CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Migration and development: looking for development
gains
Understanding migration and development
1. Policies
aimed at delivering development and poverty reduction should not
start from the assumption that migration is a rare occurrence,
a south-north phenomenon, or a one-off event. Policies need to
be based on an understanding of the multi-faceted nature of migration,
including temporary, circular and seasonal migration, within and
between developing countries, as well as from south to north.
(Paragraph 16)
2. Given the heightened
vulnerability of female migrants to trafficking and exploitation,
it is essential that policy is not based on the assumption that
migrants are male. Policy-makers must pay careful attention to
the experiences and concerns of female migrants to ensure that
their migration is beneficial. (Paragraph 17)
3. Understanding migration
as part of the range of poor people's livelihood options has important
implications for policy. Migration and migrants should not be
seen as problems to be dealt with. Migration presents both challenges
and opportunities. Migrants are people trying to improve their
lives and must be treated accordingly. (Paragraph 21)
4. As the poorest
do not migrate, or do not migrate far, it cannot be assumed that
policies which help migrants will also help the poor. […]
We must not lose sight of the main question: what is the impact
of migration on those left behind in developing countries? A second
implication which poses a dilemma for those who would like migration
management to reduce migration, is that developed countries cannot
expect to solve their immigration problems by reducing poverty
in developing countries. Indeed the migration hump suggests that
if we are successful in reducing poverty, we should expect increased
out-migration from developing countries. But there may be aspects
of development - democracy, good governance, gender equality -
which developed countries might promote, and which might have
the effect of reducing the push factors that encourage migration,
leading to a situation where migration is an informed choice rather
than a desperate option. Improving governance is of the utmost
importance; better governance would make some migrants less desperate
to leave, and - by encouraging migrants to remit and perhaps to
return - would also make that migration which does take place
more development-friendly. This is primarily the responsibility
of developing country governments. (Paragraph 25)
Designing policy: Identifying development wins
5. Policy
should not be designed on the basis of hunches and anecdotes.
If development policies are to be well-designed, on the basis
of a sound understanding of the causes and consequences of migration
and development, then the evidence-base urgently needs improving.
In particular, better data on internal migration is needed. (Paragraph
34)
6. The International
Organization for Migration (IOM) suggests that the Government
produce a short annual report on migration to the UK from developing
countries. By providing information about who is coming to the
UK, where they come from, what they do in the UK, to what extent
they are remitting, and whether and when they return to their
countries of origin, and by outlining what the Government is doing
to make migration more development-friendly, such a report could
do much to raise awareness about the linkages between migration
and development. We support this proposal and recommend that the
Government takes it up. (Paragraph 35)
Migration journeys: from departure to return
Leaving and being left behind
7. It
is unfair, inefficient and incoherent for developed countries
to provide aid to help developing countries to make progress towards
the Millennium Development Goals on health and education, whilst
helping themselves to the nurses, doctors and teachers who have
been trained in, and at the expense of, developing countries.
(Paragraph 39)
8. As regards the
regulation of the recruitment of healthcare professionals by the
UK, several issues need clarifying. How effective has the NHS
Code of Practice been? What will the Government do to enforce
the Code of Practice or to encourage NHS employers to adhere to
it? Where does passive recruitment end, and active recruitment
begin? Why is there not a Code of Practice for Northern Ireland,
Scotland and Wales? And perhaps most importantly, how significant
a loophole is the fact that the Code does not apply to the private
sector; specifically, how many health-workers from developing
countries are employed in the private and public sectors, and
how many of those employed in the public sector were initially
recruited for the private sector? (Paragraph 44)
9. We were pleased
to read about the Government's plans to tighten up the Code of
Practice, and look forward to seeing the detail of these proposals.
They must be effective, and their effectiveness must be proven.
James Buchan reported to us that the NHS cannot say how many nurses
from developing countries it employs. He described this as "unfortunate".
We need not be so restrained. Data should be collected on the
number of doctors and nurses born and trained in developing countries
who are employed by the NHS. This is a gaping hole in the evidence-base
for policies relating to migration and development. We also recommend
that UK-based employers be required to use only recruitment agencies
which are registered in the countries from which they are recruiting.
In this way developing country governments might have some leverage
over recruitment agencies, or at the very least have some opportunity
to plan for the impacts of recruitment. (Paragraph 45)
10. The UK Government
is a member of the Working Group which has developed the Commonwealth's
Draft Protocol on the Recruitment of Teachers; we trust that this
is a sign of its commitment. The UK is not a signatory to Commonwealth's
Code of Practice for the International Recruitment of Health Workers.
By its support the UK could play an important role in improving
the multilateral regulation of recruitment. We invite the Government
to explain its position. (Paragraph 46)
11. If the NHS is
to depend on overseas workers, then we recommend that the Government
considers designing schemes to train nurses in developing countries
for temporary employment for a specified number of years in the
NHS, on the understanding that they would then return to their
home country. Such schemes should be designed with the input of
developing countries, migrants' organisations and employers. The
nurses would have an opportunity to earn more and to acquire skills.
The UK would receive a temporary influx of staff for its health
service. The developing country would see an increase in its skills
base. Such a scheme would need careful design, not least to ensure
that migrants did return to their home countries. But the potential
development benefits, and the fact that this would be a more cost-effective
way of training nurses, no matter where they ended up working,
make it worthy of serious consideration. The costs of training
nurses should not be borne by countries which do not benefit from
their training. (Paragraph 48)
12. We acknowledge
that "just training yet more nurses" as Hilary Benn
put it, will not in itself reduce the brain-drain, although it
may help to address what appears to be a global shortage of nurses.
However, in combination with efforts to address the push factors,
such an approach has considerable potential to make migration
work better - more fairly, and more cost-effectively - for development
and poverty reduction. (Paragraph 49)
Travelling, arriving and living
13. One
way of reducing illegal migration might be to open up more transparent
and efficient channels for legal migration. Indeed, this is what
the UK has been doing in recent years, through measures such as
reform of the seasonal agricultural workers scheme and the introduction
of sector-based short-term work schemes for hospitality and food
manufacturing workers. Migration, especially legal migration,
can be of benefit to the UK, migrants, and their home countries.
But whilst opening up channels for legal migration may undercut
traffickers and smugglers, it will not satisfy the latent demand
for migration. Migration still needs to be managed, and illegal
migration tackled. (Paragraph 52)
14. The UK Government,
and governments of other developed countries, need to address
the issue of sex tourism which fuels the exploitation of women
and children in south-east Asia particularly, and ensure that
existing legislation protecting the rights of migrant workers
is vigorously enforced. (Paragraph 53)
15. Governments, including
the UK Government, need to ensure that they do not, in their enthusiasm
to control migration - prevent refugees from gaining asylum. And
if public confidence in a government's ability to control migration
is to be maintained, asylum claims need to be processed fairly
and quickly. If this is not achieved, public support for economic
migration will disappear, and with it the potential development
gains. (Paragraph 56)
16. A reader of the
British press might assume that the UK is in the front-line of
dealing with refugees. Such a view is incorrect and should not
be allowed to mis-inform debates about migration. (Paragraph 59)
17. It is essential
that the UK contributes its fair share to international humanitarian
assistance. There is also a need for both donors and developing
countries - including government at national and local levels
- to take into account the needs of refugees, and the implications
for policy, in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. (Paragraph 60)
18. Host countries
need to ensure that migrants living within their borders are able
to live productive lives, enjoy adequate access to services, welfare
services, and have their rights protected. We were pleased to
hear that DFID is funding innovative rural livelihoods programmes
in India which, by including support to migrants, are making a
big difference to migrants' lives. […] We applaud such creative
efforts to improve the lives of migrants, which will in turn help
to make migration work better for development and poverty reduction.
We trust that mechanisms will be put in place to ensure that policy-makers
elsewhere can learn from these projects. (Paragraph 62)
19. We invite the
Government to outline what it does to help migrants' integration
in the UK, and to consider Oxfam's recommendation of a comprehensive
support and education system. Similarly, where appropriate, the
Government should encourage and help its developing country partners
to establish similar schemes. (Paragraph 64)
20. Oxfam have told
us that Home Office research disproves the idea that giving asylum
seekers the right to work would increase the attractiveness of
the UK to potential refugees and asylum seekers. We would welcome
clarification of the Government's views. (Paragraph 65)
21. Governments should
do their utmost to protect migrants' rights - through legislation
and its enforcement, and through the provision of information
- to ensure that they are not subject to exploitation by employers,
gangmasters and employment agencies. We welcome the swift progress
of the Gangmasters (Licensing) Bill through Parliament; once this
Bill becomes law it will be an important step in preventing the
exploitation of workers, including migrant workers, by gangmasters.
(Paragraph 65)
22. We invite the
Government to explain why it has not ratified on the UN Convention
and to provide us with the evidence to support the assumption
that there is a trade-off between migrants' rights and immigration
control. We would also like to know how the Government
came to the conclusion that it had struck the right balance; that
is, how was the value of migrants' rights and the value of immigration
control assessed? (Paragraph 68)
23. If there were a multilateral commitment
on the part of all migrant-receiving countries to ratify the Convention,
and to protect migrants' rights accordingly, then no one country
would risk being seen as a soft-touch as a result of its ratification.(Paragraph
69)
Returning, reintegrating and circulating
24. There
are temporary migration schemes that work, and schemes that do
not work. What is not in doubt is that there is a demand for workers
in developed countries such as the UK, and demand for employment
from people in developing countries. There is a need to examine
the evidence to learn the lessons and to understand what can be
done to make temporary migration and assisted voluntary return
schemes work and deliver development benefits. The UK Government,
working with the IOM and other international organisations, should
ensure that this challenge is taken up. (Paragraph 74)
25. DFID, and through
DFID, other development stakeholders - including migrants' organisations
and labour ministries in key migrant-sending countries - should
be consulted when the UK Government is designing and revising
temporary migration schemes. If countries with a Department or
Ministry concerned with the welfare of their overseas workers
were given priority in such consultations, developing country
governments might be encouraged to do more to protect their overseas
workers. The input of development stakeholders would make the
schemes work better for the UK and deliver more benefits to developing
countries. On 27 April 2004 the Prime Minister announced a wholesale
review of the UK's immigration schemes; DFID must be fully involved
in this review so that development objectives are fully considered.
(Paragraph 76)
26. Well-regulated
recruitment agencies - offering transparent fee structures, involving
migrant workers' associations, and rigorously enforcing minimum
wage and other health and safety conditions in the workplace -
could be given preferential access to legal immigration routes
into the UK, providing an incentive for, and a model of, good
practice. (Paragraph 77)
27. Temporary migration
can enable migrants to learn new skills, and in many cases it
can play a useful role in exposing migrants - as well as host
societies - to new ideas and ways of doing things, some of which
may be usefully continued or adopted after the migrant's return.
The experience of VSO volunteers and their "volunteer journeys"
may hold important lessons for efforts to improve the skills acquisition
element of temporary migration. (Paragraph 79)
28. Migrants could
be encouraged to return home by reimbursing them with a portion
of their unused National Insurance contributions once they had
left the UK. Given that migrants who leave will not be making
a claim on their contributions, we consider that there is some
sense of fairness in this suggestion. (Paragraph 80)
29. The Government
should consider seriously the idea of involving employment agencies
in making temporary migration schemes work, as well as the proposal
to reimburse National Insurance contributions. It should also
ensure that lessons are learnt and disseminated from the experience
of other countries such as Canada and the USA with making their
temporary migration schemes truly temporary. (Paragraph 81)
30. To ensure that
returning migrants have something to go back to, governments,
with the support of donors, need to:
- be serious about welcoming migrants back
- make progress with improving governance and tackling
corruption;
- ensure that pay structures and progression within
the civil service do not unfairly penalise migrants who have worked
elsewhere and may have acquired useful skills; and,
- help returning migrants to find suitable jobs,
or to set up their own businesses. (Paragraph 84.)
31. We were pleased
to hear that DFID and the EU are supporting programmes including
the IOM's Migration for Development in Africa and pilot schemes
in Ghana and Sierra Leone. It is only through learning from experience
that the best ways of facilitating sustainable return can be discovered.
(Paragraph 86)
32. If developing
countries are to benefit from the sustainable return of their
migrants, they need to pursue policies - better governance, less
bureaucracy, and economic growth - which will make migrants want
to return, and which will ensure that those migrants who have
returned have a sense that they, and their country, are moving
towards a brighter future. (Paragraph 87)
33. The UK Government
should explore the potential development benefits which might
be gained from more circular migration, and - alongside its developing
country partners - should examine the different ways in which
such circular migration might be encouraged. The Government should
also consider whether there is scope - in sectors such as health
where developing countries would benefit a great deal - to help
migrants to return home temporarily by offering leave of absence
from employment and other forms of assistance. (Paragraph 89)
34. DFID reported
that the UK's position on GATS Mode 4 is widely viewed as being
among the most progressive. The Government should make the UK's
policy stance on GATS Mode 4 clearer and explain what the UK is
doing to promote an agenda which will be to the mutual benefit
of the UK and developing countries. The Government should also
clarify its position on a simplified GATS visa. (Paragraph 93)
35. As is the case
with trade liberalisation more widely, developing countries could
secure benefits from liberalising south-south migration, perhaps
through the establishment of regional passports, and by making
it easier for skilled people from the north to offer their services
in developing countries. There is a pool of people in countries
such as the UK who are keen to employ their skills in developing
countries; developing countries should take advantage of this.
As regards south-south migration, we were interested to hear that
the European Commission is working with the African Union on migration
management in Africa. We would welcome further information about
this. (Paragraph 94)
36. We seek assurances
that the Government is pursuing a joined-up approach to its policy
on Somaliland. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office should clarify
its position on the issue of recognition, particularly if Somaliland
continues to govern itself in a responsible and democratic way,
while the other parts of Somalia continue as a failed state. We
would welcome a response from the Government on the measures it
has taken to assist the successful resettlement of those who have
been repatriated. (Paragraph 98)
Resource flows: Remittances and the role of the
diaspora
Remittances for poverty reduction?
37. We
recognise the difficulty of gathering reliable data on unofficial
remittances, and applaud the Government for its efforts to gather
information about remittance outflows from the UK. The Government
should encourage other European governments to do the same. In
the absence of such information, evidence-based policy on remittances
and on migration will remain an aspiration. (Paragraph 103)
38. Migrants and their
families have long been aware of the value of remittances. Greater
awareness on the part of governments and development agencies
is welcome. But if the potential of remittances is to be maximised,
then more needs to be done to understand remittances and their
use, to increase the flow of remittances and to make them work
better for poverty reduction. (Paragraph 106)
39. The UK could encourage
remittances through the provision of guarantees to back the issue
of bonds by developing country governments, by the use of tax
incentives such as treating person-to-person remittances as charitable
and therefore tax-deductible donations. For their part, migrants'
associations might wish to investigate acquiring charitable status,
or, a charitable arm. As a charity, donations channelled through
them would be tax-deductible. (Paragraph 107)
40. As with temporary
migration, so with remittances; there will be schemes which work
for poverty reduction and schemes which do not. Along with other
development agencies such as the World Bank, DFID needs to ensure
that lessons are learnt and best practice is disseminated widely.
DFID should also help its partner governments in developing countries
to assess whether and how they might encourage their migrant workers
to remit. The DFID-World Bank International Conference on Migrant
Remittances provided an excellent start, bringing together as
it did a wide range of stakeholders. Such activity needs to be
taken forward. (Paragraph 108)
41. If transactions
costs are to be reduced, then the market for remittance services
needs to work better so that service providers compete harder,
to offer better and cheaper services, to more informed customers.
(Paragraph 109)
42. The UK Government,
NGOs and the private sector can all play their part in driving
down the costs of remittances. Competition will help, but the
Government needs to encourage this process by raising awareness
about remittances, disseminating good practice and ensuring that
the market is transparent and well-regulated. Banks should not
be allowed to crowd out their competitors by excluding them from
access to banking services. In order to prevent the voice and
interests of powerful players dominating, we recommend that the
Government support the establishment of an Association of Independent
Money Transfer Companies. We also recommend that the Government
consider the merits of a code of practice to regulate banks' relationships
with independent transfer companies. Further, the Government might
encourage an NGO or consumers' organisation to compile a price-comparison
table - "Which remitter?" - showing the costs of transferring
remittances to a range of developing countries through different
firms. (Paragraph 112)
43. Hawala and other
informal funds transfer systems play a key role in facilitating
remittances. Governments need to ensure that such systems are
not abused by criminals, but should also ensure that regulatory
solutions are proportionate to the risks and sensitive to the
possible impacts on those who rely on remittances. We are pleased
that the UK Government - informed by DFID's analysis - appreciates
the need to strike a balance between tackling the financing of
terrorism, and ensuring the free-flow of remittances. The UK
Government was praised by our witnesses for its light-touch approach
to regulating the UK remittance sector. It should persuade its
EU partners to follow suit. (Paragraph 113)
44. As part of its
continuing dialogue with diaspora organisations, DFID should learn
from the diaspora's existing practices, and explore: what enthusiasm
there is for Government-involvement in establishing voluntary
schemes to channel remittances towards poverty reduction; what
ideas migrants have for the design of such schemes; and, how best
DFID might help. In addition, the UK Government, along with the
IOM or the World Bank, should ensure that lessons are learnt from
existing voluntary schemes and that best practice is widely shared.
(Paragraph 119)
45. The Government
should encourage innovative public-private-NGO partnerships which
aim to make remittances work better for poverty reduction, and
do what it can to make them a success. (Paragraph 120)
46. We were pleased
to hear that there is a team within DFID's policy division looking
at financial sector reform and banking systems, particularly in
rural areas, and the linkages with remittance issues, and look
forward to seeing the fruits of this team's work. (Paragraph 121)
47. The best way of
making remittances work for poverty reduction is to ensure that
there is an investment climate and an infrastructure which enables
their productive use. Key factors include: stable exchange rates,
low inflation, the absence of excessive bureaucracy and corruption,
reliable power supplies, decent roads and other communications.
(Paragraph 122)
48. Donors and the
international community have a role to play in helping to remove
international and structural obstacles to poor countries' development,
and in supporting developing countries to improve their infrastructures
and to create good business environments. The primary responsibility
however lies with developing countries themselves, or if the government
itself is an obstacle, with the political process. (Paragraph
123)
Diaspora communities and development
49. In
calculating the costs and benefits of migration, and designing
policies to make migration work better for poverty reduction,
governments should not focus solely on factors which can be valued
in monetary terms. Migration can lead to political, social and
cultural change in the countries of origin - and indeed in host
societies - as people become aware that other ways of life, and
other ways of organising society and politics, are possible. (Paragraph
127)
50. Diasporas' views
are valuable and may help to deliver peace in their home countries,
but it would be a mistake to assume that communities in exile
are better able than people back home to represent their nations'
interests. (Paragraph 128)
51. We welcome the
Government's recognition of the importance of working with Black
and Minority Ethnic organisations, and look forward to seeing
more rapid progress in this area. The Africa Foundation for Development
called for DFID to report regularly on its engagement with diaspora
communities and particularly on what DFID is learning from the
dialogue; we support this suggestion. (Paragraph 132)
52. There are a range
of ways in which the Government and DFID might work more with
the diaspora:
- DFID might usefully include diaspora organisations
more systematically in consultations on draft Country Assistance
Plans, and in consultations on policy areas in relation to which
migrants' organisations may have valuable insights;
- DFID and other Departments including the Treasury
should explore with diaspora organisations the possibility of
developing schemes to enable migrants, if they so wish, to channel
remittances so that they have maximum impact on poverty;
- DFID and relevant Departments should examine,
alongside diaspora organisations, whether there are initiatives
they could take to encourage the temporary return of migrants
to their home countries;
- and, most simply, the Government should encourage
initiatives to create migrant associations, promote and publicise
their activities, and help them to work effectively. (Paragraph
133)
53. Diaspora organisations
must not be seen as marginal players in international development;
rather, the Government, DFID and mainstream NGOs should work harder
to involve them more fully. (Paragraph 134)
Managing migration for poverty reduction
Migration partnerships for poverty reduction
54. DFID
should ensure that its partner governments take account of migration
as a development issue and are aware of its potential to deliver
development benefits. Beyond this the UK should help partner governments
to consider their various options for managing migration, helping
them to design effective strategies, and providing support so
that they can implement these strategies. This should include,
but not be limited to, support for refugee-hosting countries.
(Paragraph 141)
55. PRSPs and Country
Assistance Strategies should not mention every single development
issue, but for countries where migration is important, DFID's
Country Assistance Strategies should outline what DFID will do
to help developing countries: to improve their data-gathering
and information management capacities; to identify specific ways
in which the costs and risks of migration might be minimised and
the benefits maximised; and, to provide a policy and governance
environment conducive to making migration development-friendly.
(Paragraph 143)
56. We applaud DFID
for the leading role it is playing in moving migration up the
international development agenda. The Government should consider
further what might be done at a multilateral level to manage migration
better, and particularly to make it work better for poverty reduction.
In addition we would like to be kept informed as to the involvement
of the UK Government in the Global Commission on International
Migration. This Commission provides an excellent opportunity to
promote a more positive and development-friendly agenda on migration;
the UK Government should be an active participant. (Paragraph
150)
Towards policy coherence for development
57. The
Government needs to make clear how the High Level Working Group
on Asylum and Migration imagines that aid and development strategies
might be employed in the battle to limit economic migration, and
what its assessments concluded. (Paragraph 160)
58. It is sensible
to support governments which are moving in the right direction,
improving governance and fighting poverty, but it would be a mistake
to make aid conditional on measures which aim to limit out-migration.
Withdrawing aid to countries which fail to limit out-migration
would simply plunge them further into poverty; threatening such
a withdrawal would force developing countries to spend scarce
resources on border controls rather than poverty reduction, would
undermine any notion of partnership, and would simply succeed
in pushing more migrants into the arms of smugglers and traffickers.
Development assistance or the threat of its withdrawal must never
be used as a tool for migration management. We trust that this
remains the Government's position. (Paragraph 162)
59. The Presidency
of the European Union in 2005 will provide the UK with an opportunity
to promote a positive agenda on migration which takes full account
of its development potential. We trust that the Government is
preparing now to take this opportunity. (Paragraph 163)
60. DFID has an important
role to play in the domestic context, helping the Government to
examine the development implications of its migration policies,
and working hard to ensure that development objectives are not
marginalised Immigration from developing countries has been increasing,
in absolute terms and in terms of its share of the whole. On this
basis alone, DFID must be fully involved in the formulation of
policies on migration. A clear statement of the objectives of
UK development policy in relation to migration will also be valuable;
this is something we expect to see from DFID by the end of 2004.
(Paragraph 166)
61. We invite the
Government to outline, in relation to migration initially: the
issue areas where Departments' objectives and policies overlap;
the nature of each of these overlaps; what scope there is for
increasing policy coherence in these areas; and finally, what
mechanisms are in place, and how they are being used, to achieve
greater policy coherence for development. (Paragraph 167)
| 
