Swiss Immigrant Integration Policies – Debates and Challenges Gianni D’Amato Conference of FoF...

Swiss Immigrant Integration Policies – Debates and ChallengesGianni D’Amato

Conference of FoF and FOMBerne, 24-25.3.10

Outline

General Overview Path to Integration Disputing Integration (and Multiculturalism) Effects of Federalism Conclusion

www.migration-population.ch

General Overview

According to 2000 Census:22.4% of 7.4 Mio Population is foreign born20.5% are foreigners (1.5. Mio)

Twice as high as US and Canada No immigrant integration policy until the 1990s Contentious topic since the 1960s


Path to Integration

From ANAG to AUG Before WW I, immigration was the responsibility of the

cantons to conform to bilateral agreements 1925: Constitutional Amd > Federal Govn power to

address immigration issues > (Fremdenpolizei) 1931: Law on Residence and Settlement (ANAG) >

Federal Aliens Police could implement immigration policy at discretion

Concern on the degree of “over-foreignization”


Path to Integration

Post-war Labour Migration starts 1946 1950: 6% of Tot Pop; 1960: 10.8%; 1970: 17.2%; 1980: 14.8%; 1990: 18.1%; 2000: 22.4%

To ensure no permanent residence: rotation model (did not work until 1973)


Path to Integration

Enforcement of social rights in the 1960s through bilateral agreements > Cause of popular contention

1990s: Economic recession, no rotation possible, high rates of unemployment to be handled by cantons and municipalities

Discussion of a new migration regime: combine needs of new economy with migration control

Concept of integration won acceptance in the 90s, rotation and assimilation not adequate

Integration connected with urban development (city guidelines) > new buzz word to shape immigrant policy


Path to Integration

Dualization of Admission and Labour Policy as a new migration strategy Bilateral Agreements with EU / new Alien Law (AUG) for third

country nationals, introduction of short term permits No preference for nationals with regard to EU, no regional and

sectoral labour policy Holistic approach towards migration, asylum and development

policies Coordination of Migration policies within the administration Support of international initiatives


Disputing Integration

Hoffmann-Nowotny (1992): One culture has to dominate Living apart together takes society to segregation,

endangering shared knowledge Swiss success story is not due to different groups living

together, but to segregation of cultural diversity Assimilation to the dominant culture necessary



Kälin (2000) States founded on liberal constitutions and the rule of law are

obliged to preserve liberal identity In cases of conflict, fundamental rights should regulate them

Non-discrimination (equal treatment) Neutrality towards cultural difference Rules of freedom

Respect of ordre public



Concept of Integration wins acceptance, particularly in urban areas

Gov Report :“It must be prevented, that certain groups of people, such as Muslims, Turks and nationals from the former Yugoslavia, are pushed into the role of problematic foreigners, thereby being even more discriminated and isolated” (FCF 1996)

Swiss alien policy adapted and considered integration as prerequisite for achieving a politically and socially sustainable immigration policy.



Contention persists Liberals: Integration as a means to encourage participation Conservatives: need of mandatory and coercive measures, fighting

abuses, demanding a specific set of behaviours 1st phase (2001): Support of integration projects, 12 Mio CHF per year

for language and integration courses, training for community leaders Cantons and larger municipalities have own integration programmes and

responsible offices Involvement of civic organizations and actors from immigrant communities Switzerland recognized to be country of immigration that should provide

help to integrate Emphasis on encouragement to integrate



New center of gravity regarding the consensus on integration at the beginning of new Century:

“It is not the host society that is responsible for the integration of the migrants, but this is largely their own responsibility. Only someone who is ready to do so can count on the appropriate opportunities and expect help in improving one’s personal situation. The promotion of integration remains help to self-help.” (FOM 2006)

Promotion of integration is a transversal policy issue in the new law



2nd phase (New Immigration Law 2008): Migrants have to fullfill certain criterias to facilitate their integration Permanent residents required to integrate professionally and socially Those who fail can be deported> related to low skilled migrants

Level of education and qualification interpreted to improve integration Avoiding errors of the past Immigrant’s duty to make every effort necessary to facilitate their

integration Integration has undergone policization in public discourse. Dismantling of

obstacles do not play role in public discourse:



Obstacles as: Discrimination in the housing and labour market Non recognition of foreign diploma Barriers to real participation

Current priorities: Language, Education, Work and Social Security Promotion of social integration in residential areas


Effects of Federalism Naturalization Laws and Citizenship

Citizenship as a local affair: Nation refers to republicanism of the state, everyday life is referring to canton and municipality

Framework on naturalization is federal, there are also cantonal and municipal requirements

Three stage procedure: from municipal to cantonal at finally Swiss citizenship. Minimum residence of 12 years, variations among cantons and municipalities

Local authorities determine if candidate is worthy to the cantonal citizenship. Local actors determine access to membership. Different cantons apply different procedures

Aptitudes test to filter candidates. Disparities between French and German areas.

http://eudo-citizenship.eu/docs/CountryReports/EUDO-2009-Switzerland-linked.pdf


Effects of Federalism

Political Devide:

Innovations dependant of the political culture. Western Part: system referring to political rights (citizenship) Eastern and Southern Part: system referring to belonging

Contention of a “internationalist” – liberal orientations Federalism (Cantons can influence Decision making process, Securing loyalty

important) Direct Democracy (Veto power of strong mobilizing groups)


Conclusions

Cantons and political actors have high degree of organizational and political autonomy

Cantons can use autonomy to experiment with various approaches influencing decision making at federal level

If perceptions in cantons change, federal level has to accommodate.

Cantons have enough space to manoeuvre and do not have need to share common approach


Conclusions

Integration policies have not proceeded evenly in Switzerland: Transnational Nation in the French part, “republican” in the German

and Italian part Future conflicts between partisans of Rule of Law and supporters

of popular sovereignty (Citizenship, Religious Freedom) Ongoing struggle of those who wish unlimited sovereignty of the people Unbound form of Majority Rule?


Conclusions

Integration policies have changed nevertheless the paradigm of nationhood:

Creation of horizontal and vertical coordinative institutions at federal and cantonal levels

Each canton and municipality disposes of delegates Systematic comparison of integration activities, their insertion in the

institutional structures Coordination of the integration policies Evaluation of steering instruments

Whereas the political discourse converges in more restrictive demands, many practitioners in cantons and cities are valorizing the achieved and well working instruments


Swiss Immigrant Integration Policies – Debates and Challenges Gianni D’Amato Conference of FoF...

Documents

Transcript of Swiss Immigrant Integration Policies – Debates and Challenges Gianni D’Amato Conference of FoF...