Verlenging naturalisatietermijnen

Reactie

Vraag1

I am writing as a Dutch citizen who is deeply disappointed to see that this bill has been proposed. This explanation of the proposal of this bill opens with the fact that The Netherlands is becoming “more densely populated, older, and more diverse.” However, what I object to is the statement that follows: “If no measures are taken, the prosperity of the country will be in jeopardy.”

Diversity does not threaten the prosperity of The Netherlands but rather strengthens it. Highly skilled “knowledge” immigrants are an essential part of the Dutch economy, making up 45 percent of the total amount of non-EU immigrants. These immigrants fill in labour gaps caused by the aging Dutch population, particularly in IT and healthcare.

There is also no clear evidence that integration after 5 years is inadequate. With the current naturalization law in place, immigrants must already pass a civic integration exam after 3 years of residency that involve reaching a level of A2 in Dutch and must pass an exam about Dutch culture and society.

Extending this term would not improve integration but would rather place immigrants in a longer period of uncertainty and anxiety. I believe that 10 years is too long to wait to enjoy the full rights that Dutch citizens enjoy. It is deeply unfair to the people already in the process of naturalisation, and it was not stated in the bill proposal that an exception will be made for those who have already resided in The Netherlands for a number of years. This is a glaring oversight that makes me concerned that not enough thought was put into the proposal.

Our neighbouring countries, Belgium and Germany, both have laws that grants citizenship after 5 years. I decline to see why we cannot continue to follow in their footsteps instead of taking the lead from Portugal and Spain. I believe that other measures can be taken to promote integration, such as raising the language requirement to B1 instead of A2.

Ultimately, I believe that naturalisation extension is not meaningful for integration promotion. I am concerned that this bill was proposed on ideological grounds rather than practical concerns.