Europeanisation, National Identities and Migration ... - europeanization

Integrating immigrants and minorities 93
possession of the nationality of a member state. The conclusions to the Tampere
summit meeting of the European Council held in October 1999 referred to the
need to approximate the rights of TCNs with nationals of member states, but also
stated that the route to repairing the incomplete membership status of ‘denizenship’
(legal and social rights short of full citizenship) was the acquisition of national
citizenship.
We can now move on to explore the strategy of the Starting Line Group.
The UK and Dutch influence on the SLG underpinned a strong focus on antidiscrimination.
The Starting Line Group was organised along lines that were
more in accordance with usual Commission-lobbying strategies. The SLG relied
in particular on expertise and academic networks, particularly legal expertise.
These would be used to formulate concrete proposals for action. The SLG was
particularly influenced by Anglo-Dutch perspectives on anti-discrimination with
reference to legislation that tackled both direct and indirect discrimination, with a
particular focus on the workplace and scope for positive action. This reflects
the involvement in the group’s origins of the British Commission for Racial Equality
and the Dutch National Office Against Racism. The SLG was also able to draw from
established legal resources. The EU was already committed to anti-discrimination
(gender and nationality in the Treaty of Rome). It is also committed to the principle
of equal treatment (Directive 76/207 of 1976). An interesting point here is that
these kinds of proposals did not imply a race to the bottom or lowest common
denominator policies. These terms are often used to characterise decision-making
in intergovernmental forums where unanimity is the basis for decision-making.
Arguing for inclusion
Having compared the strategies of the main groups lobbying for migrant inclusion
– the claims they made and the material and symbolic resources from which they
drew – we can now move on to explore the content of EU anti-discrimination
legislation more carefully. This involves, first, analysing the inclusion of a new Article
13 in the Treaty of Rome by the Treaty of Amsterdam that established a legal
basis for action to combat discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender,
age, disability and sexual orientation. We can then outline the progress of the
‘world record’ directives on ‘race equality’ and equal treatment in the workplace
that took just six months to go from proposal to law. It is argued that while
intergovernmental impetus underpinned the inclusion of Article 13 as a specific
anti-discrimination provision, that the frame provided by pro-migrant groups and
the cultivation of alliances with Commission officials was a vital backdrop when
solutions were sought to the problems of racism and xenophobia that were brought
into sharper focus by the entry of the extreme right-wing Freedom Party into the
Austrian coalition government in February 2000.
The inclusion of specific Treaty anti-discrimination provisions can be linked
to member-state concerns about racism and xenophobia. The French and German
governments were instrumental in the creation of the Kahn Committee, which
called for expanded anti-discrimination legislation (ECCCRX 1995; European