Migrant s and free movement in Hungary

1. Migrants and free movement in Hungary J.Tóth University of Szeged - HAS September 2006

2. 1 Mobility • According to Dublin Foundation’s fresh survey on migration (14 June 2006) • 32 % of American citizens live in other state in which s/he was born • 21% of European nationals have ever lived in another state or region but its rate is sharply differing from countries to countries and regions

3. Mobility rate The average of 21% is shared • E.g.40% of working age population in Scandinavian countries has ever lived in another country or region • 30% in Ireland and UK • 15% in Mediterranien Member States • 10% in new CEE Member States

4. 4.7% of population intends to migrate in next 5 years: Denmark, Sweden, Finnland and Ireland 2.6% in other old Member States in average 1-2% of population intends to migrate in next 5 years: Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia 7-9% in Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia Migration potential (Dublin Foundation)

5. Hungary • Migration rate and potential has been low and no significant changes in acceding process and after enlargement • Regional differences in rate and potential exist • Labour (motivated) migration to Hungary has come from adjacent states in great extent (third country nationals)

6. 2 Categoriesby law • National provisions on migrant labourers shall be implemented in general (non-liberal MS, third country nationals) • Economic test on needs is not necessary in labour authorisation • Labour permit is not necessary (nationals from liberalized MS, preferences for third country nationals) • Green card holders (under the 12 month rule)

7. Categories 5. Registration of employed migrants is required 6. Service providers 7. Family members 8. Visa holders (e.g. student, researcher, entrepreneur) 9. Protection seekers, refugees On the base of • Accession Treaty (Annex X) and EEA Treaty • Bilateral agreements • Reciprocity law • National regulation on labour authorisation (Act, Ministerial Decree, preferencial laws on refugees, long-term migrants, students) • Act on Aliens and its executive rules • Asylum law

8. Issues labour permits From them are EEA nationals Registered EU nationals Green card holders Family members Seasonal workers Students ( over 18) Refugees 46 329 (Romania, Ukraine, Serbia-M.) 2042 15 000 – 18 000 331 – 509 100 2500 13 600 100 3 Statistics (2005)

9. Statistics (2005) Locality of foreign labourers • 44% in Budapest • 18.4% in the agglomeration of the capital • 18.2% in the North (towards Slovakia) • 4.6% in the West (towards Austria) • 4.8% in other parts of the country

10. Statistics (2005) Qualification Registered EU citizens (Slovaks, Polish) • 17.6% unskilled • 4% graduated • 1.7% graduated self-employment EU citizens as labour permit holders • 2% unskilled • 20% graduated • 23% graduated self-employment

11. Issued residence permits for EEA citizens Issued visa for stay Issued residence permit for third country nationals Issued settlement permits naturalisation 13 058 30 711 46 666 5 000 10 500 Statistics (2005)

12. 4.1. Third country nationals • They form the majority of migrants (90-95%) • They face • Entry screening (visa, ban, refusal: e.g. visa refusal rate is 2-38%, requirement for material cover is 1000 HUF/person/entry (4 €) • Residence screening (permit based on visa, health checking, registered address – long term residents’ directive is not transposed) • Expulsion • Labour authorisation (a) economic need test (b) exclusion from certain employment (c) yearly prolongation of permit (d) there is no dialogue with social partners, chambers • No accession to unemployment allowances • Equality • In labour law • In social insurance • In taxation (e.g. contribution to unemployment fund) • In public education

13. 4.2.Visa Concerning the direct impact of the visa introduction on the traveling habits of the Ukrainians: the statistics may prove the number of the Ukrainian citizens traveling to Hungary significantly decreased between 2002 and 2005, however it cannot be proven that the introduction of the obligatory short-term visa is the ultimate reason for the decline while after 2004 their number started to increase. 2002: 2600 2004: 2300 2003: 2500 2005: 2400

14. Visa In case of the visitors from Serbia-Montenegro it can be seen from the statistics that after a slight decrease between 2002 and 2004, the number of travelers started to decrease in 2005.

15. Visa in practice The field-research carried out in the summer of 2006 in Vojvodina and Trans-Carpathia (Ukraine) shows: • the obligatory short-term visa is a kind of inconvenience for the applicants, who got used to it during the last 2,5 years. It is clearly stated by the consulates that visas are issued according to fairly liberal criteria, and they work as some sort of preparation for the Schengen regime. • the visa-issuing system of the consulates seems to work properly and is widely accepted by the applicants. • It is obvious for all of the actors that people living in the area near the border, mainly travel because of economical reasons (including smuggling of cigarette), the cultural ties play a significantly weaker role. • The institutions, as the Border Guards and the consulates are under preparation for the Schengen accession, • Local population has no practically information on the changes in future, the dominant feeling in connection with Schengen among the people is fear and doubtfulness. The lack of information on the Schengen system might cause enormous problems, which can only be prevented if effective information campaign is started right away.

16. 5 EU nationals • Directive on EU citizens’ and family members’ movement (2004) is not transposed into national regulation (Alien Act & executive decrees shall be fundamentally changed or a separate Act must be prepared) • No specific regulation on • integration (b) family members • HIV as public health risk is targeted • workers performing service contract • Turkish employees • students (social benefit) • Non-discrimination rules (Directives 2000/43/EC, 2000/78/EC) are not properly transposed • Exclusion from public sector (jobs in the formal sphere of public power means discrimination on the base of nationality in ~10 positions)

17. EU nationals • Language requirement (civil servants, certain occupations) undefined • Athletes’ movement is blocked by not harmonised, internal racing rules adopted by national sport associations (league, federation) • No impacts of ECJ on legal practice but rather on codification (although directive on working time – law suit at court) • Preference in naturalisation and tolerated multiple citizenship

18. Added values to labour migration (intervention at the EU level is of utmost importance): Democraphic decline (pension scheme, labour shortage) Reduction of irregular entry&stay&work Tackling the shadow economy and undeclared work (7-16% of the EU’s GDP) Equal and fair treatment of migrant workers, stable status Green Book on accession for employment Liberalised labour market as much as possible during the transition period after accession (free employment for out-migrants) Keeping up the illiberal labour market system in Hungary during in eastward enlargement, too Kin-state and kin-minority relations even in eastward accession Preparatory to the Schengen acquis Stopping the brain drain 6 EU approach v. Hungarian approach