Select Committee on International Development Uncorrected Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Anti-Slavery International

1.  INTRODUCTION

  1.1  Anti-Slavery International was set up in 1839 and is the oldest international human rights organisation in the world. Today Anti-Slavery International works to eradicate all contemporary forms of slavery through research, awareness raising and advocacy.

  1.2  In recent years we have done a considerable amount of work related to trafficking in human beings. Our most recent research, The migration-trafficking nexus, which will be published in November 2003, considers the link between trafficking, smuggling and migration. It reviews current trends in migration and considers how changes in migration policy could reduce irregular and exploitative migration and boost development in countries of origin. Some of the findings and recommendations from the report are highlighted below.

2.  AN OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

  2.1  According to International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates, there are 120 million migrant workers and family members in the world today. There are three features of modern migration which are particularly worth highlighting:

    (a)  Labour migration is not simply from developing to developed countries. Some 60% of migrant flows are between developing countries.[8]

    (b)  Women now constitute 50% of migrants in the world and in some areas they make up much larger percentages of the total migrants. For example, in the Philippines women made up 70% of migrant workers abroad in 2000.[9]

    (c)  The number of migrant workers has dramatically increased in recent years. According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the total number of people residing outside their country of origin has increased significantly between 1985 and 2000 from 105 million to 175 million.[10] This represents a 67% increase at a time when the total world population only increased by 26%.

  2.2  There are several reasons for the growth in the number of migrant workers in recent years, which can be summarised into push and pull factors:

  2.3  Push factors

    (a)  Inadequate employment opportunities, combined with poor living conditions, including a lack of basic education and health provision.

    (b)  Political breakdown or economic dislocation which may be caused by conflict; environmental disaster, structural adjustment policies, mismanagement of the economy, etc. These may threaten an individual's ability to sustain themselves and their family directly or indirectly as such crises usually lead to higher unemployment, rising cost of living and fewer public services.

    (c)  Discrimination (gender, ethnic or caste), nepotism and/or corruption, which excludes people from employment or professional advancement.

    (d)  Family breakdown (particularly the sickness or death of one or both parents), which often compels remaining family members to send the children away from their homes to work and/or have better opportunities.

  2.4  Pull factors

    (a)  Fewer constraints on travel (eg less restrictions on freedom of movement; cheaper and faster travel opportunities; easier access to passports; development in some countries or regions gives people the opportunity to migrate; etc).

    (b)  Higher salaries and standard of living abroad; greater job mobility and opportunities for professional advancement; and more options for acquiring new skills and education.

    (c)  Established migration routes and communities in other countries and a demand for migrant workers, along with the active presence of recruitment agents or contacts willing to facilitate jobs and travel.

    (d)  High expectations of opportunities in other countries boosted by global media and internet access.

Push and pull factors in operation in Mexico-US migration

  2.5  The migration of Mexicans to the US is hugely important to both economies. The Mexican community contributes some US$82.1 billion a year to US gross domestic product and nearly US$9 billion was sent back to Mexico by Mexican nationals or persons of Mexican origin in 2001 alone.[11]

  2.6  These figures do not take into account the irregular migration of Mexicans to the US. More than 90% of US "permanent" visas for employment based immigration are targeted at well educated and skilled immigrants and their families. This means there are insufficient avenues for regular migration to fill posts for less skilled jobs, despite a strong demand for these workers in the US. Consequently, many migrants try to cross the border illegally in search of work and it is estimated that some 4,000 irregular migrants successfully enter the US every day.[12]

  2.7  The risks of irregular migration are significant. Between 1998 and 2001, more than 1,500 migrants died while trying to cross the border. Some 1.5 million migrants each year are arrested on the US-Mexican border and forced to return home.[13] Others may make it into the US only to find themselves compelled to work as forced labourers or in situations of severe exploitation.

  2.8  Despite these very substantial dangers, there is no shortage of migrants willing to risk their savings and their lives in the search for work in the US. The explanation for this can be found in the fact that on average an undocumented Mexican migrant worker in the United States will find a job within two weeks of arriving.[14] Furthermore, Mexican migrants earn around nine times as much in the US as they did in their last job in Mexico.[15] Clearly any immigration policy which ignores the domestic demand for migrant workers, in whatever sector of the economy, is simply encouraging irregular migration and making migrant workers more vulnerable to exploitation by unscrupulous employers, smugglers and traffickers.

  2.9  The growing inequality of wealth within and between countries is increasing both the push and pull factors and leading more people to make the decision to migrate. Yet governments in developed countries are generally reluctant to publicly recognise their dependency on both skilled and unskilled migrant labour. Instead of tackling xenophobic reactions to the issue of migration, many government have sought political advantage by promoting more restrictive immigration policies. Such policies only reduce the opportunities for regular migration, thereby providing greater opportunities for traffickers and smugglers to operate.

3.  THE INCREASING DEMAND FOR MIGRANT WORKERS IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES

  3.1  Low fertility rates and longer life expectancy means that most developed countries have an ageing population. This will lead to labour shortages, skills shortages and an increased tax burden on the working population in order to support and provide social benefits to the wider population. Old age dependency ratios, already at breaking point in many OECD countries at a ratio of five to one, will fall to three to over the next 15 years.[16] The proportion of adults over 60 in high income countries is expected to increase from 8% to 19% by 2050, while the number of children will drop by one third.[17]

  3.2  Thus without mass immigration, the working age population (between 15 and 65) in Western Europe is projected to fall by 8.5% (22.1 million) between 2000 and 2025 and by 37.2% (96.6 million) by 2050. The situation is similar in Central and Eastern Europe, where the working age population is projected to decline by 9.2% (eight million) between 2000 and 2025 and by 30.9% (27 million) by 2050.[18]

  3.3  Even if European governments rigorously promote policies to put more people into the job market (eg discouraging early retirement or improving child care facilities) this will not change the fact that their economies will become increasing dependent on migrant workers in the coming years. In order to stabilise the size of the working population in the 15 EU member states, there needs to be a net inflow of some 68 million foreign workers and professionals between 2003 and 2050.[19]

  3.4  The demand for migrant workers will be filled by irregular migration unless policy makers recognise that it is in their national interest to facilitate and manage this process. Countries of destination benefit from the contribution migrants make to the economy through their work, their innovation and their tax contributions. If channels for regular migration are opened up, migrants would not have to put themselves in the hands of smugglers and traffickers and would also be in a better position to defend their labour rights in the receiving country. Governments in countries of origin could also better manage the migration process in order to make sure it contributes to, rather than undermines, their own country's economic and social development.

4.  THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES OF MIGRATION

  4.1  Uncontrolled migration can have a negative impact on developing countries, particularly those that already have significant problems in terms of education, adult literacy, nutrition and child mortality. These countries can ill afford to lose their most talented professionals to satisfy recruitment shortages in developed countries and must try to ensure that migration is planned and contributes to sustainable development.

  4.2  Jointly developed migration programmes between countries of origin and destination can maximise the positive impact of migration on development while limiting depletion of skilled labour in countries of origin ("brain drain"). Such programmes could encourage migration that is short term and in which migrants return to the country of origin. They may also include training to enhance the migrants' skills base while abroad and to facilitate the sharing of information, contacts and expertise with local staff when they return. They may also contain agreements on how to maximise the impact of remittances in order to promote long term development in the country of origin.

5.  REMITTANCES

  5.1  The total value of official remittances doubled between 1988 and 1999. According to the World Bank, official remittances further increased from $60 billion to $80 billion between 1998 and 2002.[20] Unofficial remittances, which are sent via private courier systems, friends or relatives, are likely to be two or three times the official figure.[21]

  5.2  Remittances account for substantial amounts of a state's income and therefore have an important impact on national economies. In Benin, remittances averaged 4.5% of the gross domestic product (GDP) between 1980 and 1999[22]and in the Dominican Republic and Honduras they exceed 7% of GDP. In Nicaragua and Yemen remittances make up more than 16% of GDP and in Lesotho the figure rises to 26.5%.[23]

  5.3  Remittances can narrow the trade gap, increase foreign currency reserves, facilitate debt servicing, reduce poverty and inequalities in wealth and support sustainable development. In low income countries, remittances are, on average, larger than overseas development assistance. Over the last 20 years, annual official remittances to several African countries, including Morocco, Nigeria and Tunisia, have been worth more than double the overseas development assistance these countries have received.[24] In El Salvador, remittances accounted for more than 80% of the total financial inflows in 2000, with overseas development assistance and foreign direct investment accounting for less than 20% combined.[25]

  5.4  Individual families also receive significant benefits from remittances, which often make up 50% of the household income. In many Latin American countries remittances increase the average per capita income by between 7% and 14%.[26] This money may be used to cover expenditure on food or other essentials such as medicine. Alternatively it might be spent on locally produced goods and services thereby stimulating demand and having a multiplier effect throughout the community, particularly in rural areas.

  5.5  The additional income provided by remittances may allow families to send their children to school rather than to work or it may be used to cover further education or training. Remittances may also be invested in starting or developing businesses or be deposited in savings accounts in local banks.

  5.6  Clearly, remittances are already an extremely important source of foreign income for many national economies. However, within the context of the increased demand for migrant workers, it is important to try and ensure that more remittances go back to the country and people that need them and that their potential to promote sustained development is fully harnessed. Addressing the following issues will help to facilitate this:

    (a)  Migrants need to have a regular immigration status in the countries in which they are working, otherwise they will be subject to exploitation which will substantially reduce their earnings and consequently their ability to send home remittances. Migrants with regular status are also subject to exploitation and measures need to be taken to ensure that their rights are fully protected in law and in practice (eg through legislative measures, information prior to migration regarding their rights, unionisation, etc).

    (b)  Migrants need to be able to access banks in their country of residence which will offer them the facility to send money home through official channels at very low costs. This would remove the need for migrants to use private money transfer firms, which often charge extremely high transfer fees. In Central and South America these fees are normally around 13% and often exceeds 20%.[27]

    (c)  Migrants could be encouraged to keep some or all of their saving in their country of origin rather than in foreign savings accounts. For this to take place migrants will have to be confident that the financial sector in their home country is efficient, trustworthy and that their savings will not be at risk. If these conditions can be guaranteed, migrants may accept lower rates of interest on their savings because of a loyalty to their country of origin.

    (d)  Programmes need to be developed by governments which encourage the use of remittances in investment and development projects. For example, further reductions on money transfer fees could be offered to migrants if they open savings accounts in country of origin. Governments in both countries of origin and of destination could also commit to financing development projects as a proportion of official remittances.

    (e)  Governments need to engage directly with migrants and their communities to listen to their concerns, help solve their problems and make them partners in the process of developing policies around migration. Migrants should never be compelled to accept any of the measures outlined above.

  5.7  Policies designed to maximise the development impact of remittances:

Mexico

  5.8  The Mexican Government introduced a "three plus one" programme under which the federal, state and municipal governments provide one dollar each to complement each dollar of remittances invested by a migrant's home town association in their community. This type of programme encourages migrants to send money home because the matching funds provided by different levels of government represent a significant injection of resources into their local communities.

Senegal

  5.9  By offering a special transfer scheme to Senegal through the Banque de l'Habitat du Senegal in Paris, official remittances from France increased dramatically. In 1999, more than US$24 million was officially transferred to Senegal via this scheme, 26% of the total official remittances to the country in that year.[28]

6.  MIGRANTS' RIGHTS NEED TO BE PROTECTED

  6.1  Despite the many opportunities presented by the migration process to all states involved, most countries still refuse to acknowledge the real extent to which they rely on migrant workers or guarantee the rights of migrant workers, as set out in various international labour and human rights instruments.

  6.2  Irregular migrants are obviously most at risk of being subjected to forced labour and exploitation, but regular migrants are also routinely denied both their human and labour rights.

  6.3  The need to protect the rights of both regular and irregular migrants has been recognised in international standards like ILO Convention No 143 on Migrant Workers, 1975 and the UN Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families, 1990.

  6.4  However, these standards have received a very low number of ratifications—only 22 states have ratified the 1990 UN Convention to date and all of these are sending countries. There needs to be a concerted effort to ensure that both sending and receiving countries ratify the 1990 UN Convention on migrant workers. This will help ensure equality of treatment and opportunity for migrant workers as well as the protection of their basic human rights.

7.  CONCLUSIONS

  7.1  Growing inequalities of wealth between and within countries and an increasing, and often unacknowledged, demand for migrant workers in both developed and developing countries are fuelling migration. Many governments have reacted to this by mounting campaigns which seek to evoke fear in potential migrants and dissuade them from travelling abroad, and by implementing more restrictive immigration policies. This response is unlikely to deter migrants who are seeking work abroad and is likely to increase the profitability of trafficking and smuggling by reducing regular routes for migration.

  7.2  Irregular migration undermines governments' efforts to manage the migration process and to maximise the potential of migration to help promote sustained economic and social development. However, it should be stressed that both regular and irregular migrants are subjected to trafficking, forced labour and other serious forms of exploitation and discrimination. It is therefore essential that migration takes place within a system which is transparent, standards-based and managed for the benefit of the migrants themselves as well as sending and receiving countries.

8.  RECOMMENDATIONS

  8.1  All states should sign and ratify the United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families, 1990.

  8.2  Frameworks for planned migration should be developed in consultation with migrants, trade unions and employers so that they benefit of sending and receiving countries, as well as the migrants themselves.

  8.3  There needs to be a clear recognition of the increasing demand for migrant workers in developed countries and the promotion of policies which facilitate regular migration and the integration and acceptance of migrants in the country of destination. Such policies must be consistent with recommendations 8.1 and 8.2 above.

  8.4  Measures need to be taken to ensure that migrants' rights are fully protected in law and in practice (eg through legislative measures, information prior to migration regarding their rights, unionisation, etc).

  8.5  Migrants need to be able to access banks in their country of residence which will offer them the facility to send money home through official channels at very low costs, thereby removing the need to use private money transfer firms which charge high transfer fees.

  8.6  Programmes need to be developed by governments which encourage the use of remittances in investment and development projects and seek to ensure that remittances benefit the wider community and not just the immediate family of the migrant. For example, further reductions on money transfer fees could be offered to migrants if they open savings accounts in country of origin. Governments in both countries of origin and of destination could also commit to financing development projects as a proportion of official remittances.

November 2003




8   International Labour Organization, Facts on Migrant Labour, 2003. Back

9   9258002002ternational Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, Geneva, 2003, p 7. Back

10   This figure includes migrant workers, permanent immigrants, refugees and displaced persons, but does not include irregular migrants. International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit, p 5. Back

11   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 148. Back

12   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 150. Back

13   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 31 and p 60. Back

14   P Taran and G Moreno-Fontes Chammartin, Getting at the Roots: Stopping Exploitation of Migrant Workers by Organised Crime, Perspectives on Labour Migration Vol IE, ILO Geneva, 2003, p 5. Quoted in ILO Trafficking in Human Beings, New Approaches to the Problem, Geneva 2003, p 5. Back

15   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 66. Back

16   There are 32 developed states in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), International Organisation for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit, p 66. Back

17   United Nations Populations Division 2002, World Population Ageing 1950-2050, New York. Quoted in Brunson McKinley, Director General of the IOM, International Migration and Development-The Potential for a Win-Win-Situation, presentation at G77 Panel for Migration and Development, New York, 20 June 2003, p 7. Back

18   The only exceptions to this in European countries are Ireland and Albania. UN Population Division. Quoted in International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit, p 244. Back

19   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 245. Back

20   World Bank, Global Development Finance, April 2003. Quoted in Human Rights Watch, Letter to World Bank President James Wolfensohn, 18 September 2003. Back

21   Brunson McKinley, Director General of the IOM, International Migration and Development-The Potential for a Win-Win-Situation, presentation at G77 Panel for Migration and Development, New York, 20 June 2003, p 9. Back

22   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit. p 227. Back

23   Brunson McKinley, Director General of the IOM, International Migration and Development-The Potential for a Win-Win-Situation, op. cit, p 9. Back

24   IOM, Migration Policy Issues, Facts and Figures on International Migration, No 2 March 2003, p 2. Back

25   Brunson McKinley, Director General of the IOM, Migrants' Remittances in the Americas, paper delivered during the VIII Regional Conference on Migration in Cancun, Mexico, 29-30 May 2003, p 5. Back

26   Brunson McKinley, Director General of the IOM, International Migration and Development-The Potential for a Win-Win-Situation, op cit, pp 5 and 8. Back

27   De la Grarza and Lowell, Sending Money Home: Hispanic Remittances and Community Development, Rowman and Littlefield, Oxford, 2002. Quoted in Brunson Mckinley, Migrants' Remittance in the Americas, op cit, p 6. Transfer costs of remittances to Nicaragua reached 25% of the money transferred. Back

28   International Organization for Migration, World Migration 2003, op cit, p 230. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 29 January 2004