DEBATE OVER IMMIGRATION: ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR (The Pros)
PRO-IMMIGRATION
By Saskia Sassen
The majority of the contemporary European public would seem to be dead set against
immigration, fearing they will be swamped by floods of immigrants they don't really need and
cannot accommodate.
And yet contrary to popular perception, Western Europe does need, and will continue to need,
increasing access to foreign workers -- for high-tech jobs, for global financial positions, and also
for a proliferation of low-wage service jobs and other manual work.
There is nothing new in this. Europe has for some time acknowledged the existence of shortages
in specific occupations -- notably nursing, nannying and the high-tech industry -- and created
legal channels for bringing in overseas workers to make up those shortages.
In fact this need to draw on foreign workers has been part of the unwritten history of Western
Europe -- specifically northwestern Europe -- for the last two centuries. During this time the
region experienced short-lived periods of labor surplus, followed by longer periods of acute labor
shortage accompanied by massive recruitment efforts.
Immigration into Europe has never simply been an indiscriminate one-way flow from poverty to
wealth, as many opponents would have it.
On the contrary, migrants from particular cities and regions in one country tend to gravitate
towards particular cities and regions in another, drawn by invisible ties of culture, economics and
history.
Such movement of people is, and always has been, a highly differentiated process. It doesn't just
involve people seeking permanent settlement. There are many who are only seeking temporary
employment and who want to circulate back and forth.
There is now a growing presence of immigrants who are not searching for a new home in a new
country; but rather who think of themselves as moving in a global labor market.
When they are allowed to circulate freely in this way, many prefer to retain a permanent
residence in their country of origin and only work a few months in the destination country.
We know, for instance, that some of the Polish women now employed as cleaners in Germany
favour using easily available three-month visas to do this work before returning to their
hometowns. This is also the case with some of the African migrants in Italy.
The number of immigrants seeking to become permanent residents in a host country is thus
considerably smaller than is often suggested.
Another important point to note is that immigrants, whether permanent or temporary, still only
account for a tiny minority of a host country's population, except for very small countries such as
Switzerland and Luxembourg.
A further issue has been raised by globalisation: Is it possible to have closed national labor
markets in an era of global economics?
The answer would appear to be no. Globalisation brings with it a need for more flexible crossborder labour circulation. The World Trade Organization, for instance, as part of the
liberalisation of international trade, has adopted measures that facilitate cross-border circulation
of professionals in finance, telecommunications and other highly specialized services.
Only by recognising these factors can Europe's governments formulate a clearer and more
realistic policy towards immigration. This will, in turn, help create a more flexible labor market,
dissuade human trafficking, reduce exploitation and minimise the impact of illegal immigrants
on the indigenous labour market.
Saskia Sassen is professor of sociology at the University of Chicago. Her books include "Guests
and Aliens" and "The Global City 2001."
DEBATE OVER IMMIGRATION: ARGUMENTS AGAINST (The Cons)
ANTI-IMMIGRATION
By Stephen Dearden
Since the early 1990s, immigration into Western Europe has risen dramatically, both as a result
of the political changes in Eastern Europe -- in 1992 Germany alone received 1.2 million
migrants -- and increased migration to the southern states of the European Union.
During the same period the number of asylum applications has also risen dramatically. In 1985,
for instance, Germany received only 73,832 applications. By 1993 this figure had risen to
322,600. In the UK, likewise, the number increased from 5,000 in 1985 to 80,000 in 2000.
The magnitude of these flows has led to increasing debate about the economic, social and
political impact of immigration on Western Europe.
The principal economic gain from immigration ostensibly lies in the increase in the supply of
labor it provides. Theoretically this should enhance the productive capacity of the host economy.
This assumes, however, that the host economy actually needs an increased labor supply, either
because it lacks the capacity to automate or has no existing unemployment. This has hardly been
the European experience.
Immigration has significant implications for those working in the sectors in which immigrants
are employed. It is generally recognized, for instance, that immigration can have a depressing
effect on wage levels, which is why historically many trade unions have opposed it.
Continuing immigrant inflow allows an economy to avoid the structural changes necessary for
sustaining growth, such as investment in the training and education of its own workforce. It must
be questioned, however, whether this is a sensible or a sustainable long-term strategy.
The one area where immigration does offer an unambiguous economic gain is where it supplies a
specific skill. The recent recruitment drives for IT specialists from India by the UK and German
governments are good examples.
Europe, however, is a labor market of such size that localized skill shortages should normally be
capable of being met within the EU. The fact that it can't do so suggests a serious structural
problem in the European economy that governments ought to be addressing -- rather than simply
relying on the short-term expedient of bringing in skilled immigrant workers from abroad.
Unemployment, health concerns and language issues among immigrants can also place economic
burdens on the host country.
Although economic considerations dominate much of the debate about immigration, its social
and political implications are equally significant.
Despite attempts in Germany to preserve the myth of temporary migrant communities, the
experience across most of Europe is of large permanent immigrant communities that receive
equal political rights as the indigenous population.
Where these communities are substantial and homogenous, they will increasingly make their
influence felt in the political system. They may, for instance, influence the host state's foreign
policy towards the immigrants' home countries.
The introduction of heterogeneous religious and cultural values may also make it more difficult
to maintain a political consensus in Europe. Although politics is the business of the
reconciliation of conflicting interests, these conflicts are likely to become more acute in diverse
societies.
Communities place considerable value upon their shared culture. They may regard the demands
of multiculturalism as too high a price to pay for any economic gain.
Stephen Dearden is an immigration specialist at Manchester Metropolitan University in
Manchester, England.