The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2004 on the Communication from the Commission on immigration, integration and employment, its resolution of 14 April 2005 concerning migrants on the Italian island of Lampedusa and their expulsion to Libya, its resolution of 9 June 2005 on the links between legal and illegal migration and integration of migrants, its resolution of 26 October 2005 on an EU approach to managing economic migration, and its resolution of 6 July 2006 on strategies and means for the integration of immigrants in the European Union,

–  having regard to the conclusions of the European Council meetings in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999, Laeken on 14 and 15 December 2001, Seville on 21 and 22 June 2002 and Thessaloniki on 19 and 20 June 2003,

–  having regard to the meeting of the Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers in Tampere from 20 to 22 September 2006,

–  having regard to Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 63 and 67 of the Treaty establishing the European Community,

–  having regard to the ongoing discussions on the Financial Perspective, including those on the European Refugee Fund and the European Return Fund,

–  having regard to Rule 103(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas seven years after the adoption of the Tampere programme, the European Union does not have a coherent immigration policy, and a legal immigration policy is notably lacking,

B.  whereas the use of the codecision procedure would give more democratic legitimacy to the decision-making process in such a sensitive field,

C.  whereas the Common European Asylum System is based on a set of rules from which no participating Member State should have derogations,

D.  whereas the Commission’s Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration predicts that ‘between 2010 and 2030, at current immigration flows, the decline in the EU-25’s working age population will entail a fall in the number of employed people of some 20 million’ and that ‘more sustained immigration flows could increasingly be required to meet the needs of the EU labour market and ensure Europe’s prosperity’,

E.  whereas there is a serious humanitarian crisis in several Member States on the European Union’s southern external borders because of the thousands of migrants who have died in the Mediterranean in recent years and particularly during the summer of 2006, notably off the Canary Islands, Lampedusa and Malta,

F.  whereas according to the EU Network of Independent Experts in Fundamental Rights’ report for 2003 ‘the area where the right to life is under the most serious threat is in the operational measures taken to ensure the control of the external borders of the Union’,

G.  whereas the lack of legal immigration channels forces migrants to pursue dangerous routes to enter EU territory and to put themselves in the hands of criminal human-trafficking organisations,

H.  having regard to the scale of the Italian Government’s expulsions of migrants from Lampedusa to Libya, particularly in November 2004 and March 2005, which were condemned by the European Parliament as being contrary to international law,

I.  whereas the tragic events in Ceuta and Melilla in October 2005, where in several days more than 10 people were shot and killed while trying to cross the frontier between Morocco and the Spanish territories, should not have occurred, and whereas there is a risk that this situation will arise again at other borders,

J.  whereas a number of migrant workers in an irregular situation find themselves in conditions amounting to slavery because it is impossible to assert their most elementary human rights,

K.  whereas the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs has visited a number of immigrant detention centres in countries such as Italy, Spain, France and Malta,

L.  whereas the gravity of the situation confirms the failure of the EU’s migration policy,

1.  Deplores the fact that the Council has not been able to define a common immigration policy and has instead maintained the consultation procedure for all matters regarding legal immigration, despite the numerous requests from the European Parliament;

2.  Considers its main priority the establishment of a common asylum and immigration policy based on the opening-up of legal immigration channels and on the definition of common standards to protect the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum seekers throughout the Union;

3.  Calls on the Commission as a matter of urgency to draw up a proposal for a directive that defines satisfactory minimum conditions for the admission for work of third-country nationals to European Union territory, with the prime objective of opening legal immigration channels;

4.  Points out that a coherent European immigration policy must be accompanied by a European integration policy that permits inter alia steady integration in the labour market, the right to education and training, access to social and health services, and immigrant participation in social, cultural and political activity; consequently urges the Member States, the Commission and Council to carry out all procedures necessary to obtain recognition of voting rights in local and European elections for migrants who have been resident in the European Union for at least five years;

5.  Stresses that any comprehensive approach to immigration cannot ignore the ‘push factors’ that lead people to leave their countries in the first place, necessitating clear plans for development and investment in the countries of origin and transit as well as real possibilities for legal migration towards the European Union;

6.  Expresses its deep concern at the development of repressive Community measures (readmission agreements, police checks at borders, the directive on the return policy, etc.), before a common policy for legal immigration has even been defined; calls for the restoration of fair priorities and the suspension of negotiations on the directive on a return policy so long as the opening of legal immigration channels has not been the subject of legislation at EU level;

7.  Firmly believes that Member States must respect their obligations under international law as regards the right of asylum and immigration;

8.  Insists that Member States apply access to the asylum procedure as well as the provisions of the reception directive in a coherent and consistent manner, and that asylum claims are processed speedily and efficiently;

9.  Calls on the Council to encourage the creation of a European asylum system before 2010;

10.  Warns against the dangers of externalising the management of the European Union’s external borders; hopes for better cooperation with the countries of origin and transit and that is will primarily be based on respect for fundamental rights, especially the right of asylum and not to be subject to refoulement;

11.  Points out that the detention of asylum seekers is contrary to the Geneva Convention;

12.  Considers that the administrative detention of migrants and asylum seekers – as noted during the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs’ visits to detention centres – has led to serious breaches of fundamental rights;

13.  Considers that a genuine change in European immigration policy should include the abolition of a special law for migrants and the abolition of administrative detention;

14.  Believes that sharing of responsibilities and financial burdens between Member States must be an integral part of the European Common Asylum System;

15.  Calls for more funding to be made available to NGOs working on the ground, providing critical emergency assistance;

16.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the UNHCR.