These are the requirements that the mayors have put on the table in the consultation with the cabinet to defuse the reception crisis. They really want to do their best to realize more emergency accommodation for asylum seekers, but then the cabinet must have a clear plan for the long term.
“The cabinet has labeled this as a national crisis, but it is not acting on it,” says a mayor of a large city. Another mayor: “It is always: a thousand asylum seekers come in, so we ask the municipalities for a thousand places. That way you are always behind the times. Let’s just recognize that we will have to receive large numbers of asylum seekers in the next ten years at least and put in place a good infrastructure for this, whereby we divide the burden somewhat evenly. The cabinet acts as if it happens to us unexpectedly every time.”
The security regions are upset that nothing has been learned from the migration crisis in 2015, says a mayor of a medium-sized city. “Everyone agreed that you should not always scale down the reception when the influx is less. That there must be a flexible shell of reception places. That the IND and COA must be paid in a structural manner. None of that happened. Now we can clean up the mess.”
The cabinet is asking the security regions to take turns to realize additional emergency shelters for the next three months. This means that the mayor of the largest municipality in a security region, who is also the chairman, must instruct his ‘smaller’ colleagues how many shelters he should create. The chairmen of the security regions do not have that authority at all. “Anything is possible with the reception of Ukrainians and with the corona crisis I also had perseverance. Now I have to rely on collegiality,” says a mayor. The government must arrange this properly. The mayors also want help finding staff to man the extra reception. In some municipalities, policy officers are busy purchasing toothpaste for asylum seekers.
Long-term
The wish list from the security regions leads to nervous consultation between the ministers involved, can be heard behind the scenes at the Ministry of Justice and Security. More prospects for the long term are quickly being sought, while it has been noted for months in government circles that there is hardly any prospect. “Obviously, additional reception places are being requested from municipalities, so the cabinet has to make something in return for the long term,” says one person involved.
Inquiries show that the long-term to be outlined mainly consists of an accumulation of the aforementioned plans. For example, the conversion of central government offices, so-called ‘flex homes’ and cruise ships. State Secretary Van der Burg (Asylum) is also working on a plan to reduce the influx, although it is questionable whether this will help in the short term.
Work is also being done on ‘legal instruments’ to enforce reception places. Van der Burg (Asylum) is supporting a bill that would allow municipalities to be forced to receive asylum seekers, because, according to him, some municipalities are now failing. That bill must be presented before the summer, but it may still take months before the House of Representatives and the Senate have approved it. The VVD State Secretary previously expressed the expectation that the proposal must be adopted by both Houses ‘still this year’. This means that chairmen of security regions will be without legislation for at least six months with which they can push through. The plan was previously to be able to distribute asylum seekers across provinces with that bill. They would then be given ‘persistence’ to distribute asylum migrants among municipalities.
The ministers involved will again consult with the mayors of the security council on Thursday evening or Friday morning.