1. Austria: The Integration Agreement between martial rhethoric and liberal practice? Dr. Bernhard Perchinig University of Vienna Research Platform Human Rights in the European Context bernhard.perchinig@univie.ac.at

2. The political debate “We are making it clear that abuse of the social system will no longer be possible in the future. I fully support the negotiated solution of the so-called “sanction ladder” through which we are saying, Yes, sir! We want to know within 3 years if somebody who came to Austria after 1998 is at all willing and able to integrate! (…). If they cannot answer, then it is clear what shall happen: they will no longer be allowed to stay here! (….) With this law, we are making one thing clear: Austria is not and will never be an immigration country. We will make sure of that!” Peter Westenthaler, Head of the Parliamentary Group of the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ), 9.7.2002 in the Plenary Meeting of the Austrian Parliament.

3. The legal definition “The Integration Agreement serves the integration of permanently settled aliens. It is aimed at the acquisition of a basic knowledge of German in order to facilitate participation in the economic, cultural and societal life in Austria. This capability may be acquired by attending a German integration course.” § 50a FRG 2002

4. 2003 - 2006 Attendance of German – integration course (100 hours) Long list of exemptions Only 10% of target group had to attend a course in 2004 Amendment in 2005

5. Integration Agreement since 2006 Module 1: Proof of literacy –School certificate or –Attendance of literacy course for 75 hours Module 2: Proof of knowledge of German at level A2 –Attendance and exam of German – integration course of 300 hours –Certificate of recognised language training centre –Austrian school and training certificates

6. Integration Agreement since 2006 5 years Costs partly refunded Sanctions: –Financial penalties –Loss of residence permit –Deportation, if right to private and family life is not violated

7. Integration Agreement since 2006 Pure language regime No duty to attend a course No civic element No cultural element Deportations unlikely due to rulings of Constitutional Court –Long term residents without attached rights –Fines rarely applied

8. Integration agreement since 2005 „Key personnel“ and family members fulfil agreement automatically –60% of maximum pensionable income (2.600.-, 14 times a year) –Managerial function (pro forma criterion) Target group: –As no labour migration except key personnel only family migration –Family members of Austrian citizens –Family members of TCN earning less than 2.600.- and not attending school –Approx. 60% women

9. Integration, the Austrian way Earn more than Euro 2.600.- (14 times a year), or Be married to a person earning more than Euro 2.600.-, or Know German at level A 2, or Pass a vocational training or secondary education examination in Austria.

10. Implementation Well established „Austrian Language Diploma“ scheme bypassed New language training system by Austrian Funds of Integration ( = Ministry of the Interior) No cooperation with experts on teaching of German as a Second Language and Ministry of Education

11. Implementation „Integration Funds“ administers Integration Agreement –Growth of personnel and budget Austrian Language Diploma organised by Ministry of Education bypassed: –Critical „epistemic community“ Political background: Debate to move integration from Ministry of the Interior to State Secretariate for Integration Instituion building of Ministry of Interior in order to dominate integration field

12. State level differences Vienna: –One – stop system –Counselling structure –Information on social life and institutional structure in mother tongue –Extra financial support Lower Austria –District administration –No counselling structure –Language schools as legal advisers

13. Figures Completed education in Austria, key personnel, etc. Proof of German skills by a certificate from a certified institute Other (integration course) Total Year 2006301411026715795 2007256412227995485 2008275915717394655

14. Figures YearEnrolment Refund of course costs after passing examination 200643141733 200721260159 2008367654008 Until 30 June 2009 185591580 Total808987480

15. New resident permits for spouses Type of permit2006 % female2007 % female2008 % femal e2009 % female Settlement permit within the quota system352166.17483961.67452765.16386563.86 Settlement permit outside the quota system135951.3692753.4058555.73145149.69 Residence permit outside the quota system859558.58551747.92593354.49500154.91 Total1347559.841128354.271104558.931031757,52

16. Empirical results High acceptance of mandatory character by immigrants Psychological aspects more important than language learning High pass rates (around 90%) Illiteracy mainly among women from Turkey and the Arab world Lack of individualisation of courses A2 – level too low for labour market Exclusion of EU nationals and asylum seekers from refunding No funding for further courses (B1) Sociolects vs. Standard Language

17. Muslim women as target group? Kurier: Is it realisitic, that all will have acces to language courses at home? Fekter: Who is able to manage the logistics necessary to come to Austria also is able to learn German. People should learn our language and our values. How we live in Europe, how our legal system works, and that women are equal to men. Kurier: How do you learn this in a village in Eastern Anatolia? Fekter: How these people acquire their knowledge is their problem. But also in a village in Eastern Anatolia people know how to immigrate to Austria. What forms are needed, where to apply fro immigration. We are doing this in particular for women from these areas. Kurier: So it is a problem of Muslim women? Fekter: I would not reduce it solely to religion. (Kurier, 4.10.2010)

18. Conclusions Integration rethoric and symbolic policy No evaluation of results, bad organisation of language acquisition process May produce long term residents without attached rights Future: –A1 aimed to reduce immigration of illiterate spouses –A2 in two years will make deportations possible Positive psychological aspects – need for „third space“ to reflect effects of migration Emancipation of Muslim women as symbolic disguise for restrictive immigration policies Concept of „language“ needs reflection