Ladies and gentlemen,

I am delighted to address the First Special International
Conference, at the Ministerial Level, of Developing Countries with
Substantial International Migrant Flows, and to share with you some
of IOM views on the themes of the UN High-Level Dialogue on
International Migration and Development, which will take place in
New York precisely five months from now.

But at the outset, allow me to congratulate all of you for
having convened this meeting of extraordinary importance. I believe
we are witness today to the birth of a new, crucial actor in the
international debate on migration. Your group, which was born under
the auspices of the G77, has the ambition and the potential to
represent a key constituency in that debate.

The very fact that such a large and prominent group of
Developing Countries from where originate a large proportion of the
200 million migrants living in the world today has agreed to meet
today, not only to compare notes, but also to work together towards
the definition of a joint position in view of the High-Level
Dialogue is a truly historic step, one which may bring a major,
positive contribution to the discussion on international migration.
I would like to applaud especially the hard work and successful
efforts deployed by the Government of Peru in organizing this
International Conference.

As you know, other important meetings have been held in the past
months, in a process of “spontaneous” preparation for
the High-Level Dialogue, to which IOM is proud to contribute. Just
to name a few, in this region of the world, the Sixth South
American Conference on Migration took place in Asuncion at the
beginning of May, while, in the same days, San Salvador hosted the
11th Regional Conference on Migration (Puebla Process). In other
areas of the world, allow me to recall the APC Workshop held in
Bangkok at the end of April, as well as the MIDSA Worsksop on
Migration, Poverty and Development in Southern Africa, which took
place in Windhoek almost at the same time.

This long series of meetings focused on the preparation for the
High-Level Dialogue started last March in Brussels, with the
Conference on Migration and Development - to which I had the honour
to participate - and will continue in the next months. It provides
us, I believe, with the most striking evidence of the absolute
relevance of the issue of migration in the agenda of most
Governments, everywhere in the world. The convening of the UN
High-Level Dialogue has acted as the catalyst for this process, but
certainly the issues at stake go well beyond that event.

The debate on migration, as I am sure this Conference will
authoritatively highlight, goes straight to the heart of national
and international affairs; it involves concerns and expectations of
hundred of million of people; it touches upon reciprocal respect of
cultural and social behaviors. Discussing all those aspects of
migration would bring us perhaps too far, so allow me to focus the
remaining of my interventions on two subjects.

First, I would like to discuss with you the link between
migration and development. And second, how the High Level Dialogue
can contribute to understanding that relationship better, and to
benefiting more from its positive potential.

What is the relationship between migration and development? As
with many complex issues, there is unfortunately no simple answer
– and especially so when people are involved. What there is,
is a two-way, positive and negative connection between migration
and development. Migration can be both a cause and a result of
underdevelopment. Underdevelopment, in turn, can be either
alleviated or exacerbated by migration. These general statements
illustrate that migration cannot be categorically seen as either an
obstacle to development, or as a strategy for its achievement. At
the global level, evidence shows that migration has a net positive
impact; however, its effect on development in individual countries
and communities depends on the political, social, legal and
economic environments in which migration takes place, and on the
characteristics, resources and behaviour of individual
migrants.

This overall positive assessment represents a significant shift
in thinking from a predominantly negative view which prevailed in
the 1980s, for example. Before, the emphasis was on the need to
eradicate the root causes of migration, brain drain, labour force
depletion and rural exodus. Now, while legitimate concerns remain,
in some of your countries, to reduce migration – for instance
- of certain categories of qualified workers, there is a growing
interest in the economic, social and cultural contributions of
migrants and how migration can help alleviate demographic and
labour market pressures in both countries of origin and
destination.

Let me now touch briefly on a few main elements of the
migration/development nexus specific to countries of
destination.

Migration can bring substantial macro-economic benefits to
destination countries by mitigating labour shortages, enhancing
human capital formation, and creating the job opportunities and
wealth which come from migrant entrepreneurial activities and the
demand for goods and services they create. These are also factors
which can increase the flexibility and productivity of the economy
as a whole, and contribute to growth.

Many destination countries have traditionally adopted
restrictive approaches to immigration based on concerns that
migration can undermine local wages and working conditions and
create security and social problems. Evidence shows, however, that
migration has minimal negative effect on wages and employment in
host countries. Moreover, no direct correlation between migration
and unemployment has been found.

To avoid potential negative effects in countries of destination,
the challenges of migration have to be addressed. While many
countries have come to embrace the diversity that migration brings
to their society, the need remains to preserve social stability and
cohesion and ensure mutually beneficial relationships between
migrants and destination communities remains. In short, migration
needs to be managed through proactive, comprehensive and coherent
governmental policies.

Let’s turn now to some of the development impacts of
migration on countries of origin, an issue of major relevance for
all of you.

One of the key benefits of migration for countries of origin is
the positive impact of remittances on poverty reduction, foreign
reserves and the balance of payments. There is also growing
recognition of the value of knowledge and skills-transfer when
migrants return home – whether temporarily or permanently,
and whether physically or virtually. “Virtualy” because
technology has made possible new and dynamic linkages between
diasporas and their countries of origin via internet – and
more and more migrants and countries of origin are exploring them.
Another readily apparent benefit lies in a certain level of relief
from unemployment and underemployment. And very importantly,
migration can also lead to the empowerment of women and other
groups.

But there are also potentially negative effects of migration on
countries of origin. Dependency of a country’s economy on the
remittances of migrants is one. Another is the brain drain that can
occur as a result of skilled emigration. Managing migration –
for example, by promoting circular migration - is therefore
essential. In particular, we need to work toward a better regulated
international labour market. Failure to do so will not only
adversely affect global economic growth. It will also fuel
irregular migration. And irregular migration opens the door for
human trafficking – an abuse of human rights, especially
women’s rights, which at its root is a byproduct of
underdevelopment, while a regulated market would substantially
strengthen migrants’ rights, dignity, working and living
conditions.

The High Level Dialogue - let me turn to the final part of my
address - will take the multilateral debate on migration and
development to a new level. This will be a unique opportunity to
move from words to action. In that respect, the very format -
combining plenary sessions with less formal, theme-based round
tables, all at the ministerial level - holds promise that greater
common understanding can be reached and ways found to move forward
in addressing the challenges of today’s new global migration
scenario.

IOM would suggest that there are seven key messages which the
High Level Dialogue should make its own. Since we know that the
High Level Dialogue will not produce a negotiated outcome, some of
those points might be reflected in the Chair’s Summary;
others will require to be negotiated within the General Assembly,
in the following months. In the interest of time, I will go through
them only as seven “headlines”, but I have distributed
a sheet to all of you which summarizes the rationale behind our
suggestions and what, concretely, they could produce.

Our seven key messages would be:

First, Migration needs to be better integrated into development
policy and planning. Migration impact analyses should figure in
development project planning. At the national level, the High Level
Dialogue should call for migration to be incorporated in national
development strategies and, whenever relevant, in Poverty Reduction
Strategy Papers (PRSPs).

Second, countries need migration policies and the internal
capacity to develop them. It is striking how many countries do not
have comprehensive migration policies, and not only in the
developing world. The High Level Dialogue should result in clear
recognition of the cross cutting nature of migration and should
recommend creation of inter-ministerial working groups as a
“good practice”.

Third, the business community needs to be drawn into the
migration debate. The business community plays a critical role in
the economics of migration. Yet it has usually been absent from the
table, especially at the international level. The High Level
Dialogue should explicitly recommend real partnership between
governments, intergovernmental organizations, the private business
sector and civil society.

Fourth, better mechanisms are needed to match supply and demand
of labor globally. The labor market is increasingly global.
Mechanisms to measure and match supply and demand, to provide
frameworks for humane, safe, legal and orderly flows to meet the
needs, and to maximize the development potential of migration, have
not kept pace. The High Level Dialogue should tackle this crucial
aspect I already referred to earlier on.

Fifth, the development potential of diasporas needs to be
explored and enhanced. There is growing focus on diasporas as
motors of development – and not only through their
remittances. The High Level Dialogue must continue to call for the
cost of remittances to be reduced. But it should go beyond that to
encourage better understanding of the relationship between
diasporas and home countries, and what motivates diasporas to
invest time, energy or money back home.

Sixth, regional consultations are a key tool for international
understanding and action. The Asia-Pacific and the Latin American
regions have been leaders in this field. More could be done
globally to achieve cross-fertilization between them globally, and
to benefit from good practice and lessons learned. Your new
“group”, which has a trans-regional dimension, could
play a crucial role in this process.

Seventh - last but certainly not least - better understanding of
migration law will benefit States and migrants alike. Improving
knowledge and understanding about the human rights of migrants will
result in better treatment of migrants. IOM has taken on the task
of compiling and disseminating information about the vast body of
existing international migration law and has begun focused training
sessions. More efforts like this are needed.

Ladies and gentlemen,

In closing my remarks, let me be very frank with you and add a
last key message: let’s keep the focus of the High Level
Dialogue on substance rather than on process, on action instead of
bureaucracy. I am referring here to the need – of which we
are all perfectly aware - of better coordinating the roles and
responsibilities of the many international actors engaged in
migration related activities.

As you know, the UN Secretary General has recently endorsed the
creation of the Global Migration Group, as an expanded and
strengthened successor of the Geneva Migration Group. I think it
would be fair to leave some time to the GMG to prove its
effectiveness in addressing the task of providing coherence to the
organizational response to migration requirements. The GMG will be
accountable to States, both collectively and through the governing
bodies of its member agencies, and States will evaluate its
efficacy, transparency and effectiveness.

To achieve this there is no need to create new bureaucratic
structures, but simply to make best use of those already existing,
without investing additional resources. I can assure you that IOM
is committed to work with the UN and other relevant organizations
in a spirit of full and transparent cooperation, for the benefit of
all parties concerned, and first and foremost - as we have been
doing for more than fifty years - in the interest and on behalf of
migrants themselves.

Thank you for your attention.