Failing the Roma – EU initiatives and structures

 

In this paper I examine the limited capacity of existing EU Roma-related initiatives and structures to achieve an effective mainstreaming of Roma issues in the activities of the European institutions and national governments. For more details about those initiatives please see http://www.ergonetwork.org/euar.htm. I examined here just a part of the EU initiatives and structures relevant to Roma – the ones which are the most visible. This will be followed by a paper focused on solutions and ways to improve and maximize the impact of existing EU structures and initiatives.

 

 

The responsible Commissioner for Roma related issues

 

This position, created in 2005 within the European Commission, suggests that the European Commission pays attention to Roma-related issues. Unfortunately, until now, this position has proven to be little more than window dressing on the part of the European Commission.

 

The Head of DG Employment and Social Affairs, Commissioner Vladimir Spidla, shows a great deal of interest in Roma related initiatives and he is unofficially in charge of Roma issues within the European Commission[1]. The presence in its cabinet of one of the best Czech experts in Roma related issues, is seen by many as the most significant step taken by the European Commission in better dealing with issues related to Roma.

 

But despite clear interest and good will on the part of Commissioner Spidla and his cabinet to improve the impact of Commission programs and policies on the lives of Roma, the results are dismal. In many cases, the situation of Roma in Europe has seen a turn to the worse.

 

The following factors may explain why Commissioner Spidla’s position has not impacted more strongly the overall social inclusion of European Roma.

 

Officially, Commissioner Spidla is in charge of 9 directorates, each with 4 units – in total, 36 units dealing, for the most part, with issues unrelated to Roma. Only one Unit has, among other assignments, a direct responsibility to deal with Roma issues: the Anti-discrimination Unit. At this point, please stop to consider that there are an estimated 8 million Roma within the EU.

 

Politically center-left, Commissioner Spidla is far from having full political back-up from his own country (which is in any case one of the smallest states in the European Union). Although Commissioner deserves respect for the work he has done within the European Commission, his influence within the Commission is limited.

 

Changes in 2005 and 2006 within the Anti-Discrimination Unit, including the coming to an end of the contract of the main and only one expert on Roma issues, the replacement of the Unit’s director  Barbara Nolan (following a long interim period), and finally, the replacement of the Director General of DG Employment and Social Affairs, Odile Quintin, led to a significant slow-down in Roma-related initiatives of the DG. The Roma Interservice Group, an informal group witch is the only structure of the European Commission focused on Roma, is lead by this DG and was created and stimulated by Barbara Nolan and Odile Quintin. Needless to say, with their departure, it’s activities were for a good period significantly reduced.

 

None of the Cabinets of the European Commissioners include any Roma or employ Roma experts with the task of dealing specifically with Roma-related problems, including Spidla’s Cabinet. So far, no Roma have been temporarily or permanently employed in the European Commission in Brussels . This makes Roma the only non-represented minority within the European Commission.[2]

 

European Commission structures

 

The Roma Interservice Group is, on paper, chaired by the Director General of the DG Employment and Social Affairs and was created to ensure steerage within the Commission regarding Roma issues.

 

Its meetings are far from transparent and despite some obvious benefits including the exchange of information within the European Commission, there are practically no known significant initiatives of the Interservice Group during the last three years. As in the case of the Informal Group of the Intergovernmental Organisations (see The European Council Initiatives part for reference), according to participants, meetings are attended mainly by low level bureaucrats with practically no decision-making power. During its first meeting I personally attended, the Director General was not present and the attendance from the Commission was largely low level (13 units represented and only two heads of unit).

 

In an initiative viewed by some experts as a clear signal of the failure of the Interservice Group, in January 2006 the European Commission established the High Level Group on Social and Labour Market Integration of Ethnic Minorities, to identify practical ways of using EU policies and programmes to promote the integration of disadvantaged ethnic minorities, including the Roma, into the labour market. The Commission singled out two focus groups of particular concern: the immigrant communities and the Roma.[3] Barbara Nolan played a significant role in the establishment of the Group but unfortunately she had left the Anti-Discrimination Unit before the Group started working.

 

The group includes two Roma experts, but so far, their activities are completely unknown to Roma activists and Roma organisations. According to sources within the European Commission, the recruitment process of the Roma experts was based entirely on personal preferences and non-critical views towards the European Commission activities. Despite the fact that the group is supposed to publish its report in the autumn of 2007, until now (May 2007), there were no known consultations with Roma activists or Roma organisations.

 

The internship scheme for Roma

 

The internship scheme for Roma is without doubt very relevant for future EU policy and it is a cornerstone in applying the much debated “positive incentives” measures of the Race Directive. ERIO and the OSI lobbied strongly for the implementation of the internships, but again, the support of Odile Quintin and Barbara Nolan were of utmost importance. Now that both have left DG Employment and Social Affairs, the follow-up on the internships has been very limited.

 

Intern stipends are paid by the Open Society Institute, and none of the many Roma interns has been subsequently employed, even temporary, by the European Commission. Moreover, because of no visible results in terms of employment, Roma activists have come to consider the scheme as “window dressing” on the part of the Commission. The lack of awareness campaigns targeting integrated and successful Roma has led to a limited number of applicants fulfilling the required conditions, and consequently a small selection pool.

 

Supporting Roma networks

 

The rights of other vulnerable groups in Europe are defended either by countries (in the case of religious, ethnic and racial discrimination) or by European NGOs[4] dealing with the related issue. Most of the European Network NGOs dealing with vulnerable groups receive core funding from the Commission. Despite the fact that Roma are the largest and most discriminated ethnic minority in Europe, according to the European Commission,  not a single Roma NGO in Europe was financed by and welcomed under the umbrella of the Commission until 2007. Under pressure, the European Commission launched a call for proposals for supporting a European Roma Network in 2005[5]. Unfortunately, the Commission did not consult with any Roma organisations about the Terms of Reference, and as a result, no organisations were selected during the first two calls. In addition, the funds available are five times less than those dedicated to similar network organisations.

 

Finally, in 2007, funding was made available for the European Roma and Travellers Forum, an organisation already financed by the Council of Europe. Many Roma feel that this was not an appropriate choice because the positions of the European Roma and Travellers Forum and its representatives are often autocratic. Given the existing situation of Roma NGOs which are still far from covering properly the main issues affecting Roma communities or from ensuring a normal participation of Roma and the very reduced available human resources from Roma communities, the European Commission needs to do a lot more in supporting the development of a healthy Roma civil society.

 

In making future decisions about funding and employment, Recommendation 23 of the European Parliament Resolution on the Situation of Roma in the European Union (28 April 2005) is relevant: “Supports the continuing moves within the EU institutions towards incorporating the Roma-to-Roma approach, as developed by the OSCE, in the future hiring of staff for Roma - as well as non-Roma-related vacancies.”  This approach has not yet been adopted by the European Commission or by anti-discrimination NGOs funded by the European Commission.

 

 

The European Council initiatives

 

In 1999, for the first time, an EU inter-ministerial group (COCEN) had Roma issues included in its tasks. Unfortunately, what looked to be a promising initiative delivered practically no known results.

 

Once the COCEN group was established, it was decided that each EU Presidency should hold a meeting devoted to Roma issue during its term. The countries which took over the Presidency from Finland were supposed to organise meetings gathering representatives of the EU and candidate countries and Romani organisations. A list of recommendations was made, but as with many other similar documents, not much happened after that. I discovered, in a discussion with the Director and the team of the anti-discrimination Unit in the Commission in 2004, that they knew nothing about the existence or activities of the COCEN group.

 

On the other side, the activity of the COCEN Group is completely unknown to Roma activists and Roma organisations. Despite the fact that its creation was based on one of the very few documents promoting institutional links with other stakeholders (Council of Europe and OSCE), these links are not functional.

 

In the same year, 1999, the Informal Contact Group on Roma of the Intergovernmental Organisations was created as an EU initiative with the aim to exchange information and coordinate activities. Planned to meet every six months under the chairmanship of the country holding the presidency of the European Union, the group failed to meet for three successive European Union presidencies: Greek, Italian and Irish. At the same time, these countries confronted the most serious violations of human rights in the case of Roma in the then EU of 15.

 

The Group has since been revived through its inclusion in the OSCE Action Plan for Roma and Sinti[6]  (paragraph 118, 2003) and has regularly met since then, but with practically no visible results. I personally took part in three of the meetings and found them disorganized and without focus or meaning. The meetings of the Informal Contact Group on Roma of the Intergovernmental Organisations were attended by well-intended but low level Commission officials, signaling the obvious lack of interest of the Commission in the activity of the group. Remarkable is the fact that none of the meetings I took part in were attended by any representatives of DG Education and Culture, despite the fact that often the main topic has been education.

 

Others

 

DG Enlargement and DG Regio have built significant know-how and experience in monitoring the situation of Roma and in implementing Roma-focused programs of social inclusion. Unfortunately, now that countries such as Slovakia , Czech Republic and Hungary are within the European Union, the leverage the EC had over the social inclusion of Roma has disappeared. The situation with Romania and Bulgaria seems to be no better, and as expected, the new EU members are fast to point to flagrant violation of Roma rights in older member states as Italy , Spain and Greece , when questioned about the situation of their own Roma minorities.

 

The Open Method of Coordination is the only tool left when it comes to social inclusion, but regrettably, this has been proven flawed, especially when it comes to disadvantaged groups. For a more detailed analyses of the OMC when it comes to Roma please contact the author.

 

DG Justice and Civil Liberties created an Inter-service Group focused on Racism that has failed up to this point to consult or include Roma related topics in its activity despite EC acknowledging that Roma are the most discriminated ethnic minority in Europe . DG Justice is lead by Commissioner Frattini member of the right wing Forza Italia. The participation in the Berlusconi’s government part of it controlled by an extreme right that never shied away from racist declarations and actions against Roma plus the harsh stand against the status of national minority for Roma in Italy are seen by many as significant reasons for the silence and non action of Commissioner Frattini during his mandate in regard to Roma.

 

The social pillar of Lisbon strategy has been significantly watered down by the Barrosso Commission and president Barrosso has barely showed any interest in Roma related issues.

 

EUMC has been at the forefront of raising awareness of the discrimination faced by Roma in the EU. The transformation of the EUMC into the Fundamental Rights Agency ( supervised by DG Justice and Civil Liberties) and the changes in the upper management could also be reasons why the Roma related activities within the European Commission are still nowhere close to what they need to be.

 

There is indeed significant progress in the awareness and actions taken by the Commission in regard to Roma. What I wanted to prove here is that what is done at this moment is not just far from enough but it is also far from ensuring a sustainable development and efficient approach towards the social inclusion of Roma.