members of the EU would be able to adopt some ofthe common practices of the EU member states. For instance,there may be differences between the non-EU and EU coun-tries in the process leading to deportation, in processing asylumapplications, or in reception facilities provided for minor asy-lum applicants. To what extent can these practices potentially beharmonised, taking into account both national and human/fundamental rights’ considerations?2. Could BSPC members consider establishing a common origincountry data collection services or database or at least enhancecollaboration amongst the BSPC governments in this field? Thiswould help achieve a fair and equal practice of processing asy-lum applications in different BSPC countries, increase coordi-nation and mutual understanding amongst the BSPC countriesand decrease possible overlap in collecting origin country infor-mation.On migration and labour markets1. Solutions concerning foreign labour and international mobilityof the workforce are primarily based on national considera-tions. Are more opportunities available for multinational33 See, e.g. Engbersen & Jansen 2013; Kirch 2013.34 Working Group on Migration and Integration 2018, 7.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 149cooperation and coordination to balance undesirable develop-ments such as labour shortages and labour oversupply?2. The best practices of supporting the societal and cultural inte-gration and employment of certain groups of immigrants (e.g.how international students, housewives or younger and olderimmigrants are acknowledged when formulating integration,education or employment legislation and policy) should be dis-cussed amongst the BSPC governments. Nevertheless, securingthe well-being of all members in a given society is arguably thedesired state of a resilient society.On immigrant integration1. The multifaceted character of immigrant integration needs to beacknowledged, and this understanding should be put into prac-tice on the level of legislation and policies. Integration occurs atthe same time on different levels (labour market, language, so-cial relationships, cultural accommodation etc.). How to mea-sure the different aspects of integration and their overall capaci-ty-building relevance should be considered.2. Immigrant integration is more than just national and regionalgovernments’ (administrative) actions. Governments and pub-lic administrations can obviously act as enablers of successfulintegration. However, other actors, such as NGOs and largely in-formal social networks of immigrants or ethnic communities inhost and origin countries can be crucial for social and labourmarket integration. How the public policies can facilitate thedesirable working conditions of the NGOs and informal net-works should be considered.3. From the point of view of integration and population policyplanning, it might be useful to ask (1) how and if the three-wayintegration,35 i.e. (a) the integration of immigrants to the prac-tices of the host society, (b) the adaptation of the host society tothe diversification of the citizens’ backgrounds and practices ofthe members of a society and (c) the role the countries of originplay is acknowledged in the BSPC states; and (2) how and ifgood relations within the population and diverse society’s abilityto function are promoted by public action.35 On the three-way integration process concept, see, e.g. Garcés-Mascareñas & Penninx 2016b.150 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6On data collection1. To provide all respondents with comparable and sufficiently de-tailed responses to the questions asked, the following steps arerecommended: (1) The questions should be as precise as possi-ble regarding the necessary information and the level of accura-cy required. (2) Responses should be reviewed, and incompleteanswers should result in queries for more information.2. More comprehensive understanding and data on local leveltrends in the BSPC region are needed. For instance, immigrantintegration and economic and labour market impact of migra-tion occur to a significant degree on the local level. Neverthe-less, the national and subnational assessments—such as theBSPC 2018 and 2019 surveys—are also important for under-standing the broader policy and societal frameworks.3. The surveys conducted by the BSPC Working Group on Migra-tion and Integration in 2018 and 2019 should be considered tobe repeated every 3 to 5 years to enhance understanding on thedevelopments of policy convergence and differentiation be-tween the BSPC countries and regions’ legislations and policiesover time.4. For example, OECD, Migrant Integration Policy Index (MI-PEX), the Nordic Welfare Centre and the International Organiza-tion for Migration (IOM) have compiled surveys and lists of bestpractices of various aspects of immigration and immigrant pol-icies. The information and lessons learned gathered by these or-ganizations could be combined in the future with the data col-lected by the BSPC members.36 This would also help avoidingduplication of data collection and possibly enhance coopera-tion with these organizations in the field of immigration.36 See References, for some of these publications. See also the responses to the 2019 survey, for some of thebest practices mentioned by the BSPC governments.5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 151ReferencesBjörklund, Krister (2015). Unaccompanied refugee minors in Finland:Challenges and good practices in a Nordic context. Migration studies C 26.Turku: Institute of Migration. Available at: http://www.migrationinstitute.fi/files/pdf/c26.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).Blatter, Joachim, Erdmann, Stefanie & Schwanke, Katja (2009).Acceptance of Dual Citizenship: Empirical Data and PoliticalContexts. Working Paper Series “Global Governance and Democracy”. PaperNo. 2. University of Lucerne, Department of Political Science.Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3005979 (accessed 24 April2019).Council of Europe (1950). European Convention for the Protection ofHuman Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14,4 November 1950. ETS 5. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3b04.html (accessed 24 April 2019).de Haas, Hein (2011). The determinants of internationalmigration: Conceptualising policy, origin and destination effects.IMI Working Papers Series, 2011, No. 32. Available at: https://www.imi-n.org/publications/wp-32-11 (accessed 24 April 2019).Engbersen, Godfried & Jansen, Joost (2013). Emigration from theBaltic States: Economic impact and policy implications. InOECD, Coping with Emigration in Baltic and East European Countries. Paris:OECD Publishing, pp. 13–27. Available at: http://dspace.lu.lv/dspace/bitstream/handle/7/31166/Hazans_OECD_2013.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 10 May 2019).European Commission (2019). Common European Asylum System.European Commission, Migration and Home Affairs. Available at:https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum_en(accessed 24 April 2019).European Migration Network (2018). Approaches to UnaccompaniedMinors Following Status Determination in the EU plus Norway: Synthesis Report forthe EMN Study. European Commission, European MigrationNetwork. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/00_eu_synthesis_report_unaccompanied_minors_2017_en.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).European Union (2003/86/EC). Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22September 2003 on the right to family reunification. Available at: http://eur-lex.152 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:251:0012:0018:EN:PDF (accessed 24 April2019).European Union (2011/95/EU). Directive 2011/95/EU of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualificationof third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of internationalprotection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiaryprotection, and for the content of the protection granted. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:337:0009:0026:en:PDF (accessed 24 April2019).Garcés-Mascareñas, Blanca & Penninx, Rinus (eds, 2016a).Integration Processes and Policies in Europe: Contexts, Levels and Actors. Cham:Springer. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-319-21674-4.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).Garcés-Mascareñas, Blanca & Penninx, Rinus (2016b).Introduction: Integration as a Three-Way Process Approach? InBlanca Garcés-Mascareñas & Rinus Penninx (eds) Integration Processesand Policies in Europe: Contexts, Levels and Actors. Cham: Springer. Availableat: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-319-21674-4.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).Geddes, Andrew & Scholten, Peter (2016). The Politics of Migration andImmigration in Europe. London: SAGE Publications.Kirch, Aksel (2013). Baltic States, migration: 20th century to thepresent. In Immanuel Ness (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Global HumanMigration. DOI: 10.1002/9781444351071.wbeghm058.Kohli, Ravi K. S. & Mitchell. Fiona (eds, 2007). Working withUnaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children: Issues for Policy and Practice.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.MIPEX (2019). Migration Integration Policy Index 2015: How countries arepromoting integration of immigrants. Available at: http://www.mipex.eu/(accessed 10 May 2019).Nordic Welfare Centre (2019). Integration: Knowledge about integration inthe Nordic region. Available at: https://nordicwelfare.org/en/integration/(accessed 10 May 2019).Population Pyramid (2019). Population Pyramids of the World from 1950 to2100. Available at: https://www.populationpyramid.net/ (accessed 24April 2019).5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 153Scholten, Peter, Entzinger, Han, Penninx, Rinus & Verbeek, Stijn(eds, 2015). Integrating Immigrants in Europe: Research-Policy Dialogues.Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-319-16256-0.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).United Nations (1951). Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10 (accessed 24 April2019).United Nations (1967). Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. Availableat: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3b00f1cc50.html (accessed 24April 2019).Vink, Maarten Peter & Bauböck, Rainer (2013). Citizenshipconfigurations: Analysing the multiple purposes of citizenshipregimes in Europe. Comparative European Politics, 11(5): 621–648.Working Group on Migration and Integration (2018). Mid-WayReport. Stockholm: The BSPC Rapporteur on Working Group onMigration and Integration. Available at: http://www.bspc.net/bspc_report_migration_integration_2018/ (accessed 24 April 2019).154 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6AppendicesAPPENDIX I. Questions of the 2018 BSPC Working Group onMigration and Integration survey.1. Name of national / regional parliament2. If available, please, provide information regarding the popula-tion structure of your country / region total, female, with mi-gration background, living in urban areas2a. If available, please, provide detailed information re-garding the population structure in your region / coun-try Insert percentage, 18-25, 26-40, 41-50, 51-65, 66+2b. If available please give a prognosis for you country’spopulation in 20 years concerning demographic devel-opment?3. What are the significant rules for immigration? E. g. does animmigration law exist?4. What are the requirements for the acceptance of asylum?5. Does your country allow dual citizenship?6. What are the conditions to obtain a work permit?7. Do advisory services for foreigners (or migrants, asylum seekers,refugees) exist?8. Are courses provided by the government, such as languagecourses or courses e.g. for civic education or vocational train-ing?8a. Who is allowed to participate in courses?8b. Are the courses free of charge?8c. Are there obligatory courses?9. What kind of benefits exist for migrants / asylum seekers?9a. What are the conditions for the benefit payments?9b. How do the benefits relate to the average national in-come?10. Are there possibilities for family-reunification?11. Could you inform us about the number of evictions activities?11a. Who decides to pursue an eviction?5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 15512. How does your country deal with unaccompanied minors? (aguardian or representative, the right to accommodation in adedicated home or in a foster, family child-specific social, eco-nomic and educational rights)12a. Do you have special programs for family unification /resettlement / return?12b. Is there a continued support upon turning 18 (reach-ing legal age)?12c. Are there procedures to identify ostensible minors?12d. Are there special regional programs for unaccompa-nied minors (school, youth welfare); best practice ex-amples?12e. Please provide examples for regional programs or bestpractice examples?13. Please state – if possible – the average monthly costs (per mi-grant, per asylum seeker, per undocumented person, per minor)14. Please indicate how your country / region organises accommo-dation (for migrants, for asylum seekers, for refugees, for mi-nors)15. 15a. How is the involvement of volunteers organized?15b. How is the financial support of volunteers organized?156 5. Working Group Meetings 4-6APPENDIX II. Questions of the 2019 BSPC Working Group onMigration and Integration survey.1. How many asylum seekers asked for a permission to stay in2015 / 2016 / 2017?2. How many voluntary returns have been documented in 2015 /2016 / 2017?3. How many evictions have been issued in 2015 / 2016 / 2017?4. How many forced returns have been documented in 2015 /2016 / 2017?5. Please State – if possible – the average monthly costs for:A) Asylum seekers /B) Refugees / subsidiary residence permitsAdults living alone1. a) in reception centers with food2. b) in reception centers without food3. c) Living outside reception centersUnaccompanied minorsa) under 16 yearsb) + 16 yearsChildren with familiesa) in reception centers with foodb) in reception centers without foodc) Living outside reception centersSpouses / partners / roommates1. a) in reception centers with food2. b) in reception centers without food5. Working Group Meetings 4-6 1573. c) Living outside reception centers1) Additional costs for transportation2) Additional costs for clothing3) Additional costs for education (books etc.)4) Health care5) Rent6) One-time paymentsC) Social benefits that are granted as a basic payment6. Are there any measures taken by the government to combat oc-currences of social control in the migrant population? Pleaseprovide best practice examples.7. Are there any measures taken by the government to prevent for-mation of segregated migrant communities? Please provide bestpractice examples8. Is there any program, training or advisory service that over timehas proved particularly beneficial for successful long-term inte-gration of migrants into the labor market? Please elaborate.9. Is there any training programs on language and culture that hasbeen conducted in collaboration with civil society organiza-tions/initiatives that over time has proved to be particularly suc-cessful? Please elaborate.Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference Secretariatwww.bspc.netBSPC SecretariatSchlossgartenallee 1519061 SchwerinGermany