Letter of 8 September 2015 from the State Secretary for Security and Justice

and the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation to the House of
Representatives on the European asylum issue

Introduction
The refugee situation is more acute than it has ever been. Huge numbers of people are seeking
safety, having fled war and extreme hardship. They are being joined by people looking for better
economic circumstances. In their attempts to reach Europe they use the services of ruthlessly
calculating people smugglers who earn money from other peoples misery and regard death
simply as corporate risk, even when young children drown before the eyes of the world. Europe
cannot offer all refugees shelter, but it does share the responsibility for refugees safety. We also
have a duty to hobble the efforts of people smugglers.

The EU member states cannot now afford to discuss which problem is more important: our
problem of how to deal among ourselves with the migrants who are already here, or our shared
problem of unsustainably high numbers flooding into Europe. A European solution can be
effective only if we tackle both problems simultaneously, as inseparable issues. The Dutch
government has been endeavouring to arrive at a common European approach to bring an end
to people smuggling and to the deaths by drowning and suffocation. We must fulfil our duty to
protect refugees with an approach to the problem that Europe can sustain in the longer term. In
this letter we wish to inform Parliament, also on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, of the
Netherlands input into the European decision-making process.
Redoubling efforts to tackle the European asylum issue
The European Union is under growing pressure from immigration, and the situation is unlikely to
improve in the near future. The reception and asylum system in the EU member states is rapidly
reaching its limits, or in some cases has already reached them. We must ensure the EU member
states can lastingly continue to offer protection and that free movement remains possible within
the Schengen area by arriving at joint solutions, some of which will be new to us.

EU member states are being affected in various ways by the current asylum problems. Though
all member states maintain that these can only be addressed jointly, in practice what we mainly
see is piecemeal solutions. Debate on these solutions and their relative merits is paralysing

AVT15/BZ116543

progress, and has done so for many years. There is no magic formula. Effective solutions are
possible only if we look at what everyone wants and find common ground.

Although in recent months some results have been achieved quite rapidly by European
standards the temporary mechanism for registration in hotspots and relocation of asylum
seekers arriving in Italy and Greece, for example in other cases implementation is slow or the
measures are simply inadequate, given the ever larger numbers of migrants reaching the
external borders who then travel on unchecked to other member states. The human suffering
this entails, and the risk of exploitation by people smugglers, even on EU territory, are greater
than ever. We must devise an approach that goes further than the current plans.

The core of this approach must lie in tackling the root causes, better reception facilities in the
region, an EU programme of resettlement, a fair distribution of responsibility for asylum seekers
and refugees within the EU based on solidarity, a joint system for the effective return of people
who are not granted a residence permit, and the dismantling of the people smugglers cynical
business model in order to reduce the flow of migrants into Europe and make it more
manageable.
Ultimate goal: UNHCR registration and reception in the region
Some of the people who are drowning at sea would have the right to protection if they survived
the journey. Others would have been sent back to where they came from. Criminal networks
earn a lot of money from these people, some of which ends up in the hands of other networks
that further undermine the stability of the region, thus perpetuating the flow of refugees and the
people smugglers customer base. We must break this vicious circle.

Refugees generally seek protection in the first safe country they reach. However, a lack of
resources means the capacity and quality of the reception facilities there are under great
pressure. The shortfall in Syria and the surrounding region has already reached 4.2 billion for
2015. The government has therefore decided to contribute another 110 million this year, over
and above previous contributions to reception in the region, partly in view of the forthcoming
winter months.

AVT15/BZ116543

At the same time, the reality is that after a time some refugees conclude that there are no
prospects for them and their families to build a new life in the region and decide to move on
elsewhere Europe in this case.

In order to put an end to this trend, and to the risks refugees face on their journey, Europe must
do more to improve prospects in the region of initial reception. Europe must help improve
security and protection, but we must also do more if we want to stop people moving on. This will
require a new approach to refugee reception in which the EU will have to take substantial
responsibility. A hopeless existence in improvised accommodation or refugee camps must make
way for more structural solutions in major transit countries in safe and properly equipped host
communities. Such semi-permanent facilities are necessary, but for various reasons this is a
sensitive issue, and complex to put into practice. It will therefore take considerable efforts and
the cooperation of the third countries in question, but these are conditions that the EU and its
member states can help create through assistance and direct economic investment in
infrastructure and business. This approach must be supported by redoubled efforts to promote
peace, security and the rule of law using the instruments available. The government will work out
further proposals over the coming period and reserve extra resources in the longer term for
reception in the Netherlands and in the region. The latter could be partially funded in the long
term by savings arising from reductions in the number of migrants travelling to the EU and
requesting asylum here.

We can tie in our efforts to support host communities in third countries with what is happening in
the region, because reception in the region is already being provided on a large scale. We must
not forget this. The numbers of people arriving in Europe are only a small percentage of the
refugee population in countries like Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and certain countries in Africa.
It is important that we show solidarity with these countries in protecting and caring for refugees.
We can do so by making investments as proposed above, which will also benefit local
populations, but that will not in itself be enough. We must combine strengthening reception in the
region with the option of resettling refugees in Europe as a safety valve for secure regional
reception facilities. International multipurpose centres, like those in Niger, could be scaled up in
collaboration with organisations like UNHCR and IOM and with the local authorities. A certain
degree of burden sharing is necessary in order to relieve the pressure on the region, and to
create support for the proposed structural changes in the reception model there.

AVT15/BZ116543

A joint EU resettlement programme therefore needs to be established, in which UNHCR would

recommend candidates after registration. The programme could be based on an agreed annual
quota for the entire EU, with each member state being allocated a binding number of
resettlement places based on an appropriate formula.

Once good arrangements have been made with third countries and safe reception and
resettlement is a realistic option, people who apply for asylum having reached the EU via other
routes will be assessed to establish their country of origin. The fundamental principle will
continue to be that people are offered protection. If they come from a part of the world with safe
reception and adequate procedures which take account of individuals specific background, such
as LGBT people, they will be sent back on the basis of agreements with those countries where
reception is available so that they can be protected there. Their application for asylum in Europe
can then be rejected, within the current international and European legal framework, on the
grounds that they are in a safe third country. This will be necessary to prevent people from
taking an alternative route and resorting to people smugglers. Applications from asylum seekers
from parts of the world where no safe reception centres are available will be taken into
consideration in Europe.

This system would discourage people from seeking illegal entry to the EU with the help of people
smugglers, as this would not lead to reception in the EU. It would simply be a longer, more
expensive and more risky way of obtaining protection in their own region. This would allow us to
offer refugees protection, dismantle the people smugglers cynical business model, and
eventually reduce the flow of migrants into Europe and make it more manageable, while
continuing to comply with our obligations under international and European law.
Interim phase: redistribution in the EU
It will not be possible to achieve the combined solution described above in the near future, but it
is an essential goal towards which the EU must work. European commitment to this solution is in
fact vital to the success of the interim phase. Reaching broad agreement on the end goal will
enable us to more effectively take interim steps towards it. An expansion of the hotspot
approach outside Europes borders and agreements between destination and transit countries
will be an inextricable part of this. In the interim phase we will have to continue to guarantee
refugees protection on EU territory. To cope with the current wave of migration, however, the EU
member states will have to agree on an equitable distribution not only of first arrivals of asylum
AVT15/BZ116543

seekers, but of all asylum applications. This will require further harmonisation of European
asylum policy. If people have a different chance of having their asylum application granted in
different member states, this will provide an abiding breeding ground for people smuggling.

In this interim phase we will have to continue implementing the measures set out in the
European Agenda on Migration agreed in May. This will chiefly require implementation of the
Common European Asylum System by all member states, with a strong supervisory role for the
European Commission, supported where necessary by further improvements to controls at
Europes external borders. Moreover, the equipping and expansion of the hotspots in Italy,
Greece and also Hungary must be taken in hand immediately. We must also collaborate more
closely with countries like Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia and Niger to tackle people smuggling, with
efforts focused among other things on border controls.

The current situation, in which a handful of member states shoulder a disproportionate burden
while others remain relatively unaffected, cannot be maintained. We must therefore discuss a
common European reception system. A system that responds only when a member state is in a
crisis situation, calling upon other member states to take more people, is not enough. It is almost
impossible to objectively define a crisis situation, and the current focus on first arrival is too
blinkered. Every member state now experiencing the pressure of migration has a different story
to tell. One country has a large number of first arrivals, but little in the way of reception services
or procedures because many of the migrants continue their journey unchecked without applying
for asylum. Another country has a large influx of people who have already been in another
member state but were not registered there and only submit an application in their preferred
country of destination. There are member states that receive large numbers of (futile) asylum
applications, while a large proportion of asylum seekers quickly abscond from reception centres
and depart for destinations unknown. And there are member states with large numbers of
applicants who have to be accommodated in the short term, and who, once granted a residence
permit, will stay for years, with all the costs and duty of care this entails for the country in
question.

The only solution is therefore an equitable distribution of all asylum applications submitted in the
EU in accordance with binding quotas per member state, determined on the basis of an
appropriate formula, taking into account each countrys absorption capacity. Immediate
registration in the country of arrival will be an essential part of this system. Since asylum seekers
AVT15/BZ116543

would be relocated under an exception to the current Dublin Regulation these member states
would not be penalised for complying with the existing obligation to register migrants in the first
country of arrival. Immediate registration has the additional advantage of providing up-to-date
information on who is entering the Schengen area. Relocation would also eliminate some of the
breeding grounds for people smuggling within the EU.
There would therefore be a double obligation on both the migrant and the member state. Both
must be enforced in order to completely eliminate the breeding grounds for people smuggling in
the EU. This means that an application submitted in Greece might lead to relocation to Germany
or the Netherlands, but that the reverse must also be possible. The member state where the
application for European protection is submitted must be irrelevant when it comes to deciding
where the asylum seeker will ultimately be accommodated in the EU. This is the only way of
removing any reason to travel within the EU to a particular member state, possibly in the hands
of people smugglers, with the sometimes fatal risks that entails.

The redistribution among member states will take account of the preferences, characteristics,
background and qualifications of the individual in question, in compliance with the formula, and
as far as is reasonably and practically possible. However, migrants who independently leave for
a member state other than the one to which they have been allocated must immediately be
returned to and received by the member state to which they were relocated.
Return
Despite the best solutions and measures we can devise, there will always be migrants who take
their chances outside the system. A certain proportion of economic migrants will always opt to
remain without documents or without submitting an unfounded asylum application. A credible
immigration and asylum policy requires an effective procedure for return, preferably to the
country of origin, which is obliged to readmit its own nationals.

In the interim phase we will need enforcement, operationalisation and investment by member
states to ensure more economic migrants are repatriated. Where member states lack the
requisite resources, the EU will have to step in with expertise and funding. An EU list of safe
countries of origin, beginning with the Balkans, will promote speedy disposal of futile asylum
applications. However, achieving a more effective return policy will be mainly a question of
strategy, given that the main obstacle is a lack of cooperation on the part of certain third
AVT15/BZ116543

countries. In cases where cooperation proves difficult, the EU will have to ensure there are
consequences for the country concerned. The concept of more for more already enjoys wide
support in Europe, but the EU must also not shrink from adopting a less for less approach when
cooperation remains unsatisfactory.
Final comments
The government believes it is important that closer cooperation with third countries on the issue
of migrants should be an integral part of the Unions external policy. A sustainable approach to
the problem of migration cannot come about without linking the instruments associated with the
internal and external dimensions of European policy. The EU must use all the instruments at its
disposal.

The Netherlands aims with this input to ensure that the European decision-making process
encompasses not only the internal redistribution of migrants, but also a joint strategy and broadbased approach to the migration issue.

Klaas Dijkhoff
State Secretary for Security and Justice

Lilianne Ploumen
Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation

AVT15/BZ116543