Final Report – Working Group on Migration and Integration

BSPCBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceWorking Group onMigration and IntegrationFinal ReportBSPCBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceWorking Group onMigration and IntegrationFinal Report2The Working Group on Migration and Integration The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) was established in 1991 as aFinal Report forum for political dialogue between parliamentarians from the Baltic SeaRegion. BSPC aims at raising awareness and opinion on issues of current© Stockholm 2020 political interest and relevance for the Baltic Sea Region. It promotes anddrives various initiatives and efforts to support a sustainable environmental,social and economic development of the Baltic Sea Region. It strives at en-Text: Hans Wallmark hancing the visibility of the Baltic Sea Region and its issues in a wider Eu-Editing: Johanna Ingvarsson, Dan Alvarsson, Bodo Bahr and Jördis Palme ropean context.Layout: produktionsbüro TINUS BSPC gathers parliamentarians from 11 national parliaments, 11 region-Photos: BSPC Secretariat al parliaments and 5 parliamentary organisations around the Baltic Sea. TheBSPC thus constitutes a unique parliamentary bridge between all the EU-and non-EU countries of the Baltic Sea Region.BSPC external interfaces include parliamentary, governmental, sub-re-gional and other organizations in the Baltic Sea Region and the NorthernDimension area, among them CBSS, HELCOM, the Northern DimensionPartnership in Health and Social Well-Being (NDPHS), the Baltic Sea La-bour Forum (BSLF), the Baltic Sea States Sub-regional Cooperation(BSSSC) and the Baltic Development Forum.BSPC shall initiate and guide political activities in the region; supportBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference and strengthen democratic institutions in the participating states; improveBodo Bahr dialogue between governments, parliaments and civil society; strengthenSecretary General the common identity of the Baltic Sea Region by means of close co-opera-+49 171 5512557 tion between national and regional parliaments on the basis of equality; andbodo.bahr@bspcmail.net initiate and guide political activities in the Baltic Sea Region, endowingwww.bspc.net them with additional democratic legitimacy and parliamentary authority.The political recommendations of the annual Parliamentary Conferencesare expressed in a Conference Resolution adopted by consensus by the Con-BSPC Secretariat ference. The adopted Resolution shall be submitted to the governments ofSchlossgartenallee 15 the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the EU, and disseminated to other rel-19061 Schwerin evant national, regional and local stakeholders in the Baltic Sea Region andGermany its neighbourhood.3Contents1. Introduction ....................................................................... 52. Mandate .......................................................................... 73. Principles of migration policy .......................................................... 84. Summary: Meetings 1–3 .............................................................. 95. Summary: Meetings 4–6 ............................................................. 146. Summary: Meetings 7–8 ............................................................. 207. Best practices – examples ............................................................ 238. Intergovernmental surveys and analysis .................................................. 279. Political recommendations ........................................................... 3110. Conclusion ....................................................................... 34List of Members ................................................................... 35WG Secretariat: .................................................................... 40Introduction 51. IntroductionLadies and Gentlemen,The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration was launchedby the 26th BSPC in Hamburg on 5 September 2017. Since 2015, withthe refugee crisis and the shared – but various – challenges it created inour region, the issue has been one of the key political topics in almostall countries in the Baltic Sea Region.The Working Group has already referred to this issue and presented rec-Hans Wallmarkommendations for action at the Annual Conferences in Mariehamn in2018 and Oslo in 2019, which were adopted by the Baltic Sea Parlia-mentary Conference. This report, therefore, refers to the situation be-fore the COVID-19 pandemic. The situation caused by the pandemicand its effects have not been discussed in detail by the Working Group,as the initially planned ninth, and last, meeting could not take place asa consequence of the pandemic. Nevertheless, when discussing and is-suing recommendations, the Working Group has taken the pandemicand its consequences into consideration, aiming for sustainable recom-mendations that will last beyond the pandemic. Being aware of a newreality due to the pandemic, the Working Group urges that the issue ofmigration and integration continues to be given high priority.The aim of the Working Group has been to coordinate and cooperate,to the extent possible, while respecting the fact that migration and inte-gration are areas of national legal competence. We all have different tra-ditions when it comes to migration, as well as different priorities andconditions that need to be taken into account when formulating our in-dividual approaches. This has also been one of the strengths of theWorking Group; by sharing best practices and our different perspectiveson the topic, we have been able to learn from each other.During the last two and half years, the Working Group has discussed anumber of best-practice examples from different regions, a scientificanalysis has been conducted by the Migration Institute of Finland, andthe dialogue with the Governments on the subject has been continuedand extended. Since the Working Group, like the Baltic Sea Parliamen-tary Conference, can only pass unanimous resolutions and submit cor-responding recommendations for action, consensus-oriented recom-mendations for action for the entire Baltic Sea region have been devel-oped.I would like to thank Ms Carola Veit, President of the State Parliamentof Hamburg and Vice Chair of the Working Group, for her excellent6 Introductionwork as a Vice Chair, for our fruitful cooperation and for hosting the first meeting, as well as the seventhmeeting of the Working Group in Hamburg. My thanks also go to the Parliament of Denmark for hostingthe meeting in Copenhagen, the State Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein for hosting the meeting in Kiel, theDuma of Kaliningrad and the Russian State Duma for hosting the meeting in Kaliningrad, the State Parlia-ment of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for hosting and organizing the meeting and the Baltic Sea Parliamenta-ry Youth Forum in Schwerin and the German Bundestag for hosting the meeting in Berlin. I would also liketo thank my fellow colleague Pyry Niemi, who has taken my seat in my absence. Furthermore, I would liketo thank all the experts attending the meetings, as well as the secretariats of the Parliaments and the Secre-tary-General, who have supported the work of the Group with the highest levels of commitment.Last, but not least, I would like to thank all the members of the Working Group for their high-quality con-tributions, the intensive discussions and the harmonious atmosphere. This Working Group has truly shownthat the BSPC is an arena for engaging discussions and cooperation, even in an area where opinions some-times differ. I am very proud to have had the honour of being the Chair of this Working Group. Hopefully,this final report can be of significance in our future work within the field of migration and integration, andthese recommendations and various examples of best practices will help us to identify where common actionis possible and further action is needed.Hans WallmarkMember of the Swedish ParliamentChair of the Working Group on Migration and Integration2. Mandate 72. MandateThe BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration was established by the BSPC Standing Commit-tee on 3 September 2017 and endorsed by the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference at the 26th annual con-ference in Hamburg on 5 September 2017. The scope and mandate of the WG can be found at: https://www.bspc.net/att-3-1-wg-migration-and-integration-sc-mandate-and-scopeThe Working Group aimed to raise political attention to migration and integration and promote the ex-change of knowledge amongst members. In accordance with this decision, the scope of the work of the WGMI covered the following:A. Migration and integration in the Baltic Sea region – a survey of the current situationThe Working Group should develop common issues for discussion by collecting information aboutthe current situation in the Baltic Sea region countries and their immigration policies.B. Best practice examplesThe Working Group should establish examples of best practice within the areas of migration as wellas integration by means of expert presentations, study visits and questionnaires.C. Measures to promote integrationThe Working Group should collect examples of promoting integration by means of expert presenta-tions, study visits and questionnaires.D. Political recommendationsThe primary outcome of the activities of the Working Group should be to develop political rec-ommendations regarding migration and integration having consideration for the specific role andadded value that parliamentarians can contribute to the promotion of integration.8 3. Principles of migration policy3. Principles of migration policyThere are several reasons as to why people migrate, some migrate out of choice, others out of necessity. Thediverse reasons as to why people are on the move mean that different principles and aspects need to be con-sidered when discussing the issue of migration. The United Nations and the Geneva Convention point tothe commitment of protecting human rights and the safety, dignity and fundamental freedoms of migrants.Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to seek andenjoy in other countries asylum from persecution”.1 The fundamental principle of the work of the UN issolidarity, which can also be seen in the core principle of the UN Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Developmentto “leave no one behind”.2 The 2016 New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants includes a politicalcommitment to share responsibility for refugees and to work towards a safe, orderly and regular migration.3The International Organization for Migration also underlines the importance of protecting the well-be-ing of migrants. The goal of the Organization is furthermore to “encourage social and economic develop-ment through migration”. The idea is that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society.4Cross-border movements can give the migrants new opportunities and, at the same time, benefit society asa whole, with exchanges of ideas and knowledge and by addressing skill imbalances in responding to labourmarket demands. Mobility and free movement are also cornerstones of the EU policy agenda.5Another principle of migration policy, is the triple-win effect, where the idea is that migration can be bene-ficial for three parts: for the individual migrant, for the receiving country and for the country of origin. Byattracting a group of professionals from a country with a surplus of a certain profession to come to a countrywhere there is a shortage of the specific skill, migration can have triple-win effects. Recruiting skilled workerswhere there is a known skills gap can maximise the benefits for all actors.61 United Nations, Migration, https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/migration/index.html 17 March 20202 United Nations, Sustainable Development Goal 10, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg10 18 March 20203 UNHCR, New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, https://www.unhcr.org/new-york-declaration-for-refugees-and-migrants.html 18 March 20204 International Organization for Migration, Mission, https://www.iom.int/mission 17 March 20205 The European Commission, Migration and Mobility, https://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/index.cfm?pg=policies&policyname=migration-mobility 18 March 20206 https://www.bspc.net/hans-wallmark-chairs-bspc-working-group-on-migration-and-integration-in-berlin/4. Summary: Meetings 1–3 94. Summary: Meetings 1–3first meeting in Hamburg on 5 December 2017The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration held its first meeting in Hamburg on 5 December2017. The meeting was chaired by Ms Carola Veit, BSPC Vice President and Vice Chair of the WG. Delega-tions from several countries and regions were present. The meeting was headlined by two presentations fromexperts on migration and integration.Ms Aydan Özoğuz, then Minister of State and Commissioner of the German Federal Government forMigration, Refugees and Integration, gave a historical background to migration in the Baltic Sea region.She pointed out that many people have migrated to and from the Baltic Sea region, trading along theway. This has had a positive impact on the region. In the 19th and 20th centuries, very large groups ofpeople moved to countries in the region in the hope of finding work. 900,000 people migrated to Ger-many for the same reason in both 2014 and 2015, but they have been completely overshadowed by therefugees who came in similar numbers. Since 1991, between 600,000 and 1,000,000 people have alsoleft Germany and moved elsewhere. Migration, both to and from the Baltic Sea region, is thus nothingnew. Mr Ulrich Weinbrenner, Head of the Staff Unit for Social Cohesion and Integration in the FederalMinistry of the Interior, informed the delegates of current integration programmes and measures in placein Germany. These included language courses, migration advisory services and social integration projects.While some of the projects had been already successful, certain issues remained. Coordinating differentprogrammes and projects at the federal and state levels was still a challenge so far in the end of 2017. Thelanguage courses had seen quite high participation rates, but no more than half of those attending thecourses achieved the level anticipated by the course.10 4. Summary: Meetings 1–3first meeting in Hamburg on 5 December 2017Since the WG was established in the after-math of the so called “irregular migration” inthe years 2015 and 2016 the WG elaboratedat its first meeting a questionnaire sending outto the governments to gather certain data towork with further on (see chapter 8).The Working Group held its second meet-ing in Stockholm on 19 March 2018. Themeeting was chaired by Mr Hans Wallmark,Chair of the Working Group, and dealt withfirst meeting in Hamburg on 5 December 2017 issues such as statistics regarding migration toSweden and challenges for migrants in Swe-den. Mr Bernd Hemingway, Deputy Direc-tor-General of the Council of the Baltic SeaStates Secretariat (CBSS), informed the par-ticipants of the views of the CBSS and madeit clear that migration was a very importantand topical issue on the CBSS agenda. Moreo-ver, Ms Carola Veit, BSPC Vice President andVice Chair of the WG, provided a first glanceat the answers given so far by several regionaland national governments to the question-naire and highlighted some best practice ex-amples regarding integration procedures.first meeting in Hamburg on 5 December 20174. Summary: Meetings 1–3 11second meeting in Stockholm on 19 March 2018Mr Marco Roman Loi and Mr Björn Bergström, bothfrom the Swedish Migration Agency, presented numbersand facts on migration to Sweden over the years. Therehad been migration peaks in the 1960s and the 1990sand again in 2015, when some 160,000 people appliedfor asylum in Sweden. These people had mainly comefrom Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq and Eritrea. Bylate 2015, the situation had become unmanageable, andthe Swedish Government announced that it would applyEU minimum standards for immigration. Now the asy-lum seekers numbered around 30,000 annually.Mr Per Aldskogius from the Swedish Ministry of Em-ployment highlighted both difficulties and opportunitiessecond meeting in Stockholm on 19 March 2018that migrants face in Sweden. His main concerns wereprolonged waiting times, lack of housing, inconsistentreception in different municipalities and regions, lackof teachers and interpreters and increased segregation.Among the opportunities were a strong economy, highdemand for labour meeting a labour shortage and the factthat many migrants were young and quite well educated.Mr Arion Chryssafis, Deputy Head of Social Services inthe Municipality of Solna, gave the fourth presentationabout the successful integration of migrants and refu-gees in Solna in northern Stockholm. Unemploymentrates for foreign-born nationals were significantly lower second meeting in Stockholm on 19 March 201812 4. Summary: Meetings 1–3third meeting in Copenhagen on 21 June 2018in Solna than in most municipalities in Swe-den. The “Solna Model”, in essence, focusedon good cooperation with local businesses,good knowledge of each participant’s experi-ence and further efforts to find employment.Self-sufficiency through work rather than re-lying on income support was the bottom line.Ms Lillemor Lindell from the Swedish SportsConfederation was the fifth speaker at themeeting. She spoke about the important roleof sports when it comes to integration and in-third meeting in Copenhagen on 21 June 2018 clusion. Many Swedes, more than 3 million,are members of sports clubs, and by includingmigrants and refugees in their activities sportcan play an important role in social integra-tion.The Working Group held its third meeting inCopenhagen on 21 June 2018. The meetingwas chaired by Mr Pyry Niemi and included apresentation on the topic of global migrationand a discussion of the results of the Govern-ment survey, presented by Vice President andVice Chair of the WG Ms Carola Veit (pre-sented in Chapter 8). Recommendations forthird meeting in Copenhagen on 21 June 2018the upcoming resolution were also discussed.4. Summary: Meetings 1–3 13First, Ms Ninna Nyberg Sörenson from the Danish Institute for International Studies spoke about globalmigration. Ms Sörenson noted that there were currently 244 million migrants in the world, the internallydisplaced numbered 40 million and there were 22 million refugees. Since most refugees were internally orregionally displaced, conflict areas bore the brunt of the burden. Thereafter, Mr Veiko Spolitis, member ofthe Latvian Parliament, provided a historic context on migration in the Baltic Sea region after the SecondWorld War. He echoed previous statements, saying that the current situation was, historically, not unique.Mr Spolitis suggested that the Dublin Directive was lacking and that it was necessary to address this.The Mid-Way Report that this summary is based on can be read here:https://www.bspc.net/bspc_report_migration_integration_2018/14 5. Summary: Meetings 4–65. Summary: Meetings 4–6fourth meeting in Kiel on 17 December 2018The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration held its fourth meeting in Kiel on 17 December2018. The meeting was chaired by Mr Pyry Niemi, representing the Chair of the WG during the SwedishChairmanship, and was headlined by a number of presentations about integration into the labour market,transnational cooperation and empowerment of migrants.The first presentation was given by Ms Sabine Hahn, Hamburg Institute for Vocational Education, whoinformed participants about the EU Strategy for Baltic Sea Region’s new action “Recognising potential – eas-ing the way for newly arrived refugees”. The Strategy has four sub-areas: education, research, employabilityand because of the refugee crisis in 2015 also integration of refugees. Ms Hahn stressed the importance ofrefugees being integrated into the labour market. She described the challenges of a high demand for labouryet different mindsets regarding openness towards migrants, and concluded that more cooperation betweenthe Governments in the region was needed to create and improve integrated measures for migrants.Mr Matti Mäkelä, Head of the Project Man-agement Office, City of Turku/EducationDivision, gave a presentation on “Knowl-edge platform – integration of newly arrivedrefugees”. He informed participants aboutthe flagship “School to Work”, a platformfor transnational cooperation, allowing poli-cy-makers to learn from each other, to developnew ideas and to avoid making the same mis-takes as others. He then informed the meetingabout BSR “Integrate Now”, a project focusedon the exchange of best practices for smoothintegration into society. From the results offourth meeting in Kiel on 17 December 2018 the projects, it was clear that transnational co-operation truly works and creates added value.5. Summary: Meetings 4–6 15fourth meeting in Kiel on 17 December 2018Mr Niklas Muhlack, Integration Centre Kiel, talked about the project “Landgewinn – empowerment ofmigrants in rural areas through social and democratic participation”, launched in 2017 by the Ministryof the Interior of Schleswig-Holstein. The core idea was empowering migrants to participate socially andpolitically. The goal was not merely to provide shelter and food for the new arrivals, but also to give themthe opportunity to make their voices heard by helping the migrants to obtain an overview of existing asso-ciations, organisations and parties, and inspiring them to build personal networks for their own social andpolitical participation.Ms Vanessa Perbos, AWO regional association Schleswig-Holstein, presented the project “Hayati” (Arabic:my life) – Integration of female migrants in the labour market. The project, that ran between 2017 and2018, had been designed for refugee women in Kiel who were unable to take German language coursesbecause they had to take care of their small children at home. “Hayati” aimed to empower the women toallow them to integrate into society and to prepare them for their academic or professional future. The pro-ject was considered a success, both for the women and the children, and all participants also benefited fromstrong linguistic development. Six months after the completion of the project, many of the women were stillattending the integration course on a daily basis.Mr Aljoscha Tischkau, Turkish Community in Schleswig-Holstein, presented the project “Diss-krimini-erung – empowerment of young participants against discrimination. “Diss” in the title stood for diversity,inclusion, self-confidence and self-empowerment. The project focused on youths with various migrationalbackgrounds. A series of workshops had been initiated that would run until the beginning of 2019, withtopics such as power structure and exchanges of experience. The project aimed to strengthen youth peoplein their perception and treat each other with respect. It was successful in bringing young people together ina constructive environment.16 5. Summary: Meetings 4–6fifth meeting in Kaliningrad on 29 March 2019The Working Group held its fifth meetingin Kaliningrad on 29 March 2019 and waschaired by Ms Carola Veit, Vice Chair of theWG. The main focus of the meeting was onthe Russian perspective on migration and in-tegration, as well as hearing about from theperspective of the CBSS. Ms Carola Veit em-phasized that the meeting in Kaliningrad ena-bled the working group to develop a compre-hensive picture of the issues facing the entireBaltic Sea region.fifth meeting in Kaliningrad on 29 March 2019The first presentation was given by Mr KirillAdzinov at the Main Department for Migration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. Mr Adzinovstated that one way to make migration easier was the abolition of visa requirements, and he expressed hisconviction that it would be possible to issue an electronic visa through a web-based system in the near future.Russia had introduced a new law on asylum in 1993, but since then there had been many dramatic changesin and around Russia which had increased the number of asylum seekers, mostly Ukrainians, but also someAfghans. Ms Victoria Ledeneva, Federal Agency for Nationalities of Russia, gave a presentation where shenoted that in Kaliningrad, and in Russia as a whole, there was a very strong emphasis on social adaptationand integration, and it was a priority that newly arrived migrants were introduced to Russian customs, lawsand culture, as well as to the Russian language. In order to succeed a number of agencies and local civilsociety cooperated with each other. She concluded by pointing out that a new concept for migration hadbeen adopted for the years 2019–2025, and that one of the new policies was that residence permits could beissued for an unlimited period of time.5. Summary: Meetings 4–6 17fifth meeting in Kaliningrad on 29 March 2019Mr Victor Musikhin, Director of a private institution for additional education talked about the activities ofprivate companies facilitating the migration of workers to the Kaliningrad region, which included the provi-sion of additional education. Even though this enterprise and its routines seemed to function fairly smooth-ly, there was still a great deal of bureaucracy surrounding the whole process. From another perspective, MsVladlena Avdeeva, Project Manager at the NGO Stellit in St Petersburg, gave a presentation which dealtwith unaccompanied minors and the risk of human trafficking. Although the number was relatively low inRussia, that did not mean that there were no problems with this issue. According to UNICEF, about 28 percent of the victims of trafficking worldwide were children, and in 2016 around 10 million children had beenvictims of trafficking. Stellit had conducted research on 113 minors living in shelters in St Petersburg and,according to the children, one of the most important aspects to consider when providing assistance for themwas taking their opinions into account and informing them about the situation.18 5. Summary: Meetings 4–6sixth meeting in Schwerin on 27–28 May 2019The Working Group held its sixthmeeting together with the BalticSea Parliamentary Youth Forum inSchwerin on 27–28 May 2019. Themeeting was chaired by the Chair ofthe Working Group, Mr Hans Wall-mark. Ms Carola Veit, Vice Chair ofthe WG, gave a summary of the workso far, and presented the results of thestatements and answers of the Gov-ernments in the Baltic Sea region tosixth meeting in Schwerin on 27–28 May 2019 the surveys conducted by the BSPCWG, and to the policy assessmentsand recommendations resulting fromthe analysis of the Migration Insti-tute of Finland on Baltic Sea RegionGovernments’ Immigration and Inte-gration Policy. Ms Veit pointed outthat this analysis provided a moregeneral survey on the level of the par-ticipating BSPC member states thanreflecting the regional and communalrealities that have great significancefor integration policies.sixth meeting in Schwerin on 27–28 May 20195. Summary: Meetings 4–6 19During the Baltic Sea Parliamentary YouthForum, politicians and a number of expertsmade comprehensive contributions to thetopic of migration and integration. Ms Bir-git Hesse, President of the State Parliament ofMecklenburg-Vorpommern pointed out thatthis important international meeting stoodfor openness to the world and the involve-ment of young people. These points were ofthe utmost importance for a society thinkingabout and for the future. Mr Hans Wallmark,chairman of the WG, said in his introductionthat achieving and safeguarding peace andovercoming conflict through dialogue wasone of the more fundamental concerns of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in Schwerin on 27–28 May 2019BSPC, and that was why it was so crucial forthe BSPC to engage with the topic of refugees,integration and migration. Mr Wallmark alsosaid that it was high time that young peoplefrom their member states were involved inthis discussion process. The presentations werefollowed by a panel discussion moderated byMs Carola Veit and attended by members ofparliament, young participants and experts,which deepened and discussed the contribu-tions made by experts. The participants ofthe Youth Forum emphasized in the so-calledWorld-Café that migration and Integration “isa very challenging topic as it requires using notonly our logical thinking and prior knowledgebut also empathy towards each other.” RamaAkid, a Syrian refugee, and Sāra Zdanovska Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in Schwerin on 27–28 May 2019from Latvia presented the results of the YouthForum on the 28th BSPC in Oslo in August2019 (https://www.bspc.net/speech/ and https://www.bspc.net/bsyf/).The 2nd Interim Report that this summary isbased on can be read here:https://www.bspc.net/bspc_report_migration_in-tegration_2019/Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum in Schwerin on 27–28 May 201920 6. Summary: Meetings 7–86. Summary: Meetings 7–8seventh meeting in Hamburg on 24 October 2019The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration held its seventh meeting in Hamburg on24 October 2019. The meeting was chaired by the Chair of the Working Group, Mr Hans Wallmark. In hisopening statement, Mr Wallmark emphasized the benefits of playing to one’s strengths. As regards the issueof integration, countries should make use of their strong traditions and successful measures, no matter whatthey are. Sweden, for example, has successfully used sports and sports clubs to socially integrate migrants andrefugees, and in Germany vocational training has been very successful. These are examples of countries mak-ing use of already existing traditions and programmes to integrate migrants and refugees, and Mr Wallmarksuggested that other countries could act in a similar way.A discussion on immigrants who refused to leave the country despite being denied asylum or with no lawfulright to remain, arose following questions and comments from Mr Kai Mykkänen and Ms Valentina Pivnen-ko. A number of issues were discussed, including problems in cooperating with countries of origin. In Ger-many, for example, around half a million people were living in the country without a legal status or residencepermit, but even though could not repatriate for human right reason etc. Sweden faced similar issues, as didmany other countries that had taken in large numbers of migrants and refugees. In connection with this,some security-related matters were discussed. It was suggested that having large numbers of people, whosebackgrounds you know very little about may pose threats to security. There are, unfortunately, cases of bothmigrants with and without legal status having well-established links to terrorism and organized crime. There-fore, security must always be high on the list of priorities when discussing and managing migration policy.After the initial discussions, the talks gravitated towards the writing and presentation of the final report.On the same day starting in the afternoon until next day midday the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region(EUSBSR), Policy Area Education, Sabine Hahn, Hamburg Institute for Vocational Training and Education6. Summary: Meetings 7–8 21eighth meeting in Berlin on 13 January 2020(HIBB) and Anders Bergström, Norden Association in Sweden held in collaboration with the WG the Euro-pean Forum on Integration of Migrants and Refugees. The objective of the forum was to support institutionsand organizations in their efforts to facilitate the integration of refugees and migrants into education, voca-tional training, labor market and society. This was also the start for a platform where stakeholders jointly candevelop new methods and policies across Europe in the framework of the so-called macro-regional strategies.Moreover, it was an excellent opportunity for dialogue between practitioners and parliamentarians getting toknow best practices examples of integration projects on national, regional and local levels.The BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration held its eighth meeting in Berlin on 13 January2020. The meeting was chaired by Mr Hans Wallmark, Chair of the Working Group, and the main topiceighth meeting in Berlin on 13 January 202022 6. Summary: Meetings 7–8was unaccompanied minors. Prof. Dr Stefan Thomas from the University of Applied Science, Potsdam heldthe first presentation. Prof. Thomas’ presentation was on the large number of unaccompanied minors whohad arrived in Germany over the last few years. He had conducted interviews with unaccompanied minorsand presented some of his findings. The main finding was that the standard of welfare was very high in Ger-many, but that there was still a lack of integration among the minors. They experienced racism, exclusionand discrimination on a daily basis. The minors, who had almost nothing to do after school, were also atrisk of being inactive. Most of the stress and pressure experienced by the minors was related to their currentsituation, rather than their experiences prior to arriving in Germany.Ms Ulrike Schwarz, legal expert at the national Association for Unaccompanied Refugee Minors, a smallNGO that advocates for the rights of refugee children and young adults in Germany, held a presentation oftheir work. She stated that the general protection of unaccompanied minors in Germany is quite high andnoted that the number of unaccompanied minors coming to Germany was declining. In 2016, 36,000 unac-companied minors had sought asylum in Germany, but in 2018 that number was down to 4,000. However,since it is not all minors claim asylum, that number probably only represents half of the actual number ofunaccompanied minors in the country. When seeking asylum, the burden of proof is on the minor. This is adifficult task and it might explain why a large number of unaccompanied minors come to Germany withoutseeking asylum.Ms Katrin Hirseland, Head of Research at the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, noted in her pres-entation that a central aspect of migration policy is promoting return. Forced return and voluntary returnare the two types of return. In Germany, as in many other countries that have accepted large numbers ofmigrants and refugees, the number of people legally required to leave Germany does not match the numberof actual returns. Forced returns have doubled since 2014 and Germany also offers the Assisted Return Pro-gramme to people who have no right to remain. The programme gives support to the returning migrant interms of travel, medical assistance and accommodation. Financial incentives for returning are often not theprimary motivation, but they may encourage those who are already thinking about returning. Finally, shenoted that there are a range of issues regarding cooperation with the countries of origin.Prof Dr Lars Castelluci from the University of Applied Management Studies in Mannheim held the finalpresentation of the meeting. According to him, the people who tend to migrate earn between 2000 and10,000 USD per year. These people have the financial ability to move, but at the same time not enoughmoney to have a decent life in their home countries. Prof. Castelluci also mentioned the triple-win effect,where the idea is that all parties (the migrant, the country of origin and the country the migrant comes to)win with regards migration. He identified nurses coming to Germany from countries where there is a surplusof nurses as a good example for the triple-win effect. On the other hand, he emphasized strongly to considerin this context the demographical development and aging societies in Europe and around the world, whichshould have a huge impact on migration policies.7. Best practices – examples 237. Best practices – examplesOne of the main purposes of the Working Group was to share best practices regarding migration and inte-gration. The WG has identified several examples which are described in the Midway Report of 2018 and ingovernment responses to the surveys. This chapter highlights some examples of the best practices discussedin the WG.DenmarkThe General Workers Union (3F) in CPH organising construction-workers, has built up committees in-side the union for workers from Poland and Rumania. They help migrant-workers get the right salary, tounderstand rules on health and safety, to understand rules about tax and pension, help finding decent livingconditions, contact to other workers from their home-country, contact to churches and organising culturalevents between Danish workers and migrant-workers. And they give legal service to migrant workers.The Union for Public Service (FOA) has organised a committee for Au-Pair workers in Denmark with sameservices and activities. Both unions have been lobbying in the Danish parliament for better laws and rulesfor migrant workers.EstoniaIn 2017, a migration advisor service was launched, where the main purpose was to support foreigners set-tling in Estonia and is available for employers, entrepreneurs, educational institutions and others who wel-come foreigners to Estonia.FinlandIn Finland, support for foreigners to move to their own homes is well planned. The receptioncentre’s employees and municipal authorities actively support persons who have been granted residence inthe practicalities of finding and moving into private accommodation. Especially for minors who have beengranted a residence permit.GermanyBetween 2018 and 2019, Germany ran an EU-funded project called “Good Arrival” organized by the As-sociation for Unaccompanied Refugee Minors in cooperation with the German Institute for Youth HumanServices and Family Law. The aim of the project was to improve reception conditions for unaccompaniedminor refugees through training of professionals in the field of social work, family law (judges and courtpersonnel) and asylum.Another example is the project “From arrival to being made to feel welcome”, in 2019–2022, an EU-fundedproject run by the Association for Unaccompanied Refugee Minors and Terre des Hommes. The aim of the24 7. Best practices – examplesproject is to improve reception conditions for unaccompanied minors through training of professionals andby developing a training model for administrative personnel, legal personnel and social workers on sup-porting unaccompanied minor refugees. The model will be incorporated into the standard school/college/university curriculum.HamburgOne example is “One desk services” – W.I.R. (Work and Integration for Refugees). The programme W.I.Rwas founded to help refugees in a holistic way. Its major concern is to prepare and integrate the refugees forand in the labour market.Hamburg develops an integration monitoring system by building on the integration concept “Wir in Ham-burg! – Teilhabe, Interkulturelle Öffnung und Zusammenhalt” (We in Hamburg! – participation, inter-cultural openness and cohesion), with more than 140 indicators for measuring the success of integration.Additionally, Hamburg is participating in the expansion of the existing supra-regional monitoring systemoperated by the federation and the federal states.LatviaOne example, is that Latvia has initiated a Baltic Sea-wide base on integration conditions and measures toimprove public debate on a factual basis.Another example is the support of civil society and private initiatives for people who have been grantedasylum.LithuaniaIn Lithuania, there are three foreigner integration centres in the country’s three largest cities. These centresaim to provide ‘one-desk’ services for foreigners, and to facilitate a wide range of services at one office inorder to speed up integration into society and the labour market.Mecklenburg-VorpommernOne example of an integration project is “You Move Rostock” which is a project for immigrants between theages of 16 and 27 in the city of Rostock. The aim is to give young immigrants a platform of their own thatenables them to deal with social and political issues in public. Through training, workshops and courses, theyoung people can acquire individual, social, professional, cultural and political competences. The measuresshould help them to understand and exercise their own role in democratic society, network with each other- also across national, religious and ethnic affiliations - and organize themselves.The integration into German culture with a focus on language (BAMF integration course) is combined withintegration into the German labour market (SLALOM). Once the necessary basic language level has beenattained, the participants are offered parallel, tailor-made solutions in order to help them integrate into thelabour market.7. Best practices – examples 25Norway“Integration through knowledge” is the name of the Norwegian integration strategy for 2019–2022. In or-der to integrate immigrants, it is vital to focus on education. The most important goal of the strategy is thatmore migrants should work so that they are able to provide for themselves and their families. Work bringspeople together and ensures their economic freedom and independence. Education is the key to work. Lan-guage is basic. Participation in Norwegian language learning and courses about Norwegian society is com-pulsory for immigrants. It is important to map the newly arrived migrants’ skills, qualifications, settlementin municipalities and match with regional employment needs.PolandIn Poland, the procedure for family reunification with a Polish citizen, EU/EEA citizen, or a person who hasbeen granted refugee status or subsidiary protection (nuclear family) is simplified. The applicant is not requiredto have health insurance, a source of stable and regular income, and is not required to prove that she/he has aguaranteed place of residence in Poland, as in the case of family reunification with a third-country national.RussiaKaliningrad has a high demand for labour, and in order to attract people to settle in Kaliningrad, migrantsfrom the far east of Russia are offered one hectare of farming land if they decide to stay in the region. Anotherexample of best practice is the abolition of visa requirements and the introduction of new electronic visasthat can be applied for online.Schleswig-HolsteinUnaccompanied minors who are resident in Schleswig-Holstein are obliged to attend school under the Ed-ucation Act. They take part in a multilevel system of classes, in which German is taught as the 2nd language.1st level: classes are taught in German only (usually 1 year), 2nd level: integration of pupils in regular classeswhile being taught additional German 2-6 hours a week (up to 6 years), and 3rd level: complete integrationin the regular classes, additional German can be provided only if necessary.SwedenIn the south of Sweden, Skåne, a multilevel platform called Partnership Skåne was introduced in 2008, andhas proven to be quite successful. The project includes actors at all levels and sectors of national, regional andlocal government. One programme included in the project provides civic and health communication in themigrant’s mother tongue, mandatory civics orientation and visits to different arenas in the local communi-ties. Another programme is NAD, which emphasizes cooperation with civil society organizations in order tofacilitate social networking and language training, among other things.Another example is the “Solna Model” where the bottom line is systematic efforts to assist residents in Sol-na from income support to support themselves by either work, self-employment or studies. The model isfocused on good cooperation with local businesses, good knowledge of each participant’s support in findingemployment for example by matching employers and employees. The aim is to fight unemployment amongforeign born residents in Solna.26 7. Best practices – examplesSport could also be seen as tool for integration. There is a long tradition in Sweden to facilitate integrationthrough sport, but the Swedish Sports Confederation, has given the idea more attention during the last yearsdue to the increased immigration. Sport is a way for everyone, regardless of age, gender, religion, culture andethnical background to take part. It is also a way to help to learn a language and to create a new networkof contacts. Some examples of activities that has been organized is; walking groups for mothers, languagetraining for adults and sport to facilitate integration for parents and clubs organising open training whereeveryone can participate at his or her level, with the aim to meet new people and to exercise.ÅlandIn Åland, healthcare staff are trained in intercultural communication in order to understand how differentimmigration status create different rights within healthcare provision. They use various forms of commu-nication such as images, language apps, interpreters etc. An interactive website – available in more than 20languages – has been developed with an FAQ page containing questions, answers and links sorted undervarious themes. Through this website, integrational events can also be promoted.8. Intergovernmental surveys and analysis 278. Intergovernmental surveys and analysisGovernment surveysThe Working Group on Migration and Integration has conducted two surveys among the BSPC memberGovernments. The main goals of the surveys were to map migration and integration policies and proceduresin the region, learn from best practices and develop proposals to improve cooperation in planning migrationand integration policies.The 2018 survey contained 15 questions regarding policies and regulations concerning asylum, dual citizen-ship, work permits, advisory services for migrants, courses provided by the Governments, benefits providedfor migrants, family reunification, returns, unaccompanied minor asylum applicants, monthly costs for dif-ferent categories of migrants, accommodation, and involvement of volunteers. 10 BSPC member countriesand 4 regions provided responses to the survey. The statements and answers can be found at https://www.bspc.net/answers-of-the-governments-bspc-wg/In 2019, an additional survey was conducted. This survey consisted of 9 questions. The themes included,among other things, numbers of asylum applicants, voluntary returns, forced returns, practices of the Gov-ernments in combating occurrences of social control in the migrant population, measures to prevent theformation of segregated migrant communities and best practices of programmes relating to language andculture education. 10 BSPC member countries and 3 regions provided responses for this survey. The state-ments and answers can be found at https://www.bspc.net/bspc_anhang_statementsbspc27/Policy assessment and suggestions by the Migration Institute of FinlandIn the spring of 2019, the BSPC Secretariat commissioned the Migration Institute of Finland in Turku andresearcher Matti Välimäki to assess and analyse the responses submitted by the respective governmental bod-ies of the Baltic Sea Region states. The report “Baltic Sea Region’s Government Immigration and IntegrationPolicies - Policy Assessment and Suggestions” can be found at https://www.bspc.net/policy-assessment-migr-in-stitute-finland-oct-2019-final/One of the conclusions in the report is that the inflow and outflow of migrants and the scope and goals ofimmigration and integration legislation vary between the countries. This can, to some extent be explainedby the specific characteristics of the countries. The difference in population sizes, for example, with 144.5million in Russia and 1.3 million in Estonia, illustrates this quite well. Other factors include history andpresent-day realities.The number of migrants and their regions of origin also vary considerably from one BSPC country to anoth-er. For instance, in the 2018 survey, the responses of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Finland and Russiareport populations ‘with migration background’ making up less than 5 per cent of the total population,whereas in Norway, Sweden, Germany and Denmark, the figures are between 10 and 25 per cent. Anotheraspect is outward migration or emigration, where the number has been relatively high in some countriessuch as the Baltic States, Germany, Poland and Russia, which may cause some concerns regarding the loss ofskilled workers, the so-called brain drain.There are also similarities between the member states, for example, ageing populations and decreasing fertil-ity rates. Most of the countries have also built their immigration policies on the acceptance requirements in28 8. Intergovernmental surveys and analysisthe UN Refugee Convention. The countries that are EU members have policies deriving from the EU Qual-ification Directive, which includes protection for people who are eligible for subsidiary protection. However,the conditions for subsidiary protection can vary between the countries, since the countries recognize differ-ent reasons for asylum. Sweden recognises the risk of the death penalty, torture, internal armed conflict andenvironmental disasters, where other countries do not consider these factors. In general, residence permitsprovided on grounds of subsidiary protection in the BSPC countries are often temporary, while residencepermits based on the UN Convention often are permanent or long-term.Immigration legislation differs as well. Some countries – Germany, Latvia and Poland – have a separate lawregarding asylum seekers, where others have integrated such provisions into their Aliens Acts. Turning tolabour migration, all of the BSPC countries have some need of foreign workers, especially in sectors such asconstruction and healthcare services. Labour migrants in the BSPC countries have to meet certain criteria toobtain a residence permit. Findings in the report show that work permits are generally issued on a temporarybasis and that the regulations tend to favour and protect the citizens in the country from extensive labourmarket competition.Another finding is that all of the BSPC member countries grant family reunification to a certain degree. Thelaws of each country contain different limitations and definitions. There is a big difference between the rightsof citizens in the Schengen Area and third-country nationals, where the requirements of the latter groupregarding, for example, income, documentation of health insurance or the ability to speak the national lan-guage are stricter than for the former.Regarding immigration policy relating to removals and returns, the general rule in the BSPC member coun-tries is that if the conditions of residence are no longer fulfilled, the authorities may order a removal orreturn to the country of origin. The number of returns differ between the countries, mainly because of thediffering numbers of asylum applications in total (see the diagrams on page 28 -29). In the BSPC countries,Voluntary returns60.00054.00650.00040.000 37.32029.522 201530.000201721.247 201520.000 17.558 16.41413.26111.60410.000 9.047 1.2254701.83 11 .380 164176 96 1.161 7.459 568 44 69154 1.027 876 459 3975270Germany Russia Poland Finland Danmark Sweden Norway Lithuania Latvia Estonia228. Intergovernmental surveys and analysis 29EEvviiccttiioonnss330000000022550000002200000000115500000011000000005500000000GGeermrmaannyy PPoolalanndd FFininlalanndd DDaannmmaarkrk SSwweeddeenn NNoorwrwaayy LLitihthuuaanniaia LLaatvtviaia EEsstotonniaia SS Hcc Hh ohl ole sl les stsw etw eii nigi ng-- M VM Voe oec rpc rk pkl oel omem mm mb mbu eu er rg nr rg n--22001155 2200886622 11.0.02222 11889977 33996611 1144004477 77882255 444444 339922 115577 557700 4444448822001166 2255337755 888855 22003311 44557766 2200114422 88007777 117777 335555 115533 884400 3344996622001177 2233996666 11.3.37755 22774499 22887799 1133221122 55443344 110033 118877 116655 333388 227700442255FFoorrcceedd rreettuurrnnss99.0.0000088.0.0000077.0.00000 2200115566.0.000002200116655.0.0000044.0.00000 2200117733.0.0000022.0.0000011.0.0000000GGeerrmmaannyy RRuussssiaia PPoolalanndd FFininlalanndd DDaannmmaarkrk SSwweeddeenn NNoorwrwaayy LLitihthuuaanniaia LLaatvtviaia EEsstotonniaia224430 8. Intergovernmental surveys and analysisthe authority that handles removals and returns is usually the central office for immigration or border con-trol, operating under a ministry or a special agency. It is common to separate voluntary removals and forcedremovals.In recent years, especially in 2015, some of the BSPC members have received a high number of unaccom-panied minor asylum applicants. Germany and Sweden were the recipients of some of the highest numbersof minors applying for asylum in the EU. A majority of unaccompanied minors are boys aged between 16and 17. In 2017, the main countries of origin of the unaccompanied minor applicants in the EU were Syria,Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea and Somalia. Services and support provided for asylum applicants under the age of18 are generally more extensive than for adult asylum seekers. They are accommodated in a specific facility orin separate reception centres. The services provided often include education, social integration and supportin organising the life of the minor asylum seeker. One conclusion in the report is that the BSPC memberstates should examine whether there are some countries or regions where minor asylum seekers live togetherwith adult asylum seekers, and whether this could be addressed. Some states have a special transition periodwhere unaccompanied minors aged 16–17 intensively train for independence; this is also something thatseveral BSPC members could adopt. All the BSPC countries and regions that have answered the questionson minor asylum applicants have legislation or processes regarding age assessment of minors.As regards integration policy, all BSPC countries and regions provide some kind of language courses andcivic education for migrants. In more than half of the states, asylum seekers have a duty to participate in thispublic integration training. According to the responses to the government survey, vocational training seemsto be less common. One conclusion of the report is that the primary objectives of the BSPC countries’ in-tegration policy include learning the host language and gaining employment in the short- to medium term.An important aspect of integration is housing and accommodation. Many of the countries highlighted theimportance of accommodation for asylum seekers, each with different policies and approaches. In Germany,asylum seekers are required to live in a reception centre for a certain period of time before being allocated aplace in regional accommodation. In Finland, asylum seekers are allowed to live in private accommodationduring the asylum process, for example, with a friend or a relative.9. Political recommendations 319. Political recommendationsOn the basis of its mandate and as a result of its work, the BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integra-tion has discussed various political recommendations. In these discussions, it has been of great importanceto take into account the fact that migration policy and integration policy are part of the national legal com-petence. Each and every member of the BSPC also has different national priorities, migration realities andconditions to further take into account. Even though the issue is a matter of national competence the BSPCWorking Group seeks to achieve coordination, consensus and cooperation to the extent that is possible.Bearing in mind the fact that migration and integration are of and a highly politically sensitive nature, therecommendations are broad and open pointing towards a common direction and strengthen cooperation.Seven recommendations were adopted in the 27th Conference Resolution can be found at https://www.bspc.net/res-27-bspc-final/. Adding to that, seven recommendations were adopted in the 28th BSCP Conferenceresolution: https://www.bspc.net/conference-resolution-28-bspc-adopted-270819/. In preparation of the 29thBSPC Conference resolution, 14 new recommendations have been proposed. Some of the recommenda-tions derive from the Policy Assessment of the Finnish Migration Institute based on the government surveysof the Working Group.The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference calls on the Governments in the Baltic Sea Region,the CBSS and the EU to:1. aspire to harmonize the practices concerning (1) deportation, (2) processing of asylum applications,and (3) reception facilities provided for minor asylum applicants, while taking into account bothnational and human/fundamental rights’ considerations;2. establish a common country of origin data collection service or database;3. strive for multinational cooperation and coordination in order to balance undesirable developmentssuch as labour shortages and labour surpluses;4. disseminate and adopt best practices for supporting the employment and integration of certaingroups of immigrants. Such groups of particular concern include international students, house-wives, minors and the unemployed. Ensure that these groups are acknowledged when formulatingintegration, education and employment legislation and policy;5. acknowledge the multifaceted character of integration (i.e. labour market, language, social rela-tionships, cultural accommodation etc.). This understanding should also be put into practice at thelegislative and policy levels;6. streamline public policies and allocate resources in order to facilitate desirable working conditions amongthe NGOs and informal networks supporting social and labour market integration of migrants;7. acknowledge the importance of civil society and NGOs in facilitating integration, where sport asso-ciations are one example of organisations that play an important, unifying role in integration help-ing people to get introduced to the society, activated, and bringing together new groups of people;8. promote good relations within society and promote diversity. Such measures may involve informa-32 9. Political recommendationstion campaigns, organization of events and housing policy that promotes diverse residential areas;9. acknowledge the concept of three-way integration in legislation and policies. Formulate policiesthat enhance each aspect of the three-way integration model’s ability to function;10. compile more comprehensive data on local level on social, economic, employment and populationtrends in the BSPC region, which will assist immigration and immigrant policy-making;11. give the planned flagship project on the subject, “Recognising potential – enabling the integration ofmigrants”, in the forthcoming EUSBSR Action Plan from 2021 on, timely political support such that apartner from the Baltic Sea region with just the right know-how agrees to take over the flagship project.Regarding the worldwide developments in spring 2020, and considering the fact the COVID-19 pandemicand the consequences and burdens caused by the pandemic have necessitated a temporary reappraisal of ourresponse to other problems and challenges, the Working Group also recommends that the BSPC in its 29thresolution calls on governments to take into account the following principles and calls for action:- The issue of migration and integration must continue to be given high priority;- Migration in the Baltic Sea region, in Europe and worldwide, is and remains an essential issue forcountries and continues to give rise to unprecedented humanitarian, economic, security and politicalchallenges;- International cooperation - including in the Baltic Sea region - must be further strengthened in thispolicy area;- The issue of unaccompanied minors needs continued political focus;The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference further calls on all governments in the Baltic Searegion to:12. not roll back but to maintain and further develop, the institutions and projects that have been set up inmany countries in the Baltic Sea Region as a result of the sharp increase in refugee numbers in 2015 and2016 and which have made a decisive contribution to improved integration, in order to better respondto future needs in this area;13. maintain and extend the support for local authorities from the state level in this task, because in thelong term, the communes bear the main responsibility in the context of sustainable integration andimplementation of long-term integration measures;14. take up successful examples of best practices in other Baltic Sea countries, some of which are highlightedin this report, provided that they can be integrated into the respective legal and structural frameworks;thanks the governments of the Baltic Sea States for their detailed statements on the implementation of thecalls for action concerning migration and integration made so far by the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Confer-ence.9. Political recommendations 33Statements from the Governments to the 27th ResolutionThe Working Group’s recommendations for action – incorporated into the 27th BSPC resolution in 2018– were forwarded to the Governments of the member parliaments for their comments as part of the overallMariehamn Resolution. The Governments of Åland, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hamburg, Latvia, Meck-lenburg-Vorpommern, Norway, Poland, Russia and Sweden have responded and sent statements regardingthe issue of migration and integration. The statements can be read here: https://www.bspc.net/statements-to-bspc27/General support was expressed for the recommendations, especially regarding the need for cooperation andintensified dialogue between the member states. Several countries such as Estonia, Finland and Germanyalso mentioned measures at EU level in the field of migration, as well as communication between the coun-tries of origin. Norway also addressed the matter of close cooperation between different actors in the region.For some members, for example Åland, the difficulties connected with divided legislative competence werementioned. It was also concluded that migration and integration are connected to several policy areas.Regarding the recommendation on language training in order to intensify integration efforts, several coun-tries agreed on its importance. In almost all regions in Russia, there are centres for testing knowledge of theRussian language, history and fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation, and schools wherechildren of migrants to study the Russian language and culture. The recommendation regarding the estab-lishment of a common data analysis tool was not mentioned to the same extent by the Governments, butHamburg supported the idea and wanted to develop joint solutions.Integration into the labour market seems to be a common priority, where for example Latvia has imple-mented a programme with that specific aim. Sweden addressed the subject of cooperation in combatingforced labour and exploitation in the region. The role of sports in integration was supported by several Gov-ernments. For instance, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern has an “Integration through Sport” programme whichinitiated the opening up of sports clubs for migrants and asylum seekers. Another example is Poland, whichhas projects for advising and supporting volunteers and civil society organizations working in the field ofintegration. The role of sport in the project will be extended in the future.Statements from the Governments to the 28th ResolutionThe Working Group’s recommendations for action – incorporated into the 28th BSPC resolution in 2019– were forwarded to the Governments of the member parliaments for their comments as part of the overallOslo Resolution. The statements of the Governments can be read here:https://www.bspc.net/bspc_statements_28thbspc_resolution/34 10. Conclusion10. ConclusionThe Working Group has benefited from being able to discuss and learn from a wide range of issues that BalticSea member states at different stages of their migration policies and integration approaches are dealing with.The different stages are linked to the pressures and opportunities that migration and integration present toeach region. The importance of this work is underlined in extending the usual working group period byone year. It has been particularly useful for the Working Group to see and learn from the Russian and theÅland approaches - two very different scenarios. Equally, it has been beneficial to learn from projects testedin several regions of Sweden, Germany and Finland at the height of the movement of people in 2015. This isan ever-changing area of work and members need to develop individual approaches that work for the BalticSea region as a whole. The learning from this project should assist in this. In conclusion, the work of theWorking Group has shown the value of having an open dialogue and exchange between Baltic Sea membersstates, in an area that is highly politically sensitive in its nature. That is the strength of the BSPC and theCBSS; that it is possible to have open arenas for dialogue despite differences of opinion between members.LLiisstt ooff MMeemmbbeerrss 35List of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Sweden Mr Hans Wallmark Ms Johanna Ingvarsson,Chair of the WG Mr Dan Alvarsson,Mr Pyry Niemi International Advisors,International Department of the SwedishParliamentSwedish Delegation to the BSPC,RiksdagenSE-100 12 StockholmSwedenTel: +468 786 54 13 / 08-786 50 48johanna.ingvarsson@riksdagen.sedan.alvarsson@riksdagen.seBefore: Mr Ralph HermanssonParliament of Free and Ms Carola Veit Ms Friederike LünzmannHanseatic City of Vice-Chair of the WGHamburg State Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic CityAdditional member until of HamburgApril 2020 Administration of the ParliamentMr Michael Westenberger Schmiedestraße 220095 HamburgGermanyTel: (+49 (0) 40) 4 28 31-1352Fax: (+49 (0) 40) 4 27 31-2271internationales@bk.hamburg.defriederike.luenzmann@bk.hamburg.deParliament of Åland Mr Wille Valve Ms Emma DahlénAssistant to the ParliamentThe Åland ParliamentPB 69AX-22101 MariehamnÅland IslandsPhone:+358 18 25 474+358 457 529 2964emma.dahlen@lagtinget.axBefore: Before:Mr Johan Ehn Ms Maj Falck36 List of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Denmark Mr Christian Juhl Ms Joan ÓlavsdóttirMs Kamilla KjelgaardThe International Secretariat,The Parliament of Denmark, Christiansborg,1240 CopenhagenDenmarkPhone:+45 3337 5500/+45 3337 3366/+45 61 62 3375Joan.Olavsdottir@ft.dkKamilla.Kjelgaard@ft.dkBefore: Before:Ms Karin Gaardsted Ms Louise Egholm HattensParliament of Estonia Ms Urve Tiidus Ms Regina Sepp,Ms Enel OtstavelForeign Relations DepartmentRiigikogu of the Republic of EstoniaLossi plats 1A15165 TallinnEstoniaTel: +372 631 6397GSM: +372 53089818Regina.Sepp@riigikogu.eeenel.otstavel@riigikogu.eeParliament of the Mr Johannes Schraps Ms Katalin ZadorFederal Republic of Ms Lynda LawrenceGermanyDeutscher BundestagDivision International Parliamentary AssembliesPlatz der Republik 111011 BerlinTel: +49 30 / 227-32553katalin.zador@bundestag.delynda.lawrence@bundestag.debspc@bundestag.deBefore:Ms Dr Nicole TepasseList of Members 37Member Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactMr Kai Mykkänen Mr Mika Laaksonen/Ms Maarit ImmonenParliament of FinlandThe Parliament of FinlandFI-00102 Eduskunta,FinlandBefore: Tel: +358 9 4321Member: Ms Maria mika.laaksonen@eduskunta.fiTolppanen, maarit.immonen@parliament.fiSubstitute: Mr KariKulmala,Chairman of the Finnishdelegation to the BSPCParliament of Latvia and Prof Jānis Vucāns Ms Ingrida SticenkoBaltic Assembly Senior Adviser,Saeima Interparliamentary Relations BureauSecretary of the Latvian delegation to the BalticAssemblyTel: +371 6 7087335Ingrida.Sticenko@saeima.lvMs Agnija AntanovičaSecretariat of the Baltic AssemblyCitadeles Street 2, room 616Riga LV-1010,LatviaTel: +371 67225178agnija.antanovica@baltasam.orgBefore:Ms Anete PlivnaParliament of Lithuania Mr Valerijus Simulik Mrs Renata GodfreyPresident of the BSPCSeimas, Gediminas Ave 53, 2002 VilniusLithuaniaTel: +370 5239 6220Renata.Godfrey@lrs.lt38 List of MembersMember Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Ms Beate Schlupp Mr Georg SträtkerMecklenburg-Vorpommern State Parliament of Mecklenburg-VorpommernLennéstr. 119053 SchwerinGermanyTel: +49 385 525 1530Tel: +49 385 525 1531 (InternationalSecretariat)Georg.Straetker@landtag-mv.deinternational@landtag-mv.deBefore:Mr Julien RadloffNordic Council Ms Bente Stein Mathisen Mr Arne Fogt BergbyMs Birgitta JarlåsNordic CouncilVed Stranden 18DK-1061 Copenhagen KDenmarkTel: +45 33 96 04 00arfber@norden.orgBefore: Before:Mr Ulf Leirstein, Ms Jenny Pentler/Ms Karen Klint Ms Line Karlskov JensenParliament of Norway Mr Ove Trellevik Mr Thomas FraserThe Norwegian Parliament0026 OSLOBefore: NorwayMr Stein Erik Lauvås Tel: +47 23 31 35 91/+47 40 45 54 50thomas.fraser@stortinget.noList of Members 39Member Parliament Member MP Staff Point of ContactParliament of Poland Mr Jarosław Wałęsa Mr Piotr KoperskiSecretary of the Delegation of the Sejm and theSenate of the Republic of Poland to the BSPC,International and European Union AffairsOffice,Chancellery of the Senate of the Republic ofPolandBefore: 6 Wiejska Str.Mr. Grzegorz Matusiak, 00-902 Warsaw,MP PolandSubstitute: Mr. Jacek Tel: +48 22 694 95 65Protas, MP koperski@nw.senat.gov.plState Duma of the Ms Valentina Pivnenko Ms Yulia GuskovaFederal Assembly of the SecretaryRussian Federation Ms Marina YakovlevaInterparliamentary Relations DepartmentState Duma of the Federal Assembly of theRussian Federation1 Okhotny Ryad St.RU-103012 MoscowRussian FederationTel: +7 495 692 2626Fax: +7 495 692 3513guskova@duma.gov.ruParliament of Schleswig- Mr Joschka Knuth Ms Jutta Schmidt-HolländerHolsteinHead of DivisionState Parliament of Schleswig-HolsteinPostfach 712124 171 KielBefore: GermanyMs Aminata Touré Tel: +49 431 988 1159Mr Wolfgang Baasch jutta.schmidt-hollaender@landtag.ltsh.de40 WG Secretariat:WG Secretariat:Mr Bodo BahrSecretary General of the BSPCSchlossgartenallee 1519061 SchwerinGermanyMobile: +49 171 5512557bodo.bahr@bspcmail.nethttp://www.bspc.netMs Johanna Ingvarsson,Mr Dan Alvarsson,International Advisors,International Department of the Swedish ParliamentSwedish Delegation to the BSPC,RiksdagenSE-100 12 StockholmSwedenTel: +468 786 54 13 / 08-786 50 48johanna.ingvarsson@riksdagen.sedan.alvarsson@riksdagen.seUntil December 2019:Mr Ralph HermanssonBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference Secretariatwww.bspc.netBSPC SecretariatSchlossgartenallee 1519061 SchwerinGermany