person:nando sigona

    • Global migration figures higher than previously thought, study finds

      US researchers reveal that up to 87 million people migrate every five years.

      Over a five-year period, about one in 80 people around the world migrate to another country, researchers have revealed, in a study that shows more than a quarter of that movement is down to people returning to their country of birth.

      Global migration is difficult to measure, with data often lacking for developing countries and inaccurate for others.

      But a pair of researchers in the US say they have come up with a model that provides the most reliable “big picture” view of human migration yet. Crucially, they say, it takes into account the “churn” of people moving into and out of countries, something previous global estimates had not included.

      “Policies that are set based on a quota of a number of people who enter the country miss out on the fact that you should also be expecting a lot of the existing migrant population to be leaving the country,” said Dr Jonathan Azose, a co-author of the study from the University of Washington.

      The study, published in the journal PNAS, reveals a model for estimating migration around the world between 1990 and 2015, broken down into five-year chunks. The team say they were able to show the model worked by comparing its results with high-quality migration data from Europe.

      A key problem with the previous leading global migration estimates, says Azose, is that the approach looked at overall changes in the net number of immigrants in a country over time, without taking into account that many individuals left and others arrived, resulting in underestimates of movement, something the new model tackles.

      It suggests that between 67 million and 87 million people, including refugees, migrated for each five-year chunk – far higher than previous global estimates of 34m-46 m migrations – and corresponding to 1.13%-1.29% of the global population.

      The team note that while absolute numbers of people migrating appear to have risen, there has been little change in the proportion of the world’s population who are on the move. That said, key origins and destinations change over time: for example,movement of Syrians in Saudi Arabia to Turkey between 2010 and 2015 were a leading contributor to “transit” migrations, while migration of Syrians from Syria to Turkey and Lebanon were among the largest emigration movements in that period.

      The new study suggests that while migration to a new country makes up the biggest proportion of human movement, return migration – in which individuals return to their country of birth – accounted for between 26% and 31% of migration in each five-year period.

      However, the team admit the new model has limitations, including the fact that different countries require individuals to stay there for different lengths of time to be registered as a migrant, and figures for the total number of migrants in each country might not be accurate to start with, meaning possible errors in the data used.

      But the team say their work could help researchers delve deeper into what causes people to migrate and help them build predictive models for this.

      Dr Nando Sigona, an expert in international migration and forced displacement at the University of Birmingham, who was not involved in the research, welcomed the study.

      “Estimating migration flows is extremely difficult. Data are limited and incomplete, especially in less economically developed countries. This contributes to a perception in the west that all migration flows are directed towards the global north,” he said.

      While the new model had limitations, he added, it offered a more rounded view of global migration, including showing movements between countries in the south and highlighting the large proportion of return journeys. “Finally,” he said, “it shows a world which is more dynamic and on the move than previously thought.”

      https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/24/global-migration-figures-higher-than-previously-thought-study-finds
      #estimations

      Lien vers l’article/étude:
      https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/12/18/1722334116

  • #métaliste sur les #statistiques des enfants réfugiés dits « disparus » en Europe

    –—

    Fil de discussion sur les 10’000 disparitions de MNA, chiffre qui avait été publié par #Europol et que j’avais décortiqué.
    Le fil de discussion ci-dessous commence d’ailleurs avec mon article publié dans @vivre :
    Disparition de mineurs : la responsabilité de l’Europe
    https://seenthis.net/messages/690142

    #MNA #mineurs_non_accompagnés #asile #migrations #disparition #France #réfugiés #disparitions #enfants #enfance #chiffres

    cc @isskein

    Plus de matériel sur seenthis, avec les mots-clé #disparition #MNA #réfugiés :
    https://seenthis.net/recherche?recherche=%23disparition+%23MNA+%23r%C3%A9fugi%C3%A9s

  • Je viens de trouver cet article sur twitter qui parle d’un rapport-choc (que je n’ai pas lu) où il est question de « 13’000 migrants mineurs refoulés à la frontière » :
    13.000 migranti minorenni respinti alla frontiera italo-francese nel 2017 : il rapporto choc
    http://minoristranierinonaccompagnati.blogspot.com/2018/07/13000-migranti-minorenni-respinti-alla.html

    Or, sans vouloir nier la gravité de la situation à la frontière, je pense que ces chiffres sont gonflés… car il s’agit très probablement de « passages » et non pas de « personnes », une personne pouvant passer plusieurs fois (et donc être comptée plusieurs fois).

    En #Suisse, c’était le cas :
    https://asile.ch/2016/08/12/parlant-de-personnes-lieu-de-cas-medias-surestiment-nombre-de-passages-a-front
    https://asile.ch/2016/09/16/decryptage-frontieres-migrants-refugies-usage-termes-chiffres

    Et pour les frontières d’ex-Yougoslavie aussi (même si le mécanisme était un peu différent) :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/418518
    #statistiques #frontières #frontière_sud-alpine #chiffres #refoulement #push-back #Italie #France #2017

    Lien vers le rapport :
    https://www.oxfamitalia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Se-questa-%C3%A8-Europa_BP_15giugno2018.pdf
    https://seenthis.net/messages/687096

    cc @isskein

  • [Dossier] Migrations | Nature
    via @ljegou sur Twitter

    Data on movements of refugees and migrants are flawed

    Accurate and timely information on the flow of people is crucial for policymaking and apolitical interpretations / Une information précise et opportune est cruciale sur la circulation des personnes pour l’élaboration des politiques et les interprétations apolitiques.

    “The headline “710,000 migrants entered EU in first nine months of 2015” blared from a press release that year by Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in Warsaw. Not so, said social scientist Nando Sigona, an expert on refugees and migration at the University of Birmingham, UK. Frontex, he pointed out, had been counting the same people two or three times or more — for example, a person who was recorded on arrival in Greece and left the EU by going to Albania was again counted on re-entering the bloc by a different route. Frontex has since made this caveat clear in its releases of cross-border data. But it is often the headline numbers that are retained by the media, and by the many populists and politicians who abuse data on refugees and migrants for political ends. We simply do not know the true figure.”

    https://www.nature.com/news/data-on-movements-of-refugees-and-migrants-are-flawed-1.21568

    Lire le dossier : https://www.nature.com/news/human-migration-1.21521

    Image credit: Alberto Seveso

    #migrants #migrations #réfugiés #data #Syrie #Nature #mouvements #flux

  • Disparition de mineurs : la responsabilité de l’Europe

    “On ne sait pas où ils sont, ce qu’ils sont en train de faire ou avec qui ils sont”. C’est ainsi que Brian Donald, chef de cabinet d’Europol, l’office de police criminelle de l’Union européenne, commente le chiffre de 10’000 enfants disparus annoncé par son agence à The Observer en janvier 2016. Un chiffre-choc qui ne s’appuie sur aucune étude, rapport ou communiqué de presse sur le sujet, tout en pointant du doigt « des bandes criminelles pan-européennes [ciblant] les mineurs à des fins d’exploitations sexuelles et esclavage » (The Observer, 30.01.2016) (1).


    https://asile.ch/2017/01/24/decryptage-disparition-de-mineurs-responsabilite-de-leurope
    #disparitions #asile #migrations #réfugiés #enfants #enfance #MNA #Europe #responsabilité

    Ce texte que j’ai écrit il y a plus d’une année a été publié sur @vivre, mais bizarrement je ne l’ai pas mis sur seenthis... Du coup, je le signale maintenant, une année après sa publication...
    Il y a pas mal de liens vers d’autres articles et rapports qui traite de la question, qui est d’ailleurs aussi pas mal couverte sur seenthis : https://seenthis.net/recherche?recherche=%23disparitions+%23mna

    • Enfants migrants disparus : la vérité sur un scandale humanitaire

      Selon #Europol, ils seraient au moins 10 000 en Europe. Isolés, plusieurs d’entre eux seraient tombés dans les filets des réseaux criminels et des trafiquants en tous genres. Des chiffres et des faits alarmants, qui restent pourtant largement imprécis. Et occultent la véritable cause des « disparitions » : la faillite de l’Union européenne dans la gestion des mineurs non accompagnés.

      « Une infrastructure criminelle entière s’est développée dans les dix-huit derniers mois, exploitant le flux des migrants. » Le 30 janvier dernier, dans une tonitruante interview à The Observer, version dominicale du quotidien anglais The Guardian, Brian Donald, un responsable d’Europol, « révèle » qu’au moins 10 000 mineurs migrants non accompagnés (MNA) auraient disparu en Europe pendant les deux dernières années, dont la moitié en Italie et environ mille en Suède. Fait alarmant, selon l’agence européenne de police, nombre d’entre eux auraient été happés par des réseaux criminels et des trafiquants. Ils seraient victimes d’exploitation sexuelle et d’esclavage. « Les criminels actifs dans le trafic d’êtres humains apparaissent maintenant dans nos fichiers du trafic de migrants », alerte Brian Donald dans le dominical britannique.

      Ces déclarations, relayées par la majorité des grands médias européens, ont effrayé et choqué. Mais si la menace des réseaux criminels est réelle, le chiffre d’Europol de 10 000 enfants disparus demeure largement imprécis, pour ne pas dire erroné, selon l’Unicef. « Nous n’avons pas de preuves. Nous ne savons rien sur les chiffres. Europol parle d’enfants disparus : cela ne veut pas dire qu’ils sont perdus, ce sont des enfants qui ne sont pas enregistrés dans un système de données », nous explique Sarah Crowe, porte-parole de l’organisation. « Le chiffre d’Europol provient des signalements à la police. C’est une info brute qui ne prend pas en compte les jeunes non identifiés. Et il n’y a pas d’investigation pour connaître les causes car il n’y a personne pour réclamer une enquête, contrairement aux enfants disparus de parents français », ajoute Laurent Delbos, responsable du plaidoyer à l’association française Forum réfugiés-Cosi, et coordinateur d’un rapport européen sur « Le droit d’asile des mineurs isolés étrangers dans l’Union européenne » (2012).

      DES STATISTIQUES MYOPES

      Les données officielles sur les mineurs isolés restent aléatoires. Selon le Haut-Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés (HCR) et l’Unicef, plus de cent mille enfants migrants non accompagnés ont été enregistrés en 2015 en Europe, dont 35 000 ont demandé l’asile uniquement en Suède, plus de 60 000 ont été enregistrés en Allemagne et 9000 en France. La plupart auraient entre 14 et 17 ans. Du fait de la mobilité du parcours migratoire et des réalités différentes dans chaque État, il est difficile de disposer de statistiques fiables et, donc, crédibles. Un problème que critiquait déjà sévèrement le Parlement européen dans une retentissante résolution du 12 septembre 2013, déplorant « le manque de statistiques officielles fiables concernant les mineurs non accompagnés ». Afin de mieux appréhender la situation de ces jeunes et d’assurer leur protection de manière plus efficace, le parlement de Strasbourg a réclamé des États membres et de la Commission européenne qu’ils améliorent la collecte des statistiques, notamment en utilisant les outils déjà disponibles sur le plan européen, à savoir Eurostat, Frontex, le Bureau européen d’appui en matière d’asile (BEAA) et le Réseau européen des migrations.

      Si le trafic d’êtres humains s’est indéniablement développé avec l’augmentation du nombre de réfugiés en Europe, en particulier sur la route des Balkans, les principales raisons de la disparition des enfants migrants semblent se situer ailleurs. Sur le média Open Democracy, Nando Sigona et Jennifer Allsopp, chercheurs aux universités de Birmingham et d’Oxford, affirment que la principale cause de disparition a peu de lien avec les infrastructures criminelles pan-européennes. Elle aurait plutôt pour origine le fossé qui sépare, d’une part, la gestion des mineurs non accompagnés par les autorités étatiques et, d’autre part, la façon dont ces jeunes envisagent leur migration. En effet, de nombreux mineurs isolés sont enregistrés dans un pays de transit, comme la Grèce, l’Italie ou les pays des Balkans, avant de continuer leur chemin vers un pays de destination différent, souvent l’Allemagne, la Suède ou l’Angleterre, pour rejoindre des membres de leur famille ou des amis. Il n’est pas rare que les enfants s’enfuient des centres, frustrés par de longues procédures d’asile.

      « Les enfants ont peur d’être enfermés dans un centre trop longtemps, comme cela arrive par exemple en Italie et en Grèce. Ils fuient les centres quand le processus de détermination s’éternise », confirme Sarah Crowe de l’Unicef. « Les disparitions, ce sont avant tout les poursuites du parcours migratoire. Europol parle de 5000 mineurs en Italie sur les 10 000 disparus. Normal, car l’Italie est avant tout un pays de transit », explique Laurent Delbos de Forum réfugiés-Cosi. Comme le rappellent les chercheurs Nando Sigona et Jennifer Allsopp, « le compte des ‘disparus’ est moins simple que les informations d’Europol veulent nous le faire croire ».

      NON ASSISTANCE À PERSONNES VULNÉRABLES

      En Angleterre, les cas d’enfants disparus rapportés par les autorités locales varient d’une absence de quelques heures à une disparition permanente. En Italie, un enfant évaporé dans la nature, mais qui réapparait dans un autre État, peut rester enregistré dans le registre des personnes disparues. Il n’est également pas rare, toujours en Italie, qu’un mineur soit comptabilisé deux fois, par des autorités différentes. Il arrive même aux enfants de mentir sur leur âge. « Les enfants qui voyagent seuls cachent parfois leur âge, parce qu’ils ont peur de se retrouver bloqués dans des centres », confirme Sarah Crowe.

      Aujourd’hui, la disparition des radars de milliers d’enfants migrants non accompagnés résulte donc avant tout des failles du système, d’une débâcle de Bruxelles et des Etats européens dans leur gestion de la « crise » des réfugiés. « S’il y a un risque de traite par des réseaux criminels, c’est d’abord un constat de faillite de prise en charge de ces jeunes par les États », déplore Laurent Delbos. En France, certaines collectivités territoriales, comme le département de Loire-Atlantique, peuvent même se retrouver hors-la-loi à cause de la mauvaise gestion des centres d’accueil. Ainsi, le 12 août 2015, le Tribunal administratif de Nantes a-t-il condamné le département à héberger un mineur non accompagné, le neuvième depuis que la collectivité a refusé d’accueillir des jeunes demandeurs d’asile, pour cause de saturation de ses centres.
      En Bulgarie, le HCR alerte sur le cas de mineurs non accompagnés pris en charge dans les centres d’accueil dans l’attente de leur procédure d’asile ; ils sont toujours déscolarisés dans cet Etat de transit : « Le gouvernement nous a rapporté trente cas d’enfants non accompagnés ou séparés, âgés de moins de 18 ans », nous confie Kitty McKinsey, porte-parole du HCR à Sofia. « Aucun de ces jeunes ne fréquente l’école. » En Grèce, face à l’afflux de réfugiés sur les îles, le manque de protection juridique des mineurs non accompagnés est criant. Cette non-assistance à personnes vulnérables forme le terreau sur lequel prospèrent les organisations criminelles, ce que redoute Europol.

      Dans un reportage paru dans Le Monde du 11 février 2016 — titré « La jeunesse sacrifiée des réfugiés mineurs » — une psychologue d’un centre d’accueil à Lesbos se dit préoccupée par Fatima, une Somalienne de 16 ans : « Je suis certaine à 90% qu’elle est victime d’un trafic humain et qu’elle a déjà subi des horreurs (...) Deux hommes étranges la recherchent sur l’île. Il va falloir redoubler de vigilance à son égard ; et de patience. Rien ne sert d’ouvrir des blessures que l’on ne pourra pas soigner ici... »

      Pour pallier l’absence de protection et les risques d’exploitation des enfants, le HCR et l’Unicef ont lancé, fin février, un programme destiné aux femmes et aux mineurs réfugiés. L’ouverture de vingt « Blue Dots » — centres d’aides, assurant les services pratiques, l’identification des personnes, le soutien psychosocial ou les conseils juridiques — a été prévue en Grèce et dans les Balkans. « Cependant, ces centres ne remplacent pas la responsabilité et l’obligation des États de faire leur possible pour fournir un soutien et une protection aux personnes fuyant la guerre et la violence, en particulier celles qui ont des besoins spécifiques », assure le HCR.

      La résolution du Parlement européen du 12 septembre 2013 est pourtant sans appel. Elle condamne vivement « les lacunes existant en matière de protection des mineurs non accompagnés au sein de l’Union européenne » et elle dénonce « les conditions d’accueil souvent déplorables de ces mineurs ainsi que les nombreuses violations de leurs droits fondamentaux dans certains États membres ».

      Mais l’autre « péril » pour les mineurs migrants non accompagnés est d’atteindre l’âge adulte. Face à une politique européenne de moins en moins tolérante vis-à-vis des réfugiés, ils risquent à tout moment le renvoi, même après des années d’intégration. En février 2016, le Bureau of Investigative Journalism, une ONG anglaise indépendante qui travaille en collaboration avec la BBC, le Guardian et Mediapart, a révélé que 2 748 jeunes ont été expulsés du Royaume-Uni entre 2007 et 2015 vers des pays instables ou en guerre comme l’Afghanistan, l’Irak, l’Iran, la Libye ou la Syrie.

      MULTIPLICATION DES RENVOIS ET... DES NOYADES

      En Norvège, le Parti du progrès (FrP), formation populiste entrée au gouvernement en octobre 2013 aux côtés des conservateurs, a imprimé progressivement son empreinte dans la société. Alors que la règle tacite était de ne pas renvoyer des mineurs étrangers ayant vécu pendant des années dans le pays, la Norvège a expulsé 528 enfants étrangers en 2015. Pour le magazine du Monde, la photographe norvégienne Andrea Gjestvang a suivi quatre d’entre eux pendant trois mois. « Ils parlent de paix, mais ils ne la construiront pas en envoyant des enfants au Yémen ou en Afghanistan. Ils donnent le prix Nobel de la paix à Malala Yousafzai, mais ils ne font pas la paix dans leur vie », déplore Joséphine, une adolescente nigériane expulsée, suivie par la photographe.

      Sans oublier que de nombreux enfants meurent tragiquement aux portes de l’Europe, avant de risquer d’être pris dans les filets de la criminalité ou d’essuyer l’humiliation du renvoi. La photo du petit Aylan, un enfant syrien de 3 ans mort sur une plage de Bodrum en Turquie en septembre 2015, a ému le monde entier et suscité une prise de conscience. Mais selon le HCR, depuis septembre, deux Aylan seraient morts chaque jour en tentant de rejoindre les côtes européennes.

      Les enfants forment la population la plus vulnérable et la plus exposée aux noyades en mer. Ainsi, 340 enfants, souvent des bébés ou des bambins, ont trouvé la mort en Méditerranée entre septembre 2015 et février 2016. Dans un communiqué conjoint, en date du 19 février, le HCR, l’Unicef et l’Office international des migrations (OIM) estiment même que « le nombre total des enfants décédés pourrait être encore plus grand, avec leurs corps perdus en mer et jamais retrouvés ».


      https://www.lacite.info/politiquetxt/2016/4/19/enfants-migrants-disparus?rq=disparus

    • Et la solution préconisée par l’UE face à ce problème ?
      Prendre de force les #empreintes_digitales des MNA

      Activists slam EU plan to force migrant kids to give fingerprints

      Activists have raised concerns about new EU plans to allow police to force migrant children to have their fingerprints taken. The aim is to prevent unaccompanied minors from going missing or ending up in the hands of criminal gangs. Critics say coercion is not the answer.

      “We have been pushing for lowering the age of taking fingerprints of migrant children from 14 to 6,” Anna-Maria Corazza Bildt, an MEP with the right-wing European People’s Party told RFI. “It’s extremely difficult for law enforcement authorities to find them, to identify them and to protect them if they’re not fingerprinted.”

      http://en.rfi.fr/europe/20180426-eu-sparks-row-plan-force-migrant-children-be-fingerprinted
      #coercition #Eurodac

    • "L’esercito dei bambini fantasma" cresce sempre di più: 5.526 minorenni spariti solo nel #2017

      Negli ultimi sei anni i minori stranieri non accompagnati giunti in Italia sono 62.672.
      Tra i censiti, però, uno su quattro scappa dalla rete dei sistemi di accoglienza: per raggiungere familiari in altri paesi europei, perché troppo frustrante aspettare i tempi dell’iter per la protezione internazionale.

      http://www.meltingpot.org/SOS-Minori-Stranieri-Non-Accompagnati.html
      #Italie

    • Struggling UK universities warn staff of possible job cuts

      Deteriorating balance sheets and political uncertainty blamed for redundancy threats.

      Universities are warning staff to prepare for redundancies in the new year as a result of deteriorating balance sheets and lowered forecasts for student recruitment, coupled with the uncertainty of Brexit and sudden shifts in government policy.

      In recent days more than half a dozen universities have told staff there could be job cuts in 2019, including members of the research-intensive Russell Group such as Cardiff University, while others are privately bracing for cuts later in the year.

      Universities are in the midst of reporting their financial results for 2017-18 and are monitoring student applications coming in for next year. Several have been alarmed by the projections they are seeing before a 15 January deadline for undergraduates.

      Insiders say universities are more likely to cut staff because of a number of other threats in the next 12 months, including the potential effect on international students of a no-deal Brexit, as well as cuts to tuition fees in England as a result of a review of funding ordered by Theresa May that will report early next year.

      “Knee-jerk cuts to staff will harm universities’ ability to deliver high-quality teaching and research and provide the support students need. Staff are already overstretched and asking those who remain to do even more is not a sustainable strategy,” said Matt Waddup, head of policy for the University and College Union (UCU).

      “Students repeatedly say they want greater investment in their staff as a top priority, yet the proportion of expenditure spent on staff has fallen. Cutting staff will send out entirely the wrong signal to potential students. Axing educators is obscene at any time, let alone during the current uncertainty when we need our universities firing on all cylinders.”
      Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
      Read more

      Among the group of universities that have gone public, the University of Reading told staff in an email on Monday evening that a voluntary redundancy scheme was being drawn up and would open in January.

      “I want to emphasise that voluntary redundancies are only one tool available to us,” wrote Prof Robert Van de Noort, the acting vice-chancellor, suggesting that staff should consider early retirement, reduced hours or changes to contracts to help to avoid compulsory redundancies.

      Reading’s accounts, published a few days ago, reveal that the university made a £20m loss for the financial year, including a £27m loss on its subsidiary in Malaysia. Reading’s balance sheet was brought into the black only by £36m of pension “remeasurements”.

      Van de Noort told staff: “There is no doubt that the year ahead will be difficult at times, but I am confident that as a university community we can address these difficulties and remain a leader in teaching and research in the UK and globally.”

      Despite Reading’s deficit, the previous vice-chancellor, Sir David Bell, saw his total pay rise by £10,000 to £329,000. Bell announced his departure this year and is now vice-chancellor of the University of Sunderland.

      At Cardiff, the vice-chancellor, Colin Riordan, has also written to staff telling them they will be offered voluntary redundancy from January. The university has said compulsory staff cuts “cannot be ruled out”.

      In a joint statement the Cardiff University branches of the Unite, Unison and UCU unions said: “We are astonished that Cardiff University staff are facing their third voluntary severance scheme in six years, and we are very worried that the vice-chancellor still refuses to rule out further compulsory redundancies.”

      At the University of Gloucestershire, based in Cheltenham, unions say they have been advised of more than 100 job cuts and other redundancies as a result of what the university called a “rebalancing” in challenging conditions.

      “There is a demographic fall in the number of 18-year-olds in the population, which is affecting demand for higher education, the level of tuition fees universities are permitted to charge home undergraduate students is capped by the government, and there is increasing competition for recruitment,” the university said.

      “At the same time, we are facing large increases in some of our costs, particularly external increases in what we are required to spend on staff pensions. The combined effect of these factors is that, in common with many other universities, our costs are rising faster than our income. That is not a situation we can allow to continue.”

      In Scotland, union members at Queen Margaret University in Musselburgh begin voting on Wednesday on strike action over the possibility of 40 job cuts – about 10% of its staff – although the university says it hopes to meet the number through voluntary redundancies.

      Other universities considering redundancies include Birkbeck, University of London and Bangor University in Wales.

      The university financial reporting season also reveals that some universities continue to thrive. The University of Oxford said its income topped £1.5bn for the first time in 2017-18, with an overall surplus of £150m.

      Oxford’s investments grew by £286m, which was £68m more than the previous year, while the Oxford University Press contributed a further £205m.

      The financial statements suggest the public controversy over vice-chancellors’ high rates of pay has had some effect, with many leading universities showing little or no growth in pay for their leaders.

      At the University of Manchester, where revenue topped £1bn for the first time, the total earnings of the vice-chancellor, Nancy Rothwell, fell from £306,000 to £276,000 owing to lower pension contributions.

      https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/dec/11/struggling-uk-universities-warn-staff-of-possible-job-cuts

    • Bitter sweet citizenship: how European families in the UK cope with Brexit

      About 80,000 EU nationals have applied for British citizenship since the UK voted to leave the European Union. The decision has rarely been easy. On the contrary, it has often been perceived as “forced” or as an attempt to “take back control” of life amid the Brexit uncertainty, a new research has revealed.

      The contrasting feelings were highlighted in a study by “EU families and Eurochildren in Brexiting Britain”, a project by the University of Birmingham in cooperation with civil rights group the3million, Migrant Voice, and immigration barrister Colin Yeo.

      Researchers interviewed 103 families in the UK in which at least one of the partners is a non-British EU national. They wanted to understand how Brexit is impacting the decisions they make about their legal status.

      The study shows that while many are applying for naturalization, many more are still uncertain and “considering their options.” Better off and educated EU nationals from Western European countries are the most resistant to the idea of becoming British citizens as a solution to Brexit. This is especially true for Germans, “who feel like they somehow betray the European ideal in doing so,” says the report.

      Others, particularly from Eastern Europe, take a more pragmatic approach. Those who apply often do it to protect their children. But instead of being seen as “the culmination of a path to integration”, naturalisation often generates “feelings of un-belonging and of disintegration”.

      Lead author Nando Sigona, deputy director of the Institute of Research into Superdiversity at the University of Birmingham, discusses the research findings with Europe Street News.

      Why a research on families rather than individuals?

      We focused on families in which at least one of the partners is a non-British EU national because Brexit has legal implications for their rights and social implications for their choices. We wanted to explore the dilemmas these families face. For example, in a mix family ‘going back home’ is a complex issue: if you are a Polish-German couple who has met in the UK and speak English as main language, where is home? Probably in the UK.

      We also thought about their children, the next generation. Even pro-migration groups have been very utilitarian in their approach to European migrants. They say they are needed because they work hard, they are young and they contribute to the economy. I personally hate this narrative because I do not like to have a price tag on my head. And for children the situation is even more complicated: they are not productive, they use schools and services, and yet they are in the UK as legitimate residents. According to Migration Observatory, there are more than 900,000 children of EU parents (Ireland excluded) in the UK. How will British society look like in 20 or 30 years, when these children will be adult? What will be the impact of the way they have been treated? These are the questions we wanted to examine.

      Is this why the project refers to ‘Eurochildren’?

      Yes, but let’s not forget that in these families there are British nationals too. We could have called the project “British families with European heritage” and probably we would have got more attention from politicians who have a responsibility towards their citizens, those they do not treat as “others”.

      We usually refer to the 3.8 million EU nationals in the UK, according to the latest Eurostat data. But, as you say, many of them have British partners and children. How many people are really impacted by Brexit?

      It is almost impossible to know because of the way official data are collected. In case of dual nationality, the Office for National Statistics prioritises the British one so people disappear from the statistics on EU nationals. Our research also looked at the census data of the past 40 years, with children of earlier migrants now registered as British. The legacy of EU’s free movement in the UK is much larger that what people think.

      This means that no one knows how many people might or might not be protected by the withdrawal agreement – if there is one – or by the “settled status” scheme.

      The situation is so complicated. Within the same family different members may have different rights. The problem with European families is also that, when they moved to the UK, this was not part of the deal. Their legal status was not something they had to worry about. The government is now ignoring or underestimating this situation by imposing a retroactive bureaucratic monstrosity like the “settled status”. The risk is that many will be left out. The only solution would be to turn the process into a registration rather than an application, and to leave it open. Some people will be inevitably left out, but at least they won’t become unlawful.

      Based on your interviews, what has changed for these families since the Brexit vote?

      Most people feel unsettled because they failed to see Brexit coming. They did not think a majority would vote against the EU and they were not prepared for it. Secondly, they feel forced to consider their options and to make important decisions such as applying for British citizenship or leaving. The configuration of the family, for example whether or not the partners are from the same EU country, can make a difference for their opportunities. There is also a sense of being forced to define themselves. Previously mix families could reconcile their identities under a European umbrella, but Brexit is changing that. However, it is important to acknowledge that people have different feelings about the situation and to not monopolise their voices.

      Are the responses you received uniform across the UK?

      There are places where people feel more secure. London feels safer, respondents said, as a majority voted to stay in the EU, the environment does not feel hostile and there are long standing EU communities. In Scotland, the positive narrative coming from the government helped too. In contrast, people in areas with a strong leave vote felt very isolated. Outside big cities, where immigration is a fairly new phenomenon, Polish and Eastern Europeans in particular did not have established communities and social networks to support them in this hostile transition.

      Many of the people we interviewed were reflecting on neighbours and family members who voted for Brexit. It felt very personal. We heard of families avoiding Christmas meals and, in the most tragic situations, splitting up because the additional tension brought by Brexit pushed them beyond the tipping point. We have also seen tensions between parents and children, for example children asking parents not to speak their mother tongue in public or parents not speaking with their children in the native language because they do not feel safe. The Home Office and migration policies do not consider the reverberations within families of big geopolitical shifts.

      What is the approach of these families to naturalisation?

      Part of our respondents showed a lot of resistance to naturalisation. Especially those with higher social stardards do not want to be forced into it. Some who never felt the urge to become British eventually applied. Among the people who did so, there were often feelings of anger and frustration but this was seen as a strategy to secure the future of children, a sort of parental duty.

      A number of people said they have lost trust in the British government, they are sceptical about the settled status and they think naturalization is the safest option. Others want to retain the right to move freely in and out of the country: becoming British for them does not necessarily mean wanting to stay but keeping all options open for themselves and their children. A minority also said they want to be able to vote. But there are large groups who are not applying. Some cannot because their countries do not allow dual citizenship. The cost attached to the process is also a factor. There are strict eligibility criteria and the test is not easy. Citizenship is not a right: it is something you have to earn, pay for and deserve.

      What do you think of Michael Gove’s proposal to grant citizenship for free to EU nationals, if he becomes the leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister?

      Great, but I’d feel uncomfortable if this applies only to Europeans. Fees are unfair for everyone and the government makes a large profit from them. Fees should be cut and the process simplified in general, especially for children. It would guarantee their future status and it would be good for the country.

      Are there groups of EU nationals applying more than others?

      Central and Eastern Europeans started to apply for British citizenship early, before the EU referendum. They were already victim of the hostile environment and they felt negatively targeted by populist media, so they tried to secure their rights earlier on. Free movement is also fairly recent for them [the country joined the EU in 2004].

      For French, Spanish, Italian and German nationals there has been a 250-300% increase in applications since the referendum, but this is mostly because few were applying before June 2016. Before the Brexit vote they felt their position in Britain was fully secured.

      Who is not applying?

      There are people who cannot apply because they do not have regular jobs, they are from minorities, for example the Roma, they struggle with the procedure or cannot afford it. We heard of parents who had to prioritize which one of their children could apply for naturalisation, as they could not afford to pay for all. There were people at the margins before Brexit and they will be even more so when they will lose the protections of EU law.

      How do children feel about these changes?

      It depends on the age. Children up to 3 years old are usually shielded by their parents. The 5-6 years old are aware that something is going on and ask questions. Teenagers are aware and sometimes join the conversation, for example participating in demonstrations. Maybe they are more conflicted about family decisions. But kids are the ones normalising the situation trying to be like others.

      Is the European identity of these families at risk?

      Not necessarily. For the first time in Britain we see large numbers of European flags. In a sense, the European identity has become a topic of conversation. For many British citizens and policy makers the EU has only just been an economic project, but now it is a political one and this can further develop. The European heritage is not going to disappear. If anything, some of the people we interviewed started teaching their language to the kids or sending them to language schools. What is clear is that the EU is a topic we will have to confront for years to come. The issue of belonging will have repercussions that can go in many directions, depending on how things will settle. One of the challenges of this research is precisely that it is happening while event are unfolding.

      https://europestreet.news/bitter-sweet-citizenship-how-european-families-in-the-uk-cope-with-br

    • Vote Leave’s position on EU and Irish citizens post-Brexit raises more questions than it answers

      On 1 June, Vote Leave issued a statement outlining its plans for a post-Brexit immigration policy. Among other matters, the statement sought to give reassurance on two status issues that would arise in the event of withdrawal: the position of resident EU citizens, and the future rights of Irish citizens. According to Bernard Ryan, their position on migrants’ rights after a Brexit raises more questions than it answers.

      http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/06/07/vote-leaves-position-on-eu-and-irish-citizens-post-brexit-raises-more-q

    • Is Theresa May really threatening to deport Europeans?

      Does Theresa May really understand Brexit? Speaking to Robert Peston today, the Home Secretary seemed to be entertaining the idea of deporting European nationals staying in Britain. Or, almost as bad, using them as collateral in some negotiation with Brussels: a deeply worrying and, to me, revolting suggestion. But coming from the Home Secretary, we have no choice but to take it seriously.

      http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/theresa-may-want-kick-europeans
      #expulsion #renvoi

    • The UK’s EU Referendum and the victimisation of the European migrant

      On June 23rd the citizens of the UK will have to decide whether Britain will remain a member of the EU, in one of the UK’s most important referendums since World War II. Arguably, a vote to leave would spell the beginning of a new era for Europe, which could compromise the sense of solidarity between European states and their citizens.

      http://lacuna.org.uk/migration/the-uks-eu-referendum-and-the-victimisation-of-the-european-migrant
      #migrants_européens

    • How politically viable are proposals for an EU immigration ’emergency stop’?

      Arguably the major stumbling block in Brexit negotiations concerns the relationship between membership of the Single Market, and the acceptance of EU provisions on the free movement of workers. A number of commentators have already analysed the options, and weighed up their feasibility. See for example the blog by Jonathan Portes on this, and a recent FT article. Here’s my take on the question. I pay particular attention to the question of political feasibility – both in terms of the EU’s potential to accept one of these deals, and its marketability to Leave voters concerned about immigration.

      https://christinaboswell.wordpress.com/2016/08/04/how-politically-viable-are-proposals-for-an-eu-immigrati

    • Glasgow University lecturer faces deportation despite being given government research grant

      Dr #Kevin_Parsons, who now lives in Bearsden with his wife and two children, has been ordered to leave the country by June 11 or risk being deported by the Home Office.


      http://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/glasgow-uni-lecturer-faces-deportation-13094732#ICID=sharebar_faceboo

    • All the rights EU citizens in the UK are set to lose after Brexit

      LONDON — Theresa May on Monday released what she described as a “generous offer” to EU citizens living in the UK after Brexit. The plans, which will form part of the negotiations with the EU, were sold as offering Europeans living here rights which are “almost equivalent to British citizens”.

      http://static5.uk.businessinsider.com/image/59520e2b44e5a327008b48a8-1024/gettyimages-458367623.jpg
      http://www.businessinsider.fr/uk/all-the-rights-eu-citizens-in-the-uk-are-set-to-lose-after-brexit-20

    • Undocumented Germans? Diary of an EU citizen in the UK (22)

      The point here is that as a result of Brexit, the reverse may happen. But this time it will not affect only the citizens of the newer EU member states but potentially all EU 27 nationals. And while I’m sure that some kind of solution will be put in place so that EU nationals that currently live in the UK will be able to continue in some shape or form to live and work there, I am equally sure that these measures will leave some out. Recent data on detention and removal of EU nationals from the UK already show signs in this direction.

      https://nandosigona.info/2017/03/29/undocumented-germans-diary-of-an-eu-citizen-in-the-uk-22

    • ‘Not one of you any longer’: EU nationals’ Brexit uncertainty and mistrust

      The Brexit vote has plunged EU Nationals resident in the UK into uncertainty. For the first time many face profound feelings of rejection, betrayal and fear for their futures and those of their children and families. Whatever deal is struck during Brexit negotiations regarding the ‘settled status’ of EU nationals, the general trajectory of May’s Conservative Government on citizenship and immigration has been the deliberate and open pursuit of a ‘hostile environment’. The promotion of discrimination through bordering practices that permeate multiple areas of everyday life – housing, health, education, legal support and advocacy, banking services and work – has marginalised all migrants but also any person of colour. The Brexit campaign and vote has shattered the myth of Britain as an open, tolerant society.

      https://discoversociety.org/2017/12/15/not-one-of-you-any-longer-eu-nationals-brexit-uncertainty-and-mistr

    • EU citizen registration in UK could become ’#new_Windrush', say migration experts

      Critics warn many could be left without legal status to stay if settlement scheme fails.
      Migration experts have warned that the post-Brexit system for registering EU citizens living in the UK could become a new “Windrush scandal” as the scheme to register an estimated 3.5 million EU citizens living in the UK begins.

      From Monday, the third phase of testing will open to EU residents in the UK, who will be able to register for the new post-Brexit “settled status”. The Home Office is extending its live trial to all EU citizens who hold a valid passport and any non-EU citizen family members who hold a valid biometric residence card.

      Critics have warned that thousands could be left without legal status to remain in the UK if applications are not processed quickly and effectively.

      Maike Bohn, founder of the3million which campaigns for EU citizens in the UK to retain their existing rights after Brexit, warned trust in the government was low.

      “The Windrush people trusted the Home Office and many of them got deported because they were citizens but couldn’t prove it,” she said.
      Voters would back remaining in EU over May’s Brexit deal
      Read more

      The expansion of the scheme follows two “private” test phases. The second phase saw 29,987 applications submitted with 27,211 decisions made. Of those, no cases were refused. However, the second phase was open to 250,000 people in selected universities, health and social care bodies.

      The Home Office said 70% of applicants had been granted settled status with the remaining 30% granted pre-settled status, which is given to those who have been in the country for fewer than five years. There was positive feedback from 77% of applicants.

      The immigration minister, Caroline Nokes, said: “From the very beginning we have been clear that securing the rights of EU citizens living in the UK is our priority.

      “The report into the second private test phase of the EU settlement scheme shows clearly that we are well on track to deliver a system that will make it easy and straightforward for EU citizens to obtain status once we have left the EU.

      “We are now in a position to proceed with the wider public testing of the scheme, which will provide us with further valuable insight before the full launch of the system by the end of March. We are grateful to those individuals and organisations that have participated in the testing so far.”

      The rollout comes weeks after a series of bugs were exposed in the phone app, which does not work on iPhones, including complaints that the passport recognition function did not work on all Android models.

      Politicians, migrant thinktanks and charities have warned the UK could face “another Windrush” if the settled status scheme fails.

      Chai Patel, legal policy director at the joint council for welfare of immigrants, said: “EU citizens who do not pay to apply for settled status by 2021 will lose their right to live in the UK and become undocumented.
      Sign up to our Brexit weekly briefing
      Read more

      “This is a major obstacle in the way of achieving the government’s promise that every EU national currently in the UK will be welcome after Brexit. By charging a fee and by setting a time limit for applications the government is making it certain that some people will not get settled status.

      “And with 3 million to 4 million people needing to register, that means creating tens or hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants overnight. The poor, the elderly, [and] those with illnesses or disabilities will be particularly affected as the government is failing to set aside enough resources to help them.

      “We therefore urge the government to do everything in its power to make sure everyone’s rights are protected after Brexit. Instead of creating a system that defaults to removing rights if a person does not pay for an application, the government should today grant a free and permanent legal right to stay to all EU nationals resident in the UK.

      “The Home Office should then provide a free and simple process by which people can obtain documents proving that right.”

      Jill Rutter, director of strategy for British Future and co-author of the report, said: “The Home Office must invest in getting the EU settlement scheme right from the start. Failure to do so could cause massive problems in years to come, on a far bigger scale than the ‘Windrush scandal’.

      “The application system should work simply and efficiently for the vast majority of EU citizens. But there will always be more complex cases where people find it harder to navigate the system or to prove their residency – and the sheer scale of this task means even a low rate of failure equates to tens of thousands of people.

      “The Home Office needs to make sure that people hear about the scheme, that it works well and that errors are remedied quickly when they are made. It must also overcome a legacy of mistrust created by the previous permanent residency scheme.

      “This is an important test for the Home Office. The stakes are high. Get it right and the UK sends a strong message that EU citizens are welcome and the government is in control. Get it wrong and the consequences are dire.”

      Ed Davey, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “No one seriously believes that the Home Office will be able to grant settled status to everyone who’s eligible within two years. Thousands will be left effectively undocumented and subject to Theresa May’s hostile environment.

      “Liberal Democrats demand better for the Europeans who’ve made their lives here and contribute so much to our economy, our public services and our society. They must not become the victims of a new Windrush scandal.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/21/eu-citizen-registration-in-uk-could-become-new-windrush-say-migration-e

    • Brexit : contingents d’autorisations de séjour prévus pour les ressortissants du Royaume-Uni en cas de sortie de l’UE sans accord

      Le Conseil fédéral entend maintenir les étroites relations bilatérales nouées avec le Royaume-Uni au-delà du Brexit. En conséquence, il a arrêté, lors de sa séance du 13 février 2019, des règles d’admission qui seront applicables aux ressortissants britanniques au cas où le Royaume-Uni quitte l’Union européenne (UE) sans accord de retrait. À partir du 30 mars 2019, les Britanniques qui souhaitent entrer en Suisse pour y exercer une activité lucrative bénéficieront d’un contingent d’autorisations qui leur sera réservé. Le Département fédéral de justice et police (DFJP) va préparer à cet effet, d’ici à fin mars 2019, une révision de l’ordonnance sur l’admission, le séjour et l’exercice d’une activité lucrative (OASA).

      Dans l’éventualité où le Royaume-Uni quitterait l’UE sans accord de retrait, l’accord sur la libre circulation des personnes (ALCP) cessera de s’appliquer aux relations entre la Suisse et le Royaume-Uni dès le 30 mars 2019. À partir de cette date, les Britanniques seront alors en principe soumis au même régime que les ressortissants d’autres pays tiers. Pour ces derniers, l’exercice d’une activité lucrative est soumis aux conditions d’admission fixées dans la loi sur les étrangers et l’intégration (LEI). Au cas où le Royaume-Uni quitterait l’UE, non pas de manière désordonnée, mais en vertu d’un accord de retrait, les relations entre la Suisse et le Royaume-Uni continueraient, pendant une phase de transition qui durerait probablement jusqu’à fin 2020, d’être soumises aux dispositions actuellement en vigueur de l’ALCP.

      Dans le cadre de sa stratégie baptisée « Mind the Gap », le Conseil fédéral a décidé, lors de sa séance du 13 février 2019, de créer un contingent temporaire de 3500 autorisations de séjour en faveur des ressortissants britanniques qui exercent une activité lucrative. Il entend ainsi, d’une part, atténuer, tant pour notre économie que pour les cantons, l’impact du passage soudain des ressortissants du Royaume-Uni du régime de la libre circulation des personnes aux conditions s’appliquant aux ressortissant d’États tiers et, d’autre part, empêcher toute concurrence indésirable entre les citoyens britanniques et les ressortissants d’autres pays tiers. Par ailleurs, des discussions sont en cours au sujet de la conclusion d’un éventuel accord bilatéral entre la Suisse et le Royaume-Uni qui permettrait de déroger temporairement à certaines conditions d’admission visées par la LEI.
      Contingent de 3500 autorisations

      Les nombres maximums d’autorisations de séjour fixés en faveur des ressortissants britanniques seront utilisables durant la période du 30 mars au 31 décembre 2019. Le Conseil fédéral a pris sa décision aussi bien en tenant compte de la position des cantons et des besoins de l’économie qu’à la lumière des prescriptions de l’article sur l’immigration inscrit dans la Constitution fédérale depuis le 9 février 2014 (art. 121a Cst.).

      En tout, 3500 travailleurs devraient pouvoir être recrutés au Royaume-Uni cette année : 2100 au moyen d’une autorisation de séjour B et 1400 de plus sur la base d’une autorisation de séjour de courte durée L. Ces deux contingents apporteront à l’économie suisse la flexibilité dont elle a besoin.

      Ces contingents seront alloués trimestriellement aux cantons. Les autorisations de séjour ainsi octroyées ne seront provisoirement pas soumises à la procédure d’approbation, et seront donc délivrées sous compétence cantonale. Cette mesure tient compte de la situation extraordinaire du Royaume-Uni ; elle constitue une solution transitoire, dans l’attente d’une clarification du futur régime migratoire concernant cet État.

      D’ici à fin mars, le DFJP réalisera les travaux nécessaires à la révision de l’OASA et soumettra son projet au Conseil fédéral pour décision définitive.

      En décembre déjà, le Conseil fédéral avait approuvé un accord avec le Royaume-Uni portant sur les droits des citoyens suisses et britanniques après que le Royaume-Uni aura quitté l’UE (Brexit). Cet accord bénéficiera aux ressortissants suisses et britanniques qui ont acquis des droits (par ex. droits de séjour) en Suisse ou au Royaume-Uni en vertu de l’ALCP. Le Conseil fédéral entend ainsi garantir le maintien de leurs droits et obligations actuels après le Brexit.

      https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-73962.html

  • 10,000 refugee children are missing, says Europol | World news | The Guardian
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/30/fears-for-missing-child-refugees?CMP=twt_gu

    At least 10,000 unaccompanied child refugees have disappeared after arriving in Europe, according to the EU’s criminal intelligence agency. Many are feared to have fallen into the hands of organised trafficking syndicates.

    In the first attempt by law enforcement agencies to quantify one of the most worrying aspects of the migrant crisis, Europol’s chief of staff told the Observer that thousands of vulnerable minors had vanished after registering with state authorities.

    #réfugiés #exil #enfant #enfance

  • Euronews | Migrants : déchiffrer les chiffres de #Frontex
    http://www.asile.ch/vivre-ensemble/2015/10/15/euronews-migrants-dechiffrer-les-chiffres-de-frontex

    Dans un article daté du 14 octobre 2015, Euronews questionne la manière dont les #statistiques de Frontex ont été calculées : une grande partie des migrants entrés par la Grèce aurait à nouveau été comptabilisé lors de leur entrée en Hongrie ou en Croatie, comme le révèle l’Agence elle-même.

    #Documentation #Publications_-_Analyses_récentes

  • Still human, still here, still undocumented

    TEDx talk by Dr #Nando_Sigona on the plight of UK’s undocumented children and families. Not much has changed since the talk was delivered in 2012, thousands of young people are still living underground, their voices silenced and survive without effective pathways to regularisation.

    http://superdiversity.net/2014/09/12/still-human-still-here-still-undocumented

    #migration #asile #sans-papier #réfugiés #enfants #famille #mineur