(a) The following 22 Governments are members of the Committee :
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Chile
Costa Rica
Denmark
France
Germany
Greece
Israel
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Paraguay
Sweden
Switzerland
United States of America
Venezuela
(b) The Budget of the Committee for the year 1953 is :—
Part I. — Contributions to Administration - $ 2,147,000
Part II. — Operations
(1) Contributions to Operating Fund - 10,500,000
(2) Reimbursements towards Specific Schemes - 13,276,432
(3) Services - 7,046,000
(4) IRO Trust Fund - 1,000,000
(5) Funds carried over from 1952 - 2,786,043
Total Operating Funds. - 34,608,475
Grand Total of Anticipated Resources. - 36,755,475
Administration - 2,147,000
Operations - 34,608,475
Total Requirements - 36,755,475
(c) In addition to its Headquarters in Geneva the Migration Committee has the following Field Offices :
Argentina (Buenos Aires)
Australia (Canberra)
Austria (Vienna)
Brazil (Rio de Janeiro)
Chile (Santiago)
Germany (Bonn)
Greece (Athens)
Italy (Rome)
United States (Washington)
Venezuela (Caracas)
Trieste
Hong Kong (Jointly with the U. N. High Commissioner's Office)
The Governments which adopted the Enabling Resolution at the Brussels Conference on the 5th December, 1951 recognised that, whereas a general improvement in economic conditions and production would provide greater possibilities for employment and settlement in Europe, an increase in European emigration to overseas countries, nevertheless, remained necessary; further, while technical assistance might make an important contribution to the solution of the economic problems of under-developed countries, the development of all existing or potential possibilities of immigration into these countries also constituted an important factor for the solution of their problems. The Governments concluded that the existing volume of migration was insufficient to meet the needs of emigration countries or to allow the full use of possibilities offered by immigration countries and that the international financing of European emigration could contribute not only to solving the problem of population in Europe but also would stimulate the creation of new economic opportunities in countries lacking manpower. The Provisional Intergovernmental Committee for the Movement of Migrants from Europe was therefore constituted for the purpose of making arrangements " for the transport of migrants for whom existing facilities were inadequate or who could not otherwise be moved " from European countries having surplus elements of population to overseas countries offering opportunities for orderly immigration.
The provisional body thus established began its operations on the 1st February, 1952 with a life expectancy of 12 months. The Intergovernmental Committee at its Fourth Session having considered the results of the first nine months' work, decided to continue the activities of the Committee during 1953 and to change its name to the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration. The Fourth Session also requested the Director to prepare a preliminary draft constitution; a draft was considered at the Fifth Session in April, 1953 and referred to Member Governments with the request that their comments thereon be aA'ailable for further consideration at the Sixth Session, which is to take place in October of this year. Thus, Member Governments, having set up the Committee on a provisional basis and later extended it for a further trial period, are giving consideration to its establishment as a non-permanent organisation charged with certain responsibilities for facilitating and developing European emigration. The Migration Committee has from its inception received the consistent support and sympathy of both the Council of Ministers and the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe; this support has not been without its influence on the development of the Committee in the direction of greater constitutional stability and operational efficiency.
The 31st July, 1953 marked the completion of the first 18 months' work of the Migration Committee and is therefore a convenient point from which to survey its achievements. The initial targets of additional emigrants to be moved were not, in fact, achieved; nevertheless, a clearer conception of the proper functions of the Committee has emerged. The Migration Committee was established at a period when a downward trend in the intake of overseas immigration countries began to be discernible. This downward trend, which began in 1951 and continued throughout 1952, was reflected in nearly all immigration countries and was due partly to economic recession, partly to the necessity experienced by certain immigration Governments for a temporary lull to allow the large number of migrants received during the previous years to be satisfactorily absorbed. In spite of this situation, the Migration Committee was able to move overseas 119,284 persons by the 31st July, 1953. Of this number 59,746 came from Germany, 17,772 from Italy, 14,005 from Austria, 12,106 from the Netherlands, 1,035 from the Free Territory of Trieste and 12,342 from other areas, chiefly by means of individual sponsorships. The United States of America received 41,347 of these migrants, Canada 28,663, Australia 23,000, Brazil 15,906, Venezuela 3,210, Israel 1,782, Chile 1,766, Argentina 1,219, whilst 2,391 went to various other destinations. It is interesting to note that of the total of 119,284 approximately 35,000 were refugees within the mandate of the U. N. High Commissioner for Refugees, approximately 25,000 were ethnic German refugees from Germany and approximately 10,000 were the families of persons who had previously emigrated but were unable to call their families forward without assistance.
The first duty of the Committee has been to provide or arrange land, sea and air transport for migrants, the emphasis falling naturally upon sea transport. In arranging sea transport, the Committee has had to consider the requirements of specific migration programmes, the availability of established transport on the various routes, the conditions relating to safety and health on the transport available, the preference to be accorded to commercial carriers whenever possible and the desirability of keeping in operation independent carriers formerly employed in the migration service.
Transport programmes have to be planned well in advance of movement, but at the same time flexibility must be sought in order to avoid losses occurring when actual movements are found to be less than those anticipated. This operating flexibility has been made more necessary by the recent tendency of migrant movements to consist of small groups moving at frequent intervals. This has made it increasingly difficult to provide all-the-year-round employment for the independent migrant carrying fleet. Nevertheless, the Committee has been able to provide transport services on routes where additional capacity is required, to establish with the carriers economical price-scales, to allocate to the established Lines in fair proportion a regular flow of passengers and to arrange for sufficient employment for independent migrant carriers so that no suitable ship has been finally lost from the service of migration.
Certain specific improvements have been made to the conditions of transport; social workers have been assigned to undertake welfare programmes aboard ship and arrangements have been made for Catholic priests and Protestant ministers to be available during voyages from Northern Europe to Australia. The Committee has provided its own medical staff for vessels on which it books all or most of the available space, and, as a result of the efforts of this staff and of preventative measures taken before embarkation, the health record has been outstanding. In response to representations made by the Committee, many ship owners have improved the quality of accommodation provided, reducing passenger space and increasing lounge facilities.
When, the Committee was first established it was conceived largely as an operating agency for effecting the movement of persons for whom migration opportunities existed—or would be developed as a result of inter-governmental negotiation. However, after its first nine months' work in a situation of temporarily contracting demand from immigration countries, Member Governments considered it desirable to authorise the Committee to widen its activities in order that full advantage should be taken of existing potentialities and that it might give its attention to what could be done to increase the possibilities of absorption in immigration countries. The Director was therefore requested, by Resolution 36 of the Fourth Session of the Intergovernmental Committee, to improve and develop, in cooperation with Governments and competent organisations, the technical services of migration in order to increase the flow of movements within existing potentialities and to proceed with investigations with a view to the establishment of land settlement projects of a sound practical nature.
The action taken by the Committee since that time to develop the services which have a direct bearing on the volume of movements has three main objectives; first, to improve the qualifications of persons available for assisted migration in order to facilitate their assimilation and productive employment in immigration countries ; secondly, to improve methods of preselection and selection in order to ensure that only those migrants are moved to immigration countries who can be expected to settle there satisfactorily, and, thirdly, to develop and improve arrangements for the reception of immigrants and their placement in satisfactory employment.
In order to increase the qualifications of potential migrants the Committee has sponsored language training programmes and has sought to provide the migrant with information on immigration countries when that information was not already available. A vocational training project has just been completed in Italy as a result of which some 300 persons trained in building trades have been accepted with their families for migration to Brazil. Similar schemes are expected to begin in the Netherlands, Austria and Greece in the near future. These programmes, besides better fitting the migrant for his new life overseas, make a further important contribution to increasing the rate of migration. In view of the substantial number of migrants admitted to various overseas countries during the years following the second world war, it was to be expected that these countries would begin to adopt a more restrictive attitude towards immigration and would stipulate a substantial proportion of skilled workers amongst the migrants they were prepared to receive. On the other hand, the countries of Europe having an excess of population were anxious to effect the emigration of groups well-balanced in terms of skilled and unskilled workers and breadwinners and dependents in order not to be deprived of a disproportionate amount of skilled labour. Vocational training programmes provide a means by which these positions may be reconciled.
The great value of a migrant having at least a working knowledge of the language of the country to which he goes has been recognised. Language instruction is being given to Greek migrants pre-selected for Australia and Brazil and facilities for continuing language training are provided on vessels carrying migrants under the Committee's auspices from Germany and Greece to Australia, and from Greece to Brazil. The language training programme of the Committee will be increased in scope.
The Committee has also endeavoured to improve the machinery of pre-selection and processing and for placement after disembarkation. In Greece the Committee is directly responsible for pre-embarkation activities in accordance with its agreement with the Greek Government; an expert in trade selection has been assigned to assist the European selection mission of the Brazilian Government. A further project has just been begun in Italy, in co-operation with the International Labour Office, whereby three experts have been provided to assist the Italian Government in developing its pre-selection services and in informing the officials responsible for preselection of the appropriate methods and techniques. Again, in co-operation with the International Labour Office, the Brazilian Government has been assisted in the establishment of a placement board which develops opportunities for new migrants and places them in employment after arrival. Negotiations with the Government of Argentina regarding the establishment of a training farm to instruct immigrants in local agricultural methods are nearing completion. This training farm, which ultimately will have capacity for 700 heads of families, will also function as a placement centre from which immigrants will be placed either on lands available for settlement or in agricultural employment.
Resolution No. 36 of the Intergovernmental Committee instructed the Director to pursue his investigations and discussions with interested Governments and organisations with a view to the eventual development of sound land settlement schemes. Plans have been considered in conjunction with certain Governments of Europe and Latin America and with other international organisations, in particular the Food and Agriculture Organisation. It is expected that in the near future certain pilot projects will be set on foot which should ultimately make a substantial contribution to increasing the flow of migration from Europe. Progress in this field must of necessity be cautious, and an intergovernmental expert conference will be held under the Committee's auspices in Florence at the end of September to consider the form which future developments should take.
There has been close co-operation with other international agencies able to contribute to the development of migration and the improvement of its techniques. An informal working group representing the United Nations, UNESCO, the International Labour Office and the Migration Committee has met several times in Geneva to consider the development of language training in Greece. The International Labour Office has co-operated in the establishment of the vocational training project in Italy and has participated in the placement board in Brazil. There has been close co-operation and interchange of ideas between the International Labour Office and the Migration Committee on matters concerned with pre-selection and selection of migrants from Italy, with the result that the two organisations are jointly participating with the Italian Government in the pre-selection project which has been previously referred to. The co-operation of international and non-governmental organisations has been sought to the maximum extent consistent with the necessity of fully developing potentialities for movement as rapidly as possible.
The preceding paragraphs have summarized the activities and development of the Migration Committee during the relatively short period that it has been in existence. In any assessment of the contribution of the Committee to the solution of Europe's population problems, and of the contribution which it may make in the future, it should not be forgotten that fundamental political and economic factors bear upon the task of increasing European migration. These factors, reflecting as they do overall national policies and world economic trends, have a decisive influence on the activities of the Committee, the mandate of which clearly does not envisage attempting to remove the basic obstacles to larger-scale movement which exist therein. The Committee is dealing with the twofold problem of surplus population in Europe and of under-population in the rapidly developing countries of large potential resources; this in itself is symptomatic of world economic unbalance. Apart from its function of assisting in the re-distribution of population, the organisation is not able directly to influence the basic economic unbalance existing, except b y focusing attention on such needs as that for additional capital investment in certain immigration countries. Similarly, there are political factors of both internal and external nature which have their effect on the ability and willingness of immigration countries to accept and absorb increased migration. Here again the Committee does not purport to provide a solution, beyond setting itself the task of filling the maximum immigration potential within its limitation.
Nevertheless, the shipping facilities, the technical services and the financial resources of the Committee to assist migrants who would otherwise be unable to move, have been shown to be of real value in developing European emigration. The capacity of the Committee to provide the necessary flexibility in transport, which was one of the important considerations leading to its establishment, has not yet been fully employed. The Committee has, however, already been effective in ensuring the optimum use of commercial transport and has provided additional space for those migrants for whom appropriate commercial facilities were not available. The technical services of the Committee, which are now being progressively expanded in accordance with Resolution No. 36, are, likewise, contributing both to the finding of additional migration opportunities and to the provision of migrants who are more fitted to succeed in new surroundings. Finally, in its developing activity in the promotion of land settlement the Committee is entering one of the fields of migration which involves the overcoming of| great obstacles, but which if successfully undertaken will be of great significance in its effect on migration potentials. It is perhaps indicative of future developments that in July, 1953 the Committee regained the monthly average of 10,000 movements with which it began operations. There are good grounds for optimism that, with the continued support of Governments, this average can be maintained. However, the full value of the Committee's work cannot be assessed on the basis of movement statistics alone. The work which is being done to improve the technical machinery of migration and to develop facilities for the better preparation of migrants before they depart and for their reception and placement on arrival will greatly increase the quality of migration and enhance its value to the European countries from which migrants will leave, to the immigration countries which will receive them, and by no means least, to the migrants themselves.