Integrating Cities Conference 9 March 2012, contribution Ahmed Aboutaleb, mayor. Ladies and Gentlemen, My speech for today consists of three parts. First, I will comment for a bit on the current state of Rotterdam. Where are we at? Where do we stand when it comes to diversity and integration? Next, I will list a number of requirements or conditions for integration on the local level. This will, in truth, be a short summary of the experiences I have had and insights I have gained in this area over the more than three years I have by now served as mayor of Rotterdam. Finally, I will offer a number of recommendations for integration policy on the European level. Recommendations which, I hope, you will follow up on. Let's start with a few statistics on Rotterdam. Rotterdam has some 600,000 inhabitants and serves as the core of a wider area with a population of well over 1.2 million. An additional 7 million people reside within one hour's commute. In fact, Rotterdam is situated in a densely-urbanised area incorporating highly diverse landscapes and residential environments. Consequently, the population composition is also highly diverse. Rotterdam, like all other cities in Western Europe, is characterised by change. An old city, with a new city centre and a young population. Over the last 150 years, we witnessed remarkable growth, due to migration from the countryside. At first, from different parts of the Netherlands, later on from the whole of Europe and the overseas' territories. Rotterdam is a multi-ethnic society, harbouring more than 174 different nationalities. Population forecasts predict that ten years from now some 60% of the inhabitants will have foreign roots. Rotterdam is a city made up out of minority populations, which is what grants the city its special dynamism.

2

And it raises the question what a city is able to cope with. My view would be that a city can cope with a great deal. As a city's absorption tolerance is very high. But we do need to be aware of the feelings such an influx generates in the current residents. We should not trivialise or deny the existence of these feelings, but take them into account where the pace of this influx and the manner in which the new entrants merge with the old population are concerned. Nonetheless, the influx is necessary and good for the city. Cities are attractive to people wanting to get ahead. Cities are where people are able to climb a few rungs on the social ladder. This applies to Rotterdam, and also to Amsterdam. Though we do notice a difference. In Rotterdam, people start out a bit lower on the social ladder than they do in Amsterdam, and jump off earlier as well. We may look at cities as places where people develop their talents, as workshops in which the rough diamonds are cut. One may perhaps think it a bit of a shame to then see them leave to sparkle somewhere else, but one may also rejoice in the newly arriving rough diamonds. In fact, one may be proud that the city in this fashion brings a new light into the world. What's more, all those diamonds are the ambassadors for one's city. The statistics show that this process of social advancement does, in fact, take place. Over the past ten years, Amsterdam saw the percentage of people having received secondary or higher education rise from 66% to 74%. In Rotterdam, the figure rose from 51% to 60%. Here, too, we can see that both cities are doing well, albeit with a phase difference. This forms an important conclusion from the report 'De Staat van de Integratie', in English, the 'State of Integration', which was presented this week by Han Entzinger, of Rotterdam, and Paul Scheffer, of Amsterdam. We are we are pleased with the analyses of both scientists for their analyses, and we can really put them to use. As we should.

3

Because the statistics show that the upward movement is coming to a standstill on some rungs of the ladder. It has become clear that some groups miss their connection and stay behind. We need to be on high alert for this. This, as such conditions of slowdown and standstill are dangerous to a city, may give rise to disintegration and crime. To use the metaphor of the acceleration lane, in order to merge you have to speed up and floor the accelerator. 'Flooring' here means: develop yourself, go to school, learn a language, take courses. If you don't do this, if you step on the brake, you are a danger to yourself and to others. If you don't learn new things, you're standing still. To continue the acceleration lane metaphor, this also means that those on the highway should have a regard for those trying to merge. They need to make way. Sometimes, this will even call for zip merging. But this, too, is easier if those trying to merge are going at the same speed as those on the highway. It is every metropolis's task to enthuse and stimulate people to expand their knowledge and range of skills. Our goals are: higher Cito standardised test results, a better command of spoken and written Dutch, a higher educational level, higher basic qualifications, more attention to healthcare and a higher employment rate. We, the city government, have a duty to make it clear to all 'Rotterdammers' that education and the development of talents are number one priorities. Rotterdam is a learning city. * * * Next, I will list a number of requirements or conditions for integration on the local level. It's been six years since we held the first Integrating Cities Conference. Politicians, policy makers and practical experts got together to find ways to boost the integration process.

4

It was launched in 2006, in Rotterdam. The then Euro Commissioner Frattini desired that collaboration be more permanent. He took the initiative to organise an annual conference, held first in Rotterdam and next in Milan, resulting in the Milan Declaration, containing agreements between the European cities and the European Commission on improved collaboration in the field of developing integration policy. The European Commission also launched the European Integration Fund. The following year, in Berlin, relationships were solidified, and in 2010, in London, a Charter was drawn up, which Rotterdam co-signed. The Charter sets a shared vision for cities all over Europe: 'Our vision of integration is one where all city residents can develop their full potential and have an equal chance of a life in safety and dignity.' On the basis of six years' worth of debate, we are now able to phrase a number of starting principles, of conditions for the integration process. I will list three: Integration depends on the enforcement of the fundamental human rights; Integration will only succeed if people are themselves responsible for making it happen; Integration means collaboration, co-creation. I will briefly comment on these points: (1) We agree that cultural relativism is not an option. In the final years of the previous century the view that we should not criticise each other's cultural or religious backgrounds was widely held. This was a strange form of tolerance. A lot of blind eyes were turned to preserve the peace. The turn of the century represented a marked change on this viewpoint. The traumatic 9/11 experiences certainly contributed. It was ever more recognised that Western society is based on a set of universal values which are worth defending. Those fundamental values are: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, equality of men and women, of homosexuals and heterosexuals, and combating discrimination. New arrivals must accept the norms and values of

5

the rule of law. A great many things are subject to change, but these are fixed, fundamental core values. Values we should cherish. During every civic integration ceremony at city hall, we say: 'Today, you will receive your certificate, but you may decline to accept it. This is your own, free choice. Should you choose to accept the certificate, you choose for Dutch society. You will adhere to the rules we have agreed on together, you will speak Dutch and will actively participate. That is all. Should you not want to do this, should you choose not to do this, no offence taken - but in that case, there are planes available every day to return you to countries more in agreement with your views. It's that clear. (2) The second requirement is for us to look, not at where we come from, but where we are going to. This is a process involving both parties, just like merging on the road. You give each other space here, as well. The European New Agenda even speaks about a process involving three parties, as transitions in the countries of origin also play a part. I would like to emphasise that we need to realise we're lucky to live in a world granting us opportunities. But this comes with a duty for every person to seize those opportunities present. There is no room here for unwarranted victimisation. Everyone is tasked with developing themselves by improving and making use of their talents. This is one's own responsibility. Pointing towards others or the government doesn't cut it. New arrivals are themselves responsible for their civic integration. Should you come here, should you come to live here, you will have to do your utmost to integrate into society, to find a job, to follow education and to learn to speak the language. This is why we put so much emphasis on talent development in Rotterdam. We say to all students: finish school and find a challenging job. Companies are in dire need of motivated professionals. We also call on the first generation of new arrivals to learn the language, together with their school-going grandchildren. They are given a unique second chance.

6

(3) Which brings me to the third requirement of integration: a government that knows its place. A society of confident, responsible citizens deserves a government that knows what to do, but also where to stay its hand. A government strictly enforcing the fundamental rights. A government listening to the feelings of local residents, sounding out discontent and employing the right measures when a neighbourhood needs a break. A government providing the right stimuli for inter-cultural dialogue, for talent development, for participation. The 'how' of a government performing its duties becomes ever more important. It's not about taking away the initiative from others, but about providing support where needed. So, a government that inspires trust. We do so, for instance, through our 'the neighbourhood rules' initiative. Every two weeks, the chief constable and I visit a neighbourhood and talk with the residents about issues of security in the area. Together, we determine the main issues, which then become leading priorities for the police and the municipality. But we also make agreements about what residents and entrepreneurs themselves will do to improve the neighbourhood. Because it's their game as well. These are the three main requirements for a form of integration which no longer allows for cultural relativism and unwarranted victimisation. Integration is based on the fundamental values of the democratic rule of law. Integration is something one does oneself. The government then only has the responsibility to provide support, opting for co-creation. That is integration in the year 2012. * * *

7

Ladies and Gentlemen, I'd also like to make a few critical comments today. Europe launches Charters and Conferences. That's great, but what we really need are results. Not that there's a reason to have something against declarations and memoranda, but, as a former politician once said: 'You cannot live in them.' Problems require solutions and that is why we ask Europe for help. And we say: 'Don't just talk, act!' What would the EU be able to do? I'll list six points of attention. 1) Arrange for clear frameworks and preconditions for successful integration, but do realise that integration policy, in its implementation, is predominantly a local matter. It is on the local level that social cohesion may be enhanced. Continue to facilitate local governments, both by providing information and funds and by exchanging best practices. 2) Be aware of the currently uncertain legal status and rights of third-country residents. Local governments are particularly affected by this when it comes to integration policy. With regard to asylum seekers who have exhausted all appeals, all Member States and Europe must coordinate their laws and regulations. In current practice, that particular group often falls between two stools, the cities having to carry the burdens (crime, education of the children). 3) Strive for a level playing field. Member States implement EU regulations differently. Legislation needs to be harmonised, as some Member States pursue a stricter policy than others do ('Poland debate'). Further harmonisation of legislation is necessary. The debate needs to be held. Primarily, of course, by the European Parliament and the national parliaments. And during city debates (though preferably not over the Internet...). 4) Broaden European integration policy to encompass not only 'third nationals', but all new arrivals. In practice, the city/Rotterdam does not differentiate between new arrivals. It's inconsequential whether they come from third countries or from other EU Member States.

8

Rotterdam thus advocates involving 'integration of EU citizens' in the European Integration Agenda and using European Integration Fund funding not only for the integration of third-country nationals, but also to remedy integration issues involving new arrivals from Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic States. 5) Support and facilitate city debates, dialogue, language education, civic integration courses, employment projects, emancipation projects, anti-discrimination projects, etc. Arrange for a systematic exchange and monitoring of experiences, innovations, successes and failures on the local level. Make ESF, Progress and INTI funding available for these types of initiatives. 6) Establish priorities. Europe currently proceeds from the ten Common Basic Principles. That's nice, but it is too vague. We need to make clearer choices. I propose making the three requirements I mentioned in the first part of my speech into starting principles: Respect for fundamental rights, personal responsibility and co-creation. These, to me, are the three cornerstones of a common European integration policy. I hope we'll set to work on making this happen!