faq
When the federal and state governments come together for the refugee summit today, it’s about money – but not only. The debate has long been about fundamentals. Where to go in asylum policy? An overview.
the initial situation
One could almost think that the dispute in German refugee policy is reduced to a dispute about money. For weeks, states, districts and municipalities have been demanding more financial support from the federal government for the accommodation, care and integration of the refugees – and the closer the top meeting with the chancellor got, the louder and sharper the tone became.
The fact that the federal government stonewalled at an early stage with reference to billions in payments and aroused little hope of opening their wallets again in today’s talks should certainly have contributed to the general annoyance on the part of the federal states. The federal states accused the federal government of incorrect calculations.
What can be expected from today’s federal-state meeting?
After various preliminary talks, the refugee summit begins in the early afternoon. The federal government goes into the event with a coordinated position, as do the prime ministers. Municipalities are not represented. It remains to be seen whether the different sides will move towards one another. The end of the summit is open – everyone involved expects a long evening. Even failure is not excluded.
How are they developing? refugee figures in Germany?
Recently, significantly more refugees came to Germany than in the previous year. The number of asylum applications for the first four months of the year was 78.4 percent higher than in the same period last year. Most applicants come from Syria, Afghanistan and Turkey.
Added to this are the approximately one million Ukrainians who fled the war in their country and continue to live in Germany. You do not have to go through a regular asylum procedure.
What do the states and municipalities want to achieve?
Countries are still demanding more financial support. They want federal payments to be based on the number of people admitted. “A financing model is required that is appropriate in terms of amount and adapts to changing refugee numbers (breathing system)”, the paper says.
The federal states demand full reimbursement of costs for accommodation and heating for refugees as well as a general monthly per capita flat rate for accommodation and care under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act. They also demand a reliable solution for integration costs and the costs for unaccompanied refugees.
According to the states and municipalities, the federal government should also ensure that fewer people who have already been registered in other EU states or even recognized as refugees come to Germany. In a paper that the states jointly sent to the Federal Chancellery, they also call for “mandatory border procedures at the EU’s external borders for certain groups of people”, more border controls and faster asylum procedures in Germany.
Will the federal government pay more?
So far, the federal government has rejected the financial demands of the federal states. This position was underpinned by a list of previous expenditures: According to the Ministry of Finance, the federal government spent a total of 29.8 billion euros on refugee aid last year. In 2023 it will be around 26.6 billion – including, however, the costs associated with combating the causes of flight. In addition, the federal government refers to the support of refugees from Ukraine who receive basic security. The federal government is already taking over 90 percent of social benefits directly.
Basically, there are “dramatic shifts in income at the expense of the federal government”. While the federal states and municipalities made surpluses overall, in 2022 the federal government recorded a deficit in the three-digit billion range for the third time in a row. It is therefore becoming apparent that Chancellor Olaf Scholz wants to continue to let the calls for more federal money come to nothing.
How should the asylum procedure continue?
According to Chancellor Scholz, the asylum procedures should be accelerated. They sometimes lasted several years. The SPD politician emphasized that it was therefore necessary to digitize the immigration authorities and create enough positions for administrative judges.
The return to “central arrival facilities” is also under discussion. A resolution proposed by the Chancellery for the refugee summit states that “returns could also be carried out directly from these facilities”. The concept is reminiscent of the so-called anchor centers introduced by the previous government of CDU/CSU and SPD, which existed from mid-2018.
Scholz also said that he was open to common asylum procedures at the EU’s external borders. He also called for effective border protection. Within the EU framework, Germany can help with the planned migration partnerships with the countries of origin and transit of refugees.
What is the status of deportations?
According to the draft resolution of the federal government, legal rules that have made deportations more difficult up to now are to be adjusted. Specifically, one wants, for example, to expand the search options of the police and extend the so-called exit custody from ten to 28 days.
The countries also seem to support the idea. Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder also advocated a tougher course towards the countries of origin. The CSU politician emphasized in the “Bild am Sonntag”: “We stand by the basic right to asylum. But in countries that do not agree to an orderly repatriation, we must also think about cuts in development aid in the future.” Söder also called for the number of so-called safe countries of origin to be expanded.
How about the safe ones countries of origin?
According to a draft law by the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the list of so-called safe countries of origin for asylum seekers is to be expanded. “I propose that comprehensive migration partnerships be launched very quickly with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova,” said the special representative for migration, Joachim Stamp, to the “Spiegel”. Both countries should be classified as safe countries of origin “so that the asylum procedures can be accelerated so that abusive applications are no longer worthwhile,” said the FDP politician.
If a state is classified as a safe country of origin, asylum applications from people who come from there are generally to be rejected as “manifestly unfounded” – unless those affected can expressly prove the opposite. Currently on the list are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ghana, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Senegal and Serbia.
The Greens in particular have reservations about an expansion. In 2019, they blocked a law in the Federal Council that would declare Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria and Georgia as “safe countries of origin”.
What are the EU’s plans?
The positions of the EU members on a reform of the asylum system are still far apart. However, in view of the renewed increase in migration pressure in many EU countries, it does not seem unrealistic that a solution could be found.
The European Union has been trying to reform its asylum system for years. In essence, it is about agreeing on how asylum seekers are to be distributed fairly among all 27 EU member states.
In March, Federal Interior Minister Faeser met with counterparts from five influential EU countries that are also potential host countries – France, Italy, Sweden, Spain and Belgium. The EU roadmap envisages that all EU members agree by June. After that, the negotiations with the European Parliament could take place. The aim is to conclude negotiations for a new asylum system by spring 2024 at the latest.
What criticism is there?
The German section of Amnesty International was alienated by individual proposals and the tone of the debates. The human rights organization spoke of “increasingly dubious human rights demands and verbal gaffes by politicians,” for example calls for upper limits and fences, and warned everyone involved to “maintain a dialogue that is sensitive to discrimination and to work constructively on solutions for the accommodation and integration of those seeking protection.”
More border procedures and detentions are not an answer to the challenges, said Deputy Secretary General Julia Duchrow. Both at EU level and at federal level, it is important to develop factual human rights-compliant solutions.
The refugee organization Pro Asyl currently sees the federal government in dealing with refugees along the line of former CSU Federal Minister of the Interior Horst Seehofer. The plans that became known gave “a bad idea”. Like the previous government, the federal government is relying on so-called anchor centers and safe countries of origin, as well as longer detention pending deportation and greater isolation at the external borders.
UNICEF Germany and 26 other organizations called on the federal, state and local governments to fulfill their responsibility in caring for refugees and to give greater consideration to child protection.