FRAMING of a LOCAL ASYLUM SITUATION a Study on the Establishment and Development of Different Types of Framing by Local Actors in Cranendonck

FRAMING OF A LOCAL ASYLUM SITUATION A study on the establishment and development of different types of framing by local actors in Cranendonck

Student: Jette Boere Student Number: 911207085100 Supervisor: Dik Roth Course code: LAW-80436 Date: May 2016

Wageningen PageUR 0

Table of content Table of content ...... 1 Abstract ...... 4 1 Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers ...... 5 1.1 Introduction to the current multi-layered asylum crisis ...... 5 1.2 Objective and research question ...... 7 1.3 Methodology ...... 8 1.3.1 Qualitative field study ...... 9 1.3.2 Quantitative case study ...... 11 1.3.3 Literature study ...... 12 1.4 Overview of this thesis ...... 13 2 Theoretical framework ...... 16 2.1.1 Policy translation ...... 17 2.1.2 Framing ...... 19 2.2 Conclusion ...... 22 3 European and Dutch asylum policies ...... 23 3.1 Introduction to the international migration crisis ...... 23 3.2 Context of the European asylum system ...... 26 3.2.1 The European Asylum Procedure ...... 28 3.2.2 Recent establish- and developments on the European level ...... 30 3.3 Context of the Dutch asylum policy ...... 32 3.3.1 Asylum procedure ...... 35 3.3.2 Shelters and their distribution ...... 39 3.3.3 The aftermath of the asylum procedure ...... 41 3.4 Conclusion ...... 44 4 Asylum centres in Cranendonck ...... 46 4.1 Short historical introduction of Cranendonck ...... 46 4.2 Budel-Dorplein ...... 47 4.3 Budel-Cranendonck ...... 48 4.3.1 Request to host 1,200 asylum seekers ...... 50

4.3.2 Informative meetings and periodic consultations ...... 51 4.3.3 A second and third request ...... 52 4.3.4 A permanent asylum shelter ...... 53 4.3.5 Informative sessions ...... 55 4.3.6 Council meeting ...... 55 4.4 Conclusion ...... 61 5 The asylum seekers in Cranendonck ...... 63 5.1 Local opinions on the characteristics of asylum seekers ...... 63 5.1.1 Worries and complaints ...... 67 5.1.2 Competition caused by asylum seekers ...... 73 5.2 Local entrepreneurs and supermarkets ...... 75 5.3 Conclusion ...... 79 6 Narratives of local residents ...... 81 6.1 Framing of local circumstances ...... 81 6.1.1 Number of asylum seekers ...... 84 6.1.2 Habituation ...... 89 6.2 Local opinions on COA ...... 91 6.2.1 Communication ...... 92 6.2.2 Transparency ...... 94 6.2.3 Promises ...... 97 6.3 Local opinions on the municipality of Cranendonck ...... 99 6.3.1 Communication towards local residents ...... 101 6.3.2 Local participation ...... 104 6.4 Conclusion ...... 107 7 The role of media in framing ...... 109 7.1 Short introduction on media influence ...... 109 7.2 Reactions on local, traditional, media ...... 112 7.3 Reactions on social media ...... 114 7.3.1 Opponents’ Facebook group “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers” ...... 115 7.3.2 Proponents’ Facebook group “We, Cranendonckers, welcome you” ...... 119 7.3.3 Reactions on Twitter ...... 124 7.4 AZC Alert ...... 128 2

7.5 Petition ...... 130 7.6 “Pass the warmth” ...... 132 7.7 Conclusion ...... 134 8 Discussion, conclusion and recommendations ...... 135 8.1 Discussion ...... 135 8.2 Conclusion ...... 138 8.3 Recommendations ...... 141 9 References ...... 143 10 Appendix ...... 153 10.1 Online questionnaire ...... 153 10.2 Statistical analyses ...... 161 10.2.1 Descriptives ...... 161 10.2.2 Frequencies ...... 167 10.2.3 Correlations ...... 188 10.2.4 Graphs ...... 192

Abstract The current influx of asylum seekers in Europe and the Netherlands is causing pressure on the European and national asylum procedures and the local implementation of them. This research studied the way in which local actors in the municipality of Cranendonck frame the local asylum situation as well as the other local actors involved in the translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies on the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers on the local level in Cranendonck. Data for this thesis have been collected by means of interviews with actors involved, a quantitative questionnaire and a multi- levelled literature study on the European and national asylum policies.

The narratives of local residents of Cranendonck, the frames applied to describe other local actors involved, for example the municipality and COA, and to evaluate the local situation with regard to the asylum centre and its inhabitants are indicated and explained. Furthermore, the importance of traditional and social media is discussed. Its influence on the formulation of the frames applied by actors on the local level is stressed. It can be concluded that the establishment of the different frames is influenced by different external factors such as personal experiences, personal assumptions, prior knowledge, experienced personal advantages or disadvantages and media publications. It is also concluded that communication flows influence the levels of trust and the openness to listen to the stories and arguments of others and therefore they are an important factor in the establishment of the frames applied by local residents. Since the external factors can differ, different frames are established by different local residents to evaluate the asylum situation as well as the actors involved in these processes.

1 Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers Migration flows are multi-layered issues that influence and include not only the countries of origin and destination. International, national and local regulations and policies have been developed and readjusted to manage the current the migration flows (EuropeanCommission, 2015d, 2015f). The terms migrant, asylum seeker and refugee are sometimes mistaken or interchangeably used, however these words have highly variating meanings and indicate different groups of people. To avoid ambiguities and mistakes, the internationally applied definitions of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees are presented below. These definitions are applied when referring to the different groups of people in the remain of this research.

An international distinction is made between migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. The definition of a migrant, as formulated by the European Commission is “a broader-term of an immigrant and emigrant that refers to a person who leaves from one country or region to settle in another, often in search of a better life” (EuropeanCommission, 2012).

The EU member states are able to grand an official refugee status to third country nationals. People awaiting this process are called asylum seeker. The official definition of an asylum seeker in global context is “a person who seeks safety from persecution or serious harm in a county other than their own and awaits a decision on the application for refugee status under relevant international and national instruments”. In EU context this definition is formulated as “a person who has made an application for protection under the Geneva Convention in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken” (EuropeanCommission, 2015b). After the asylum application is approved the involved member state is recognizing this third country national or a stateless person as a refugee and by granting him or her with an official (temporary) refugee status (EuropeanUnion, 2004).

In the Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 a refugee is defined as “a third country national who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group, is outside the country of nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country, or a stateless person, who, being outside of the country of former habitual residence for the same reasons as mentioned above, is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return to it, and to whom Article 12 does not apply” (EuropeanUnion, 2004). Article 12 of this Council Directive describes the circumstances under which people are excluded from being a refugee and receiving that status. 1.1 Introduction to the current multi-layered asylum crisis Since the emerge of the Arab spring in 2011, the number of internally and externally displaced Syrians increased. This resulted in a direct increase of the migration flow of Syrian residents towards the European Union and its member states. Aside from those Syrian migrants, residents from Afghanistan, Iraq and, to a lesser extent, from Kosovo and Eritrea made their way to Europe in their search for asylum. In 2014 the number of first time asylum applicants in Europe was estimated on 563,000 thousand. In 2015, this number of first time asylum applicants in Europe doubled to 1.26 million (eurostat, 2016a). Once arrived in Europe, many asylum seekers continue their travels towards Western and Northern countries in Europe. In 2015, most asylum application claims were filed in Germany, where the total number of asylum

5 requests is estimated on 442,000. In the Netherlands, the total number of asylum applications in 2015 is estimated on 43,000, most of which were filed by Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers (eurostat, 2016a).

On the national level, more asylum centres (AZC), Process shelter locations1 (POL) and Central reception locations2 (COL) have been established to guarantee shelter location for the asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands. Figure 1 below visualizes the spread of those shelter locations over the Netherlands. Asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands need to go to Ter Apel to officially apply for asylum (COA, n.d.-j). In Ter Apel they are registered where after they are sheltered in Ter Apel or Budel-Cranendonck. At these two locations, asylum seekers are sheltered during the official asylum procedure. Due to the current number of asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands, delays occurred prior to the start of the official asylum procedure. These delays result in an awaiting phase during which asylum seekers are sheltered in emergency locations where they awaiting the start of the Dutch asylum procedure (Schippers, 2016)3.

Figure 1: Number of asylum centres (A), POLs (B), and COLs (C) in the Netherlands, reported by COA on 21-04-2016

Budel-Cranendonck is the second asylum centre located in the municipality of Cranendonck, which was established in May 2014 at the former Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Currently, a total of 1,700 asylum seekers can be sheltered in Budel-Cranendonck, and together with the almost 300 asylum seekers that are sheltered in Budel-Dorplein, the municipality of Cranendonck hosts approximately 2,000 asylum seekers (COA, n.d.-a, n.d.-b). The establishment of a second asylum centre in Cranendonck led to some dissatisfied local responses however, a big protest never occurred (EindhovensDagblad, 2014b). In November 2015, COA filed a request to the municipality of Cranendonck to change the character of the second asylum centre, from temporary to permanent. Despite this request has, so far, not led to resident protest in Cranendonck, it did result in local discussion between local residents, residents and the municipality, local residents and COA, and between the different political parties in Cranendonck. In these discussions, different frames were applied by the involved actors to describe each other and to evaluate the local situation (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). Furthermore, this request led to publications in both traditional

1 Procesopvanglocatie 2 Centrale ontvangstlocatie 3 Interview COA employee Mr. Schippers, Budel, January 21 2016 6 and social media, online discussions between proponents and opponents of the asylum centres and its inhabitants, and the establishment of locally organized actions (Facebook, 2014a, 2014b). 1.2 Objective and research question On the European, national and local level different policies are established, translated and implemented that aim to manage the increasing migration flows, and to guarantee an equalized and high quality asylum procedure. Despite this, the current influx of asylum seekers remains pressing upon the European, national and local situation. This results in multi-levelled policy adjustments, establishments of alternative approaches and agreements, and different implementation methods. On the national level, the influx of asylum seekers resulted in member states (re-)establishing individual policies to manage and decrease the influx of asylum seekers into their countries, for example by the re-enforcement border controls. While on the local level in the Netherlands, the establishment of shelter location for asylum seekers results in unrest and dissatisfied citizen on the local level.

In this thesis I will research consequences of the increased migration flows towards Europe and the Netherlands on the local level by a municipality in the Netherlands, the municipality of Cranendonck. Also, the consequences and effects the current influx of asylum seekers has on this municipality will be explained. This is done by indicating both national and local policy translation and implementation, possible flaws in the translation processes or translation gaps that occurred, and the different types of framing applied by actors on the local level.

To structure this research, the following research question will be answered within this thesis:

How do local actors in the municipality of Cranendonck frame the local asylum situation and other local actors involved in the translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies regarding the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers in the municipality of Cranendonck and how are these frames established?

To answer this research question I will study and evaluate the practices and opinions of the diverse local actors in Cranendonck to indicate the frames they apply, and by visualizing the national and local policy translations processes. To perform this research, I will indicate the local circumstances, developments, activities, initiatives, opinions and debates of the local actors in Cranendonck with regard to the establishment and development of the asylum centres and its residents. Furthermore, I will explain the asylum policies constructed on the EU and the national level and the policy translation process to the national and local level. To structure this research, the following sub questions have been formulated:

 What is the European asylum policy and how is it formulated on an international level in the European Union?

By answering this sub-question, I will visualize the European asylum policy and the recent developments on the EU level with regard to policy adjustments and the establishment of new international agreements as a result of the current influx of asylum seekers in Europe. Knowing and understanding the EU asylum

7 policy, and coherent recent developments or adjustments is necessary to visualize the policy translation processes on the national and local level. To enable this, a second sub question is formulated as follows:

 How is the EU asylum policy translated to the national Dutch level, and how do asylum policies and laws established by the Dutch government expand or complement the national implementation of the EU asylum policy?

While answering this sub-question, I will visualize the implementation and translation processes of the EU asylum policy to the Dutch level. In doing so, I will explain the Dutch asylum policy while indicating in the policy translation process of the EU asylum policy to the Dutch national level. Also, the national policies on the establishment and management of shelter locations will be addressed while taking recent developments into account. I will use the information gained by answering the second sub question to study the local translation process of Dutch asylum policies and agreements, by means of a third sub question:

 What local practices and developments are performed by local actors in Cranendonck with regard to the establishment and developments of the asylum centres and the sheltered asylum seekers?

By answering this sub question I will indicate the activities of the municipality of Cranendonck with regard to the sheltering of asylum seekers. Furthermore, the local implementation of the national and EU asylum policies will be visualized, whereby attention will be paid to the local policy translation process and the possible flaws that occur during those processes. The consequences of those flaws as well as the framing process applied by the local residents in Cranendonck to describe the actor involved in the shelter of asylum seekers and to evaluate the local asylum situation will be highlighted by answering a fourth sub question:

 How are local frames established and applied by the residents of Cranendonck to describe the local situation with regards to the asylum seekers and all the actors involved in the establishment, development and implementation of the asylum centres in Cranendonck?

To answer this sub-question, I will research the establishment of different types of frames applied by local residents to evaluate the situation in Cranendonck and to describe all the actors involved with the asylum centres. This way I will explain the origin and development of the frames, and the local perceptions on the developments and management of the asylum situation in Cranendonck. By understanding the origin, establishment and stimulation of specific the frames applied by local residents in Cranendonck, I will explain both the local perceptions on involved actors as well as the evaluations of specific situation, both concerning the hosting of asylum seekers.

By combining the information derived from answering the four sub questions explained above, I will be able to answer the main research question. 1.3 Methodology As will be explained more thoroughly in the next chapter, the main focus of this research lies with the framing process, applied by the local residents of Cranendonck to evaluate the establishment, development and management of the asylum centres in the municipality and to describe the actors involved in the processes of translating and implementing (inter) national asylum policies to the local level. 8

To answer my research questions, I applied a combination of qualitative, quantitative and literature research techniques. The application of these methods will be explained below. 1.3.1 Qualitative field study Cranendonck is a municipality with approximately 20,000 inhabitants that is currently providing in shelter locations for almost 2,000 asylum seekers in two asylum centres, Budel-Dorplein and Budel-Cranendonck. For this study, I use the municipality of Cranendonck as a local levelled case study to collect data on the framing processes of local residents to describe the situation and the actors involved in the establishment, development and managing of the two asylum centres in the municipality. In practice, this data was collected by means event observations and semi-structured interviews.

To include the local residents in the decision making process on the possible establishment of a permanent asylum centre at Budel-Cranendonck, the municipality of Cranendonck organized three informative sessions at the 14th, 17th and 21st of December of 2015. Those informative sessions were organized at three separate locations, Budel-Dorplein, Budel and Maarheeze, from 5.00 PM to 7.00 PM. I visited all three informative sessions to observe the number of attendees, the course of the evening, as well as to witness and participate in local discussions on the asylum centre and its residents, and to get in contact with local residents of Cranendonck.

In total, I conducted 26 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with a total of 31 individuals, of which 18 local residents, four municipal employees including the mayor of Cranendonck, three COA employees including the location manager of Budel-Cranendonck, three local entrepreneurs, two initiators of local action with regard to the asylum seekers and one employee of VluchtelingenWerk Nederland. To ensure the in-depth character of these interviews, the duration varied between a minimum of 30 minutes and a maximum three hours, with an estimated average of 90 minutes. Furthermore, all interviews were, with the permission of the interviewees, recorded using a recording device to ensure the transparency of this research. To guarantee the anonymity of the local residents, two of the COA employees, the local entrepreneurs and the employee of VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, their names are adjusted or left out. The names of the municipal employees, including the mayor, the COA location manager and the two initiators are left unchanged.

The interviews with the 18 local residents focussed on the personal narratives of the residents themselves, therefore, a semi-structured interview technique was applied whereby specific subjects were discussed while enough time remained for personal stories, experiences and topics. The subjects covered in all 18 interviews with local residents concerned their opinions on the establishments and developments of the asylum centres, the communication and activities of actors involved in these processes such as the municipality of Cranendonck and COA, the opinions of the residents on, and their experiences with the asylum seekers in Cranendonck and the possible consequences of the arrival of the asylum seekers. The interviewed residents were approached using different techniques. First, I used Facebook messenger to approach residents that had been active on the Facebook pages either for opponent or proponent of the asylum seekers in Cranendonck. This resulted in interviews with eight residents, four of them were contacted through the opponents Facebook page, and four by means of the proponents Facebook page. I approached another four residents at the informative meetings organized by the municipality of Cranendonck. One of them at the first meeting in Budel-Dorplein, another one at the meeting in Budel 9 and the other two at the meeting organized in Maarheeze. The final six local residents were indicated using the snowball effect, whereby possible interviewees were indicated to me by local residents I already interviewed. To ensure the openness of the conversation during the interview, I aimed to visited the residents at places of their choice. Therefore, 16 out of 18 interviews were held at the residence of the interviewed resident. The remaining two interviews with local residents were held at a two different restaurant and bar named “de Bonte Oss” and “de Brasser” both located in the centre of the village Budel.

The interviews with the municipal employees and the mayor of Cranendonck were arranged at the informative session on December 14th 2015 in Budel-Dorplein, where I was able to approach mayor Vermue to request an official interview. By means of the snowball effect, I was able to arrange the interviews with the three other municipal officials. For the interviews with the mayor and the municipal officials I used a semi-structured, in-depth technique whereby the specific subjects were discussed while enough time remained for personal input, stories and experiences. The subjects covered in all interviews with the municipal officials concerned the establishments and developments of the asylum centre and the role of the municipality hereby, the role of the municipality in managing the asylum centres, the communication of the municipality towards the local residents, the communication between the municipality and COA, and the communication between the municipality and the national government. Furthermore, the critiques of local residents concerning the activities and communication of the municipality were also discussed. The interviews were held at the town hall in the centre of Budel.

In total, three interviews were held with COA employees, of which two program facilitators, one from Budel-Dorplein and the other one from Budel-Cranendonck, and the location manager of Budel- Cranendonck Mr. Zeebregts. The interviews with the Budel-Dorplein program manager was established by means of the snowball effect as a result of an interviews with a local resident of Cranendonck. The interview with the program facilitator and with the location manager of Budel-Cranendonck were arranged at the informative sessions. The interviews with the COA employees were semi-structured and in-depth, and were held at the asylum centres and concerned the topics identified before as well as subjects that occurred during the conversation. These subjects identified before, concerned the identification, establishments and developments of the asylum centres in Cranendonck, the role of COA in managing the asylum centres and its inhabitants, the communication of the COA towards the local residents and the communication between the municipality and COA. Furthermore, the critiques of local residents on the activities and communication of COA were also discussed.

Three more interviews were done with local entrepreneurs in Budel and Maarheeze. The location managers of Jumbo Maarheeze and of Jumbo Budel were reached by sending an informative e-mail on my research, phone contact and a visit at the supermarkets. An employee of the Albert Heijn in Budel was also reached through phone contact. Due to a lack of time, this last interview was done over the phone. These semi-structured interviews concerned the experience of the entrepreneurs with the asylum seekers in their shops, the effects and consequences of having asylum seekers as extra customers and the shopping behaviour of those asylum seekers.

The initiators of local actions regarding the asylum seekers were contacted by means of Facebook messenger. The interview with the initiator of “Pass the Warmth” was held at her residence in Weert, while the interview with the initiator of the petition against the establishment of a permanent asylum

10 centre at Budel-Cranendonck was done by means of Skype. Since the latter initiator only responded after the fieldwork had already finished, there was no possibility to arrange a real-time meeting. The semi- structured and in-depth interviews with the initiators concerned their motivation to establish their actions, the execution and the responses of the local residents of Cranendonck to the established actions. Furthermore, similar topics were discussed as in the interviews with local residents.

Finally, I was able to use the snowball effect to arrange an interview with an employee of VluchtelingenWerk Nederland. Due to scheduling difficulties and constraints in time, it was decided to do the interview over the telephone. Despite this, the interview had a semi-structured and in-depth character whereby prior selected subjects were discussed as well as personal experiences and stories. Those selected subjects concerned the occupation of the employee, and the changes at VluchtelingenWerk as a result of the current influx of asylum seekers. Furthermore, the collaboration between VluchtelingenWerk Nederland and the different municipalities in which they operate were discussed, as well as the national and local policies of VluchtelingenWerk. 1.3.2 Quantitative case study To support the findings gained by means of the qualitative research and to put them in a broader perspective when possible, I also performed a quantitative study. For the quantitative part of this research the municipality of Cranendonck was again used as local levelled case study. By means of the webpage thesistool.com, I created an online questionnaire containing 18 questions on the local asylum situation and the asylum seekers. The first 5 questions were designed to gain information on the respondents. The rest of the questions were divided in categories concerning COA, the municipality of Cranendonck, personal experiences with asylum seekers and a possible future for the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. In the questions respondents were asked to give ratings as to what extent they agreed or disagreed with given statements. Ratings ranged from 1, I completely disagree, to 5, I completely agree. A rating of 3 was considered neutral. The results of the questionnaire are analysed using IBM SPSS, whereby the descriptive statistics and the Pearson correlation coefficient is calculated. The Pearson correlation coefficient is calculated with a two tailed significance level α of 0.05, and the percentages used in this thesis are valid percentages. In total, the questionnaire received 99 respondents and the missing number varied between 9 and 22. To guarantee transparency, the research questions including the outcome of the online questionnaire are presented in the appendix.

In chapter 7, “The role of media in framing”, on page 109, I use another quantitative research tool to do an analysis of the traditional and social media activities with regard to the local asylum situation in Cranendonck. Hereby, local media sources from May 14th 2014, when COAs request of a second asylum centre in Cranendonck reached the municipality and the local residents, onwards are evaluated. Furthermore, the discussions on social media sources Facebook and Twitter are also included. To perform this analysis, the (social) media monitoring tool Coosto was applied. This is a monitoring tool approved by the Wageningen University. The search terms used for the data collection are the same for all sources and are: asylum seeker, asylum seekers, asylum centre, asylum, COA and refugee4. Also, the (news) items

4 Literal search: “asielzoeker OR azc OR asiel OR asielzoekers OR coa OR vluchteling” 11 selected for the traditional media evaluation in chapter 7, all concerned the situation in municipality of Cranendonck. 1.3.3 Literature study The third research technique I apply to answer my research questions is a literature study. I perform this study on three levels, the European, national and local level. First, the local levelled literature study will be discussed, since it closely ties with the qualitative and quantitative study addressed above. Thereafter the EU-levelled literature study will be discussed and finally the literature study on national policy documents.

The local levelled literature study concerns literature on local practices and municipal notifications and documents shared on the website of the municipality of Cranendonck. Including these documents in my research results in a broader local context, which gives me a more thorough insight in the municipal decision making process concerning the establishment and developments of the asylum centres in Cranendonck, and the possible permanent character of Budel-Cranendonck. These documents further enable me to explain the local implementation process and the policy translation processes prior to the implementation. Furthermore, I use articles derived from national and local newspapers as well as fragments local news channels to indicate the types of framing applied by the local actors involved to describe the asylum seekers, the municipality and COA, and to evaluate the local situation with regard to the establishments, developments and managing of the asylum centres and its inhabitants. These newspaper articles are derived directly from official newspaper webpage. Another part of the local levelled literature study concerns the media analysis of both traditional and social media. I analyse the activities and publications on two Facebook pages with regard to the asylum seekers in Cranendonck, as well as the Twitter activities concerning the asylum seekers in Cranendonck, and publications in traditional media sources such as local newspapers.

For the EU levelled literature study, I research the European asylum policy, developed by the European Union, that provides in guidelines to equalize the European asylum procedure in all EU member states. To address policy translation processes and visualize possible flaws and frictions within those process or indicate translation gaps, I study the EU policies, action plans and agreements between EU member states as well as between EU and non-EU member states. To perform this study, I use official EU policy documents, EU laws as well as scientific articles concerning an evaluation of the European policies, action plans and agreements with regard to asylum seekers and possible further recommendations. These policy documents and laws were derived from the policy database of the European Commission and the official EU and EC webpages. Furthermore, the scientific articles have been recalled by means of literature database Scopus and the WUR library. By ensuring the inclusion of up to date information and recent developments in the EU policies, activities and agreements regarding the managing of asylum seekers I also used information derived from international and national newspaper articles. These newspaper articles are derived directly from official newspaper webpage or by means of Lexis Nexis, using the same search terms as indicated above with regard to the social media analysing tool Coosto.

To research the translation processes of the EU asylum policies, agreements and guidelines to the national level in the Netherlands, I also study the Dutch asylum policies, laws and action plans, official documents and laws derived from the Dutch Ministry and the national government. To further explain the national 12 implementation of the asylum procedure, information was derived from the national executive actor COA. On their website, COA provides information on the execution of the national law on hosting asylum seekers and the different ways in which, and locations where this is organized. Furthermore, resent development and establishment preformed in response to the current numbers of asylum seekers are included on their website. A disadvantage however, part of COAs website lacks update notifications, which makes it impossible to determine when some of the information is published. However, to ensure the inclusion of recent national establishments and developments, information derived from national newspapers, news channels and national broadcasts is also included in this research. Hereby, attention is occasionally paid to the frames applied in these national news sources while presenting their information. 1.4 Overview of this thesis The above presented research questions are answered in this thesis by means of five different chapters, each providing relevant information to different aspects of the questions asked. First however, I will explain the theory applied to do this research and to construct answers to all the research questions. The theoretical concepts of policy translation and framing will be addressed in chapter 2, “Theoretical framework” on page 16.

In chapter 3, “European and Dutch asylum policies”, on page 23, I present a contextual background on European and national situation with regard to the current influx of asylum seekers. I also present the European and national policies, laws, agreements and guidelines with regard to the management of the asylum flows. This way I will explain and elaborate upon the policy translation processes from the EU to the national level. Thereafter, I will also visualize the national implementation. The direct policy translation, or the possible frictions that occur in the translation processes can possibly influence the policy translation processes and the implementation of those policies on the local level. The above contributes to answering the first two sub questions. Furthermore, this contextual information is required to understand how experiences and locally applied frames relate to the policies and implementation. This might indirectly affect the frames applied by local residents to describe the local actors involved in the translation process and the implementation, as well as the frames applied to evaluate the situation that occurs as a result of the implemented policies. This also makes it possible to differentiate between frames that come forth from policy, policy translation processes or a translation gap; and frames that come forth from miscommunication with regard to the policy.

Chapter 4, “Asylum centres in Cranendonck”, on page 46, subsequently concerns the local implementation of the national asylum policies, laws and agreements in the municipality of Cranendonck. In this chapter I will provide a more detailed contextual background on the local establishment and developments of the situation in Cranendonck with regard to the asylum centres and its inhabitants. Also, I indicate the frictions that occurred during the local translation processes of the national policies to the local level. In addition to this, I will emphasize on the local situation and implementation of the national policy, since this might influence the frames applied by local residents to describe the actors involved in the translation and implementation processes and the situation that occurs as a result of the implemented policies. Understanding the relation between the friction and the translation and implementation processes on a local level helps to understand and explain the frames applied by local actors. Therefore,

13 this chapter will contribute to visualize the frames applied on the local level, and that way contribute to answer the third and fourth sub questions.

The different frames that are applied by local residents of Cranendonck to describe the asylum seekers are explained in chapter 5, “The asylum seekers in Cranendonck”, on page 63. This chapter builds on the information provided in chapter 4 and contributes to answer the main question by studying the locally applied frames to describe the asylum seekers and the framing processes. By doing so, I aim to indicate the different aspects that have influenced the establishment of the frames applied by the local residents in Cranendonck. Gaining knowledge on the establishment of frames applied local residents to describe the asylum seekers, as well as the frames themselves, contributes to the understanding of the opinions of the residents in Cranendonck and the actions executed by them. Therefore, this chapter contributes to answer the fourth research question.

Chapter 6, “Narratives of local residents”, on page 79, discusses the narratives of local residents on the characteristics of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck and with regard to the communication and activities organized by COA and the municipality of Cranendonck. This way, the establishment and development of local framing activities concerning the evaluation of the features of the asylum centres in Cranendonck, and the characterization of the organizational actors COA and the municipality, are highlighted. Additionally, I will also show the point of view of the organizational actors, to be able to compare the frames applied by both residents and organizational actors. By highlighting the different local narratives on the local situation and the actors involved, the frames applied by the local residents to describe the characteristics of COA and the municipality as well as the frames evaluating the local asylum situation are explained. This way, this chapter contributes to the understanding of frames applied by local residents and therefore this chapter also contributes to answer the main research question by further elaborating on sub questions three and four.

Chapter 7, “The role of media in framing”, on page 109, contributes to the understanding of frames applied by local actors through a media analysis. I will analyse both traditional and social media, their publications and their influence on the frames applied by local actors. Furthermore, this chapter also explains how local actors can use the media to influence the framing processes of other local actors, by sharing their own frames and promoting the actions they organized. In chapter 7, I will show that frames can be influenced by communication. Furthermore, I will show how involved parties use different types of media to promote their frame. The information provided in this chapter will elaborate on the answers to the third and fourth sub question by showing how frames are established and altered by the media.

To further explain the importance of communication and information flows, and traditional and social media items as introduced in chapter 6 and 7, I will further elaborate on these topics in the discussion section of this thesis, in sub chapter 8.1 on page 135. Hereby, I will stress how the quality of the communication and information flows towards local residents, and the similarity of the information provided by different sources, influences the frames applied by local residents. In doing so, the discussion section of this thesis also contributes to answering the fourth sub question.

To summarize, in chapter 3 and 4 I will explain the asylum related policies on different levels and explain how the policies are translated. This answers the first two sub questions and form a basis for the analyses required to answer the remaining questions. In the remaining chapters including the discussion, I will use 14 the understanding build in chapter 3 and 4 to explain the frames applied by local actors in Cranendonck, and explain the establishment of the different frames applied.

After the information provided in the different chapters have answered the sub questions, I will use these answers to answer the main research question and explain how local actors in the municipality of Cranendonck frame other local actors involved in the translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies and explain how these frames are established. This final conclusion will be presented in chapter 8 on page 135. This chapter also includes some recommendations on the organization of hosting asylum seekers on the local level in a municipality in the Netherlands.

2 Theoretical framework Various concepts can be applied in this study to answer the research questions and to gain a fuller understanding of the frames applied by local actors to describe the asylum situation and the other local actors involved in local translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies to a local level. In this chapter I will elaborate on the two concepts I decided to use for this research: policy translation and framing.

First I will explain the concept of policy translation and its application in this research. The concept of policy translation is relevant for this research, because it can be used to indicate the impact of the policies constructed by the European Union, the national government and the local municipalities, and to understand the various local practices and the actors performing them. Furthermore, this concept assumes the occurrence of frictions during the translation processes and the emergence of translation gaps. Taking this assumption in consideration, I will analyse the policy translation processes and the effects and consequences those frictions and gaps on the different levels. While doing so, I will refer to some of the (inter)national laws that are constructed on the different levels with regard to the management of the asylum situation and the asylum seekers.

Laws are not the same as policies, and the two cannot be used interchangeably. However, the two concepts are entwined. Laws are formal rules, principles and procedures that apply to a society and those living in it, who are mandatory to live up to them. Policies on the other hand, can be explained as strategies of governments and organizations to establish certain goals and achievements. Therefore, policies can include methods on how these goals and achievements can be reached (Birkland, 2014). Within this study, I will use an interpretation of laws as introduced by Birkland (2014). He describes laws as “the policy output of governments” (Birkland, 2014), and thereby indicates how laws can be used by governments as mechanisms to achieve their goals.

The legal system of the various EU member states adjudicates the way in which EU treaties and rules are implemented on the national level. The legal system of the EU on the other hand, can influence the legal agenda setting on the national level of the EU member states and generate new concepts (Wallace, Pollack, & Young, 2015). In this way, the European Union is a legal order that co-exists with the national legal orders of the EU member states. In his article, Croce (2011) refers to von Benda-Beckmann’s5 definition of legal pluralism as the co-existence of two or more different legal orders within one socio- political space (Croce, 2011). With regards to the management of the asylum situation, legal pluralism makes that more than one legal order can apply and that the national government is not the only actor in constructing this legal order or the rule of law (Benda-Beckmann, 2001). However, instead of focussing on the different legal systems and legal pluralism that comes with it, my focus in this thesis will be on the policies that emerge as a result of those legal systems. I will focus on the multi-layered policies with regard to the managing and hosting of asylum seekers on the European, national and local level and the translation processes of those policies (Birkland, 2014; Wallace et al., 2015).

5 F. Von Benda‐Beckmann, ‘Who’s Afraid of Legal Pluralism’, 2002 Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 47, pp. 37‐83, p. 37. 16

The second concept I will address in this chapter is the concept of framing. Actors can use different frames to describe, make sense of or evaluate a situation, issue or actor, which might result in several different problem statements and associated action plans. In this research the concept of framing is relevant to understand the different perceptions, positions, opinions, goals and motivations (Kaufman, Elliott, & Shmueli, 2003; Matthes, 2012) used by different actors in Cranendonck to describe the establishment, development and management of the asylum centres and its inhabitants and the actors involved in the local asylum situation. To indicate the frames applied by the actors involved, I will analyse their narratives and storylines with regard to the local asylum situation. Within their narratives, actors create a coherent vision upon which assumptions and evaluations are based and whereby frames are produced (Powell, 2011). Therefore, analysing the local narratives contributes to gain an understanding on the perceptions of those actors on the asylum situation in Cranendonck. Furthermore, by studying the narratives of local actors, the establishment and development of different frames applied can be indicated and explained, which is an important aspect of the research questions. For these reasons, the concept of framing is selected as the second concept applied in this research. 2.1.1 Policy translation The European Union is constructing policies and guidelines that ought to be honoured and implemented on the national level by all member states. To enable the implementation of those EU policies and guidelines on the national level of the member states, they have to fit within the national circumstances and possibly connect to the laws and policies that already exist. The same applies when policies, constructed on the national level, are implemented on the local level where they are put into practices. This is done by policy translation processes. Within these translation processes, the policies and guidelines constructed on one level are adapted to make them fit in on another level, where they ought to be implemented. During these translation processes, political goals are translated into other political goals, practical interests, strategies and action plans compatible with the new level in which they have to function. Policy translation processes are important to define the final outcome and efficiency of policies, and the concept of policy translation has been applied in various studies before (Mannell, 2014; Mukhtarov, 2014; Sautkina et al., 2014). Sautkina et al. (2014) for example, apply the concept of policy translation to study how system-wide approaches have been theorized and translated into practice by the ‘Healthy Town’ project in England. Within this research the importance and efficiency of policy translation when implementing theorized approaches, programmes and policies is shown (Sautkina et al., 2014).

Policy translation is performed by different actors who translate the goal of a project and the associated policies into the institutional language of its stakeholder supporters. This can be done by national government, local municipalities, governmental or municipal organizations, but also by non-official actors such as administrators and organized citizen who are translating higher-levelled policies to make them fit within their own community. Mosse (2004) explains that during these translation processes information and specific goals can be lost, slightly changed and/or twisted to make them fit within the new circumstances (Mosse, 2004). Due to these changes made during the translation process, the meaning of the policy might change as well (Mosse, 2004). Therefore, translation processes and the circumstances in which they happen are important in defining the final outcome of specific policies on lower levels (Mannell, 2014; Sautkina et al., 2014). During those translation processes, policy changes might occur that make the constructed policies fit better in the designated society. Policy makers, for example the EU or

17 the Dutch government, often assume that through the implementation of their policies and project designs they are creating an “ideal world” (Lewis & Mosse, 2006). Such an “ideal world” is based on their conceptions of a just and perfect world, in which there are clear correlations between measure A and outcome B. However, according to Lewis and Mosse, “ideal worlds” differ from the social realities (Lewis & Mosse, 2006). This difference is causing a gap between the policies in theory and the policies in practice. Those gaps can occur on all the levels that develop and/or implement policies and action plans (Lewis & Mosse, 2006). Trauner (2016) discusses such a gap occurring between the asylum policies and guidelines of the EU, and the actual asylum practices of the EU member states in a recent article published in April 2016. To stress her point, Trauner indicates the ignorance of Eastern European member states for the EU- wide resettlement scheme, and the reinforcement of inter-EU borders (Trauner, 2016). Another example of the gap between an ideal world and a social reality can be the EU Dublin System, which indicates the responsible member state for the execution of the asylum application procedure. According to this system, all asylum applications have to be executed in the country where the asylum seeker first entered the EU. Additionally, this country is responsible for the sheltering of the asylum seeker during the asylum procedure. In reality however, this system is difficult to translate to and implement on the national level because there is no action plan on how to keep the asylum seekers in the country of first entry since many asylum seekers are known to travel further and cross multiple borders once they entered Europe (Pauw, 2015). This example, which will be further addressed in chapter 3, indicates a possible gap between the EU Dublin System and the practical implementation of this system on international and national level. Gaps like these are known as translation gaps and cause the implementation of ineffective policies and/or policies with unintended outcomes (Ferguson & Lohmann, 1994).

Various authors elaborated upon the way in which translation gaps should be dealt with. According to Ferguson and Lohmann for example, translation gaps can be overcome in two ways (Ferguson & Lohmann, 1994). In the first place, by narrowing the gap though proper implementation and best practice, which is different for different contexts. This task has to be performed by agency workers at all levels. These agency workers pay attention to the contradictions between what should be done according to the policy, and what is actually done. The second possibility is to make policy developers see how their ideal worlds do not correspond with the social reality, causing these policy developers to adjust their policy and set objectives which are realizable in the social reality (Ferguson & Lohmann, 1994). However, as will be explained below, not all authors agree with Ferguson and Lohmann (1994) that translation gaps need to be narrowed and overcome.

In practice, the development of conflicting policies during translation processes is an almost unavoidable outcome. Policy changes are necessary to adjust the ideal world to the social reality. However, these multi-layered legal conflicts, unintended and/or undesired outcomes, can be used to further develop policies and increase their effectivity. Translation gaps create the possibility to develop alternative ideas and policy improvements. Therefore, an alternative to overcoming translation gaps is to use those gaps as a starting point and work with them to further develop the policies in question (Lewis & Mosse, 2006). According to Mosse (2004) policies themselves are not final products. Instead, development policies can be considered as a continuous work in progress in which social events and ideas are translated to materials or successful projects. This would mean that the gap between theory and practice can be used as a starting points (Lewis & Mosse, 2006; Mosse, 2004). An example of overcoming translation gaps is given in an

18 article by Merry (2013) in which she described how in Gujarat, a federal state of India, the official Human Rights language has been translated into a set of ideas that fit within the local culture and circumstances (Merry, 2013). In this state, the official legal forum has been re-shaped into a local court run by women who are promoting human rights based on a legal plurality including the Indian law, Indian feminism, and human rights. This court collects evidence based on their knowledge of local customs, practices and social networks. Also, instead of making claims based on the official human rights documents, the court is relying on humour, pressure and shame (Merry, 2013).

Translation processes are relevant processes in multi-layered asylum policies. The hierarchical aspect of the multi-layered policy processes evolving around asylum policies cause that national policies have to be based on the EU policies, and the local policies have to be constructed by means of the national policies (Mannell, 2014; Sautkina et al., 2014). For example, policies set on the European level, such as the directives of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), have to be translated into national policies and action plans to make them feasible on the national level. To perform those national policies on the local level, these national policies have to be translated again into local policies and action plans which fit within the local circumstances. Studying the multi-layered policies on the asylum procedure can help to understand the created policies, how they are re-formulated on various levels, which friction appears during the translation process, and what the consequences of these frictions or translation gaps might be. 2.1.2 Framing An important aspect in policy translation processes is the concept of framing. Lewicki, Gray and Elliott define frames as “lenses through which disputants interpret conflict dynamics, thereby making conflicts more or less tractable” (Lewicki, Gray, & Elliott, 2003). Actors can base their frames upon their interests, beliefs and values, consciously as well as unconsciously. When frames are applied, certain aspects of a situation, issue or concept are highlighted while others are discounted and filtered out (Kaufman et al., 2003). Political as well as organizational actors can strategically establish and use frames to promote their own ideas, views and perceptions, for example in political parties, NGOs, (social) media and local initiatives. When frames are applied to serve such purposes, they are strategic frames (Kaufman et al., 2003). Unconscious frames however, are inter alia based upon an actors’ personal experiences, norms and values and therefore interpret his or her personal thoughts, worries and assumptions (Kaufman et al., 2003; Lewicki et al., 2003).

Framing as a concept has been applied by many authors to investigate and understand various situations (Isendahl, Pahl-Wostl, & Dewulf, 2010; Jasny, 2011). Despite the diverse research topics in which framing is applied, the theoretical application and outcomes can be used to make sense of the developed asylum policies. In an article by Isendahl, Pahl-Wostl and Dewulf (2010), framing is used to understand and improve the handling of uncertainties in water management practices (Isendahl et al., 2010). One of the conclusions drawn from their research states that the different ways in which uncertainties concerning water management practices could be framed, led to different ways of dealing with those uncertainties (Isendahl et al., 2010). This conclusion corresponds with conclusions draws in studies by Kaufmann and Matthes, who state that depending on the specific frame used to describe a situation, various problem definitions, evaluations, interpretations and solutions can be shaped (Kaufman et al., 2003; Matthes, 2012). Whenever actors are using frames to make sense out of a specific situation, different and sometimes conflicting possible solutions, preferences or outcomes appear (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). 19

When researching frames and framing, frame-makers have to be included as well as the specific frames they apply. The application of the specific frames can be explained by examining the actors’ identity and the (political) position they are representing. Herewith, the concept of framing can be used to identify the different perspectives actors have on a specific situation and will therefore provide an insight in their motivations concerning the translation of development policies (van Hulst & Yanow, 2014).

In their article, Kaufmann and her co-authors describe six different frames based on different aspects (Kaufman et al., 2003). These frames are identity frames, characterization frames, power frames, conflict management and process frames, risk and information frames, and loss versus gain frames. These frames all have a different focus and subject. Identify frames for example, concern the way disputants are framing themselves as having a particular identity in specific situations. People can for example frame themselves as a Christian or an atheist. The characterization frames indicate the way in which actors characterize each other. Power frames, on the other side, concern the legitimate forms of power and highlight forms of power that can support or improve the position of the framing actor. Conflict management or process framing evolves around the best way to manage and/or solve a specific conflict. Frames that indicate the likelihood of specific situations occurring are the risk- and information frames. And finally, the loss versus gain frames concern the threat of possible losses or the opportunities for specific gains (Kaufman et al., 2003). Within my research, the emphasis will lie on characterization frames and risk- and information frames. These types of framing have been indicated and used by more authors, for example Lewicki et al. similarly apply characterization frames and risk- and information frames to gain an understanding on environmental conflicts in America. In their research, Lewicki et al. refer to risk- and information frames as risk perception frames (Lewicki et al., 2003).

As stressed above, characterization frames are used by disputants to describe the local actors involved by highlighting their characteristics. This type of framing shows resemblances with stereotyping. The characteristics of these frames often differ from the way the described actors see themselves (Kaufman et al., 2003). Characterization promotes the separation between groups and can therefore be used to indicate differences between actors involved. This type of framing can be identified in comments of actors that express their perceptions, ideas and thoughts on other local actors involved, which can be in a positive as well as a negative way. Furthermore, characterization frames are likely to reflect the believes or judgements of the actors applying those frames (Lewicki et al., 2003). In relation to the asylum situation, an example of an applied characterization frame can be to describe refugees as fortune seekers travelling to Europe to improve their economic situation.

The second type of frames used in this research are risk- and information frames (risk perception frames). These frames concern actors’ expectations of certain events and their likelihood to appear. By means of these frames, actors can make sense of and assess risks or events in different ways, whereby the likelihood of appearance seems to increase or decrease depending on the specific frame applied (Kaufman et al., 2003). Additionally, the likely outcomes and potential risks that are associated by different actions might also be differently perceived by actors causing them to disagree on the identified problem and the possible solutions (Lewicki et al., 2003). An example of this kind of framing can inter alia be found in political debates, for instance during the asylum and refugee debate of the Dutch Lower House6 on the

6 Tweede Kamer 20

14th of October 2015. During this debate Dutch politician Geert Wilders highlights the increasing threats due to the arrival of migrants and asylum seekers while describing the situation as an Islamic invasion (PVVpers, 2015). The different ways in which the asylum situation is framed however, results in different problem analyses and therefore different compatible solutions regarding the high influx of asylum seekers (Engelbart, 2015; PVVpers, 2015; rtlnieuws, 2015b).

In their book ‘Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts, concepts and cases, Lewicki et al. construct a ‘Model of Interrelationship among Four Key Factors in the Drake and Chattanooga Cases’, which is based upon the environmental conflicts in different parts of America. This model includes risk perception frames and characterization frames, as well as social identity frames and conflict management frames (Lewicki et al., 2003). As indicated above however, I will focus on the risk- and information and the characterization frames, and the way in which they influence, complement or counteract each other as well as the frames applied by other local actors. Therefore, parts of the model can be used to gain an understanding of the framing activities in the asylum situation and the consequences of the frames applied by different actors. The model of Lewicki et al. is presented in Figure 2, whereby the parts that are directly included in this research are coloured red.

Figure 2: Model of Interrelationships among Four Key Factors in the Drake and Chattanooga Cases (Lewicki et al., 2003)

The model above indicates that risk (- and information) frames applied by actors have influence on three major elements: openness to listening, levels of trust and the characterization of other actors involved in the conflict of dispute. This means that the risk and information frames applied by a local actor influences the way in which he or she is listening to other (local) actors involved, is trusting or mistrusting other (local) actors involved and is characterizing other (local) actors involved. Furthermore, the three elements, openness to listen, levels of trust and characterization are also influencing each other by patterns of communication and interaction between the different actors involved.

This different frames applied by actors can interact and mutually reinforce or decrease the stability and intensity of other frames (Lewicki et al., 2003). An example of this is also given by Lewicki et al. by explaining how different risk- and information frames applied by actors involved in one specific situation, can result into a negative assessment of the credibility of the information provided by actors applying a different risk- and information frame. As a result, the cycle of communication changes into a destructive cycle of detrimental communication in which negative characterization frames, suspicion and mistrust, and selective listening are complementing and strengthening each other (Lewicki et al., 2003).

With regard to the asylum situation in Cranendonck, these concepts of framing will be used to study the characterization frames and the risk- and information frames applied by the local actors in Cranendonck to describe each other and the asylum situation, as well as their mutual level of trust and listening capacity will be researched and indicated. As previously indicated, those frames will be identified by analysing the narratives of the different actors involved. Furthermore, the way in which the different frames influence, reinforce or decrease each other stability and intensity will be researched. In this research I will not only study the way risk- and information frames are influencing characterization frames. In addition to the model of Lewicki et al. I will also research whether or not, and possibly how, characterization frames are influencing the establishment and developments of risk- and information frames applied by the same actors. 2.2 Conclusion This study aims to indicate and explain the frames applied by local actors in Cranendonck to describe the local asylum situation as well as the other local actors involved in the translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies on the local level. In doing so, the theoretical concepts of policy translation and framing will be used to explain the national and local implementation of asylum policies as well as the opinions and practices of the local actors involved in the asylum situation.

By addressing the EU and national asylum policy and the implementation on the national and local level, the theoretical concept of policy translation will be used to indicate frictions in the translation processes and translation gaps as well as their effects and consequences on the different levels. Furthermore, the concept of policy translation is used to understand the various local practices and their actors. These practices, as well as the opinions, visions and believes of local actors in Cranendonck will be explained by means of the theoretical concept of framing. In doing so, attention will be payed to the risk- and information frames as well as the characterization frames applied by the different local actors in Cranendonck. This way, the unravelling and indication of frames will be used to understand the opinions, positions and activities of the local actors in Cranendonck with regard to the asylum situation.

When elaborated, policy translation and framing will indicate and explain the frames applied by local actors in Cranendonck to describe each other and the local asylum situation.

3 European and Dutch asylum policies This chapter provides a contextual background of European and Dutch asylum policy, which I will use as a basis for this research. Since the influx of asylum seekers increased pressure on the European Union and its policies, various discussions, and some adjustments, have been made on the European level concerning the hosting of asylum seekers in the European member states. In this chapter, I highlight the establishment of the current asylum policies of the European Union. The European asylum policies are directly influencing the Dutch asylum policies. Therefore, the influence of the European policies on the national level is also discussed. Furthermore, I will introduce the national organizations involved in the local implementation of the asylum procedure in the Netherlands. The Dutch asylum procedure involves multiple organizations and takes place at different locations that are explained step by step in this chapter. The policies, organizations and abbreviations introduced in this chapter will be referred to in the rest of this research report.

A better understanding of the translation and implementation of European and national policies will help to possibly relate the frames applied by local actors to the asylum policies and friction coming forth from the translation processes. This will also help to explain whether applied frames are the result of incorrect translations and implementations of policy, or whether they result from miscommunication or misinterpretation of communication between organizational actors and other local actors.

In this chapter, I will first give a general introduction on the current situation with regard to the influx of asylum seekers in Europa. Hereby, a small introduction is given on the emergence of the current flows of asylum seekers, the mainly used travel routes and the influence the current influx has on different European agreements. Thereafter the European Asylum Procedure will be addressed. In second part of this chapter I will discuss the asylum policy on the national level. Also on the national level a general introduction is given on the number of asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands, the chain organizations that are involved in the asylum procedure and in the aftermath of this procedure. Thereafter, I will explain the asylum procedure itself, including the location types that are established to host asylum seekers. Furthermore, the different kinds of shelters that have been established in the Netherlands due to the high influx of asylum seekers are discussed. Additionally, the national responses to the establishment of those additional shelters will be addressed. To give a full overview of the entire process from asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands until their transfer to permanent housing, or until rejected asylum seekers depart, I have dedicated the last paragraph of this chapter to the aftermath of the asylum procedure. 3.1 Introduction to the international migration crisis In April 2015 the influx of asylum seekers in Europe reached a new peak that marks the beginning of what is currently known as the European asylum crisis (BBC, 2016). Figure 3 below visualizes the increased arrival of asylum seekers in Europe in 2014 and 2015. The decrease in number of asylum seekers indicated from October 2015 onwards might be explained by the bad weather conditions which make it more difficult to travel through Europe.

Figure 3: First time asylum applications, EU-28 from January 2014 to December 2015 (Eurostat, 2016b)

The vast majority of these asylum seekers originates from Syria (BBC, 2016). The movement of Syrians towards Europa has been ongoing for several years prior to 2015. Since the Syrian civil war erupted in March 2011, the number of Syrian asylum seekers looking for refuge in the European Union has increased. Originally, Syrians fled to neighbouring countries such as Jordan and Lebanon. The continuing violence in the country of origin makes it impossible for asylum seekers from Syria to return on a short, or even medium term. The pressure this causes on the Syrian border countries has led to a tighter border policy that resulted into a limited access to secure shelter locations in these countries. Additionally, the internal circumstances at the shelter location in these neighbouring countries appear to lack education and working opportunities for its inhabitants. The combined effect of these local circumstances contributed to the move of asylum seekers from Syrian neighbouring countries to the European Union (Banulescu- Bogdan; & Fratzke, 2015).

Aside from the above-mentioned push factors, European pull factors, such as announcements of European governments and member states and information shared on social media, might also influence the asylum flows. Stories of asylum seekers about successful asylum requests (in 2015 292,540 asylum applications were approved; (BBC, 2016)), or information on best travel routes might stimulate others to travel to Europe as well. According to official European statistics over 70 percent of the asylum applicants in the EU-28 member states were male (eurostat, 2016a), which might suggest their families will join them once the asylum application is approved.

The current influx of asylum seekers influenced and put pressure on some European agreements, for example the Schengen Agreement. In accordance to this agreement internal border controls are abolished and external border controls of the Schengen area are enforced. In relation to the current asylum influx, this means in theory that asylum seekers are stopped at the boarders of the Schengen area. In practice however, it appeared the Schengen border countries do not properly perform this border control. This 24 provides asylum seekers with the possibility to enter the European Union, which results in an increase in asylum requests in various European member states (Europa-nu, n.d. ). In response to this, and to remain in control of the influx of asylum seekers looking for international protection, various Schengen countries such as Belgium (February 23 2016 – April 12 2016), Denmark (March 4 2016 – May 3 2016) and Germany (November 14 2015 – May 13 2016), have temporarily reinforced (parts of) their border control (EuropeanCommission, 2016b).

Various routes are used by asylum seekers to make their way into Europe. Estimations of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) indicates most asylum seekers arrive by sea. In total, three main routes are used by people traveling to Europe for asylum. How often these routes are used by different groups of asylum seekers in 2014 and 2015 is indicated in Figure 4. In 2014, the central Mediterranean route, from northern African countries such as Egypt, Libya or Tunisia to Italy and Malta, was mainly used by asylum seekers to travel to Europe (BBC, 2016). The popularity of this route decreased however, due to large numbers of migrants’ deaths caused by inter alia seasonal changes. Over 1,200 asylum seekers died in the Mediterranean in an attempt to reach Europe. Most of these fatalities happened during the crossing from north Africa to Italy using the central Mediterranean route (BBC, 2016). The tragedies and the increasing instability in Libya resulted in a decreased use of the central Mediterranean route by Syrian asylum seekers. Asylum seekers from Eritrea and Nigeria however, continued to use the central Mediterranean route in 2015 to travel to Europe (Banulescu-Bogdan; & Fratzke, 2015).

An alternative travel route towards Europe for the Syrian asylum seekers became the eastern Mediterranean route. On this route asylum seekers first travel to Turkey, mainly on foot, to continue their journey to Europe by crossing the Aegean Sea by boat. The vast majority of the asylum seekers cross from Turkey to Greek islands such as Lesbos and Kos that are only a few miles away from the Turkish coastline. The eastern Mediterranean route became the path most frequently used by asylum seekers in 2015.

A third frequently used pathway towards Europe is the so called western Balkans route. By means of this route, asylum seekers travel into Europe by crossing the border between Serbia and Hungary. The use of this route increased in 2015, when asylum seekers that arrived in Greece continued their journey to reach other European countries in which they desired to file their asylum request (Banulescu-Bogdan; & Fratzke, 2015). In an attempt to stop the migrant flows from traveling pass the western Balkans route, various countries alongside this route close their borders for the asylum seekers (Popp, 2016).

Figure 4: Migrants routes of 2014 and 2015.Source: (BBC, 2016)

In response to the high fatality rate among asylum seekers crossing to European territory, the European Council organized a special meeting on April 23, 2015. In collaboration with the EU heads of state and the governments, it was decided to aim to decrease the fatality rate by increasing the search and rescue possibilities at sea, fighting and disrupting trafficking networks, preventing illegal migration flows by controlling and monitoring land borders and travel routes at inter alia Tunisia, Egypt, Mali and Niger, and finally by reinforcing internal solidarity and responsibility. The latter aspect includes the transposition and implementation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). To provide a detailed background on European asylum policies, the following paragraph will provide a contextual background on the establishment and development of the current European asylum system. 3.2 Context of the European asylum system The right to asylum was first recognised in the 1951 Geneva Convention on the protection of refugees. This convention regards every refugee, which is in this Convention defined as “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin as the result of a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion” (UNHCR, 1951). Within this convention, basic minimum standards are established regarding the treatment of asylum seekers which should be similar in each member state (UNHCR, 1951). From this moment onwards, the European refugee and asylum policies have developed. Figure 5 below provides a visual overview of these developments, which will be further addressed in the remain of this paragraph.

Figure 5: Timeline of the developments of the European asylum policy

Since 1999, the EU uses an approach for all European member states that aims to guarantee access to the asylum procedure and to ensure a that high quality and fast asylum decision is made. This common European asylum regime operates in accordance with the Geneva Convention of 1951. According to this common asylum policy, asylum is given to people in fear of serious harm or persecution (EuropeanCommission, 2014). Within this policy, four legal instruments are developed on the asylum; the Qualification Directive concerning the qualification standards for asylum, the Procedures Directive establishing a common procedure for asylum applicants, the Conditions Directive concerning reception and application standards and the Dublin Regulation that determines the member state responsible for examining the asylum request (eurostat, 2016a).

From 1999 onwards, the common European asylum policy continued to develop, and during the The Hague programme in 2004, the idea of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) was put forward. This system aimed to equalize the asylum procedure in all EU member states, and to establish a uniform status for all refugees who were granted asylum or subsidiary protection (EuropeanUnion, 2015). By establishing this common system, a race to the bottom, in which member states minimalize their national standards and protection levels for asylum seeker to make their country less attractive for asylum seekers, is prevented (Thielemann, Williams, & Boswell, 2010). In June 2008 the European Commission’s policy plan on asylum was presented to elaborate upon the developments of CEAS based on three main standards: “more harmonisation to standards of protection by further aligning the EU States’ asylum legislation: effective and well-supported practical cooperation; increased solidarity and sense of responsibility among EU States, and between the EU and non EU countries” (EuropeanUnion, 2015; eurostat, 2016a). To support the European member states by reaching the similar standards presented in the CEAS, the European Commission establish a supportive office called European Asylum Support Office (EASO). The EASO became fully operational in June 2011 (eurostat, 2016a).

When in 2011 the numbers of asylum seekers travelling to Europe implied an increased pressure on the Common European Asylum System, some of the systems issues became clear (Banulescu-Bogdan; & 27

Fratzke, 2015; Nancheva, 2015). Multiple rules of the CEAS appeared to be vaguely described, leaving room for national interpretation and variations in the national policy translation processes (EuropeanCommission, 2014). On the other hand, CEAS was criticized for establishing a too Europeanised asylum policy (Nancheva, 2015). These issues resulted in different national implementations and therefore in differences in policies of member states (EuropeanCommission, 2014), as well as a gap between the policy itself and the implementation of the translated policies on the national level (Brekke & Brochmann, 2015; Nancheva, 2015). In response to these critiques, the legislative framework of the CEAS was altered and improved in 2014 by the European Commission. These alterations aim towards fairer, quicker and better asylum procedures and decisions. Also, they ensure the protection of people in danger and provide decent and dignified conditions for those applying for asylum and those that are granted international EU protection. Thereby, this system enforces equally fair and effective asylum procedures in every member state which guarantees equal treatment and possibilities for all asylum seekers regardless of their location in the EU. The improvements were carried out by means of three revised directives and two revised regulations: the Asylum Procedure Directive, the Reception Conditions Directive, the Qualification Directive, the Dublin Regulation and the EURODAC Regulation. Together these regulations and directive, that will be discussed below, form the current European Asylum Procedure (EuropeanCommission, 2014). 3.2.1 The European Asylum Procedure By means of the CEAS, the Asylum Procedures Directive is implemented in all EU Member States. In response to the adoption of the European agenda on migration by the European Commission on May 13, 2015, a renewed Asylum Procedure Directive was implemented in the EU Member States in July 2015. This agenda on migration covers different aspects of migration such as reducing the stimulation to migrate, increasing border security and establishing a new legal migration policy and a stronger asylum policy. By means of the European agenda on migration, the EU aims to combine both national and international policies while using the qualities and possibilities of all available actors. Furthermore, the agenda stresses the shared responsibility of the migration movement lies with all European member states. (EuropeanCommission, 2015e). By renewing the Asylum Procedure Directive, a more coherent system is created which ensures a more efficient and fair decision making process and higher common quality standards concerning refugee and asylum shelter in all the member states (EuropeanCommission, 2014).

The asylum application process is similar throughout the entire European Union, which is arranged by means of the so called Asylum Procedure Directive. By means of this directive, similar rules are established on European level regarding the asylum application and the examination of this application. By implementing this regulation, the overall asylum procedure will take no more than 6 months (EuropeanCommission, 2014). In the remaining part of this chapter however, it will be discussed that, in the Netherlands, the time between first arrival of asylum seekers and the end of the asylum procedure currently exceeds the 6 months’ time schedule. This is a result of the current awaiting phase prior to start of the asylum procedure, which is caused by the increased number of asylum applicants arriving in the Netherlands. Aside from the above, this regulation also aims to ensure that asylum seekers with special needs, such as unaccompanied children, receive adequate support (EuropeanCommission, 2014).

After completing their registration, asylum seekers receive material reception conditions in accordance with the Reception Conditions Directive (EuropeanCommission, 2014). This directive ensures that asylum seekers have access to basic living standards during the whole asylum period. Those standards include access to proper nutrition and accommodation, to the healthcare system (including medical and psychological care), and to employment. It appeared, however, that the EU member states have translated the Reception Conditions Directive into a variety of practices, causing different qualities of basic living standards in the various countries. Therefore, in 2014, this EU directive was renewed to pursue better and more similar standards throughout the whole EU. The renewal, implemented from July 2015, concerns detailed joint rules concerning the detention of asylum seekers, which inter alia includes a list of detention grounds, important legal guarantees and specific reception conditions for detention facilities (for example communication with lawyers, NGOs and family members and access to fresh air), and restricts detention of vulnerable persons. Furthermore, the Reception Conditions Directive obliges countries that asylum seekers must be granted access to employment within 9 months (EuropeanCommission, 2014).

During the asylum procedure, the Qualification Directive and Asylum Procedure Directive ensure that registered asylum seekers are interviewed by skilled case workers specialized in EU law, who are accompanied by an interpreter. During the interviews it is decided whether or not the asylum seeker fled his or her country for legitimate reasons and whether the refugee status or a subsidiary protection is granted. This decision is based on the standards and grounds valid for all EU Member States and specified in the Qualification Directive regarding granting international protection to asylum seekers. When an asylum seekers’ request for asylum is not granted, he or she is allowed to appeal in court for a second opinion. When it is decided again that the asylum seeker cannot be granted, the refugee status or subsidiary protection, the asylum seeker has to return to his or her country of descent or transit. When the refugee status or a subsidiary protection is granted the refugee gains specific rights in accordance with the Qualification Directive. Those rights include access to a residence, the labour market and the healthcare system, as mentioned before (EuropeanCommission, 2014).

The Dublin Regulations state that the member state most involved in the applicant’s entry or residence in the European Union is responsible for evaluating his or her asylum request. This is influenced by family matters, the possession of recent resident permits or a visa for a particular member state, and whether the EU was regularly or irregularly entered by the asylum seeker (EuropeanCommission, 2014). The establishment of the Dublin Regulation also aims to prevent so called ‘asylum shopping’, or secondary asylum applications, whereby asylum seekers actively decide in which member state to file their asylum request (Thielemann et al., 2010), depending on, for example, local circumstances for unemployed residents. Furthermore, including the Dublin regulation in the European asylum policy increasingly prevents member states from abusing the system by implementing bare minimal standards to make their member states less attractive for ‘shopping’ asylum seekers (Nancheva, 2015; Thielemann et al., 2010). However, despite of the similarities in the asylum systems of the EU member states, asylum seekers might still continue asylum shopping activities based on internal national circumstances during the asylum policy, such as shelter locations, and national delays prior to the start of the asylum procedure. Furthermore, asylum shopping might be stimulated due to national circumstances such as wealth, access to education and health care system.

The precursor of the Dublin Regulation was the Dublin Convention, which was established and signed in 1990, and implemented in 1997. In this convention, it was decided that the member state in which an asylum seeker first applied for asylum, is responsible for the request examination and therefore also for the decision to grant asylum or not. However, when an asylum application is lodged for a certain member state while the asylum seeker is located in another member state, the country of (temporary) residence will be held responsible for the examination of the request (Communities, 1997; Hurwitz, 1999). The aim of the current Dublin Regulation is ensuring that a single member state is responsible for the evaluation and examination of a specific asylum request. To ensure the implementation of this regulation, the EURODAC regulation has been established in 2003 as another part of the CEAS. The EURODAC Regulation has been an operating IT tool in the EU asylum procedure. When applying for asylum in an EU Member State, the particular applicant is obliged to cooperate with a fingerprint scan. These fingerprint scans are saved in a European database called the EURODAC central system (EuropeanCommission, 2014). This system is used to track asylum requests of asylum seekers. In practice however, border countries such as Italy appeared to hold back from systematically taking the fingerprints of the asylum seekers as long as possible. Additionally, the delays in which they uploaded the fingerprints to the EURODAC central system gave the asylum seekers, that entered Europe in Italy, the possibility to leave the country without their point of first entry being traceable (Trauner, 2016). Those delays in EURODAC data transmission between member states, indicate a transition gap that resulted in the dysfunction of the EURODAC regulation. To solve this issue and overcome this translation gap, the regulation had to be updated in 2015 and the uploading rules were tightened (Nancheva, 2015). Together, the Dublin regulation and the EURODAC regulation are named the ‘Dublin System’. This system is responsible for the current division of asylum seekers over the European member states (Mouzourakis, 2014).

Before the 2014 alterations of the EURODAC regulation, the information collected in the EURODAC database could be used for the asylum procedure. However, after the implementation of the alterations in July 2015 both the national police forces as well as Europol were allowed to access the database under strict conditions only. When detecting, preventing or investigating serious criminal activities such as murder and terroristic threats, the national police forces and Europol are allowed to access the database (EuropeanCommission, 2014). This is an important adjustment since the fear and threat of terroristic attacks increases as an effect of the current asylum influx, as will be further addressed in chapter 6.

The Europeanization of the asylum procedure resulted in some resistance of national governments due to the costs of raising the minimal standards of protection, and due to the national anti-migration debates in some member states that are not in line with the European migration governance (Nancheva, 2015). 3.2.2 Recent establish- and developments on the European level A downside of the Dublin regulation is visualized by the imbalanced division of first-country entrances of asylum seekers. The first member states that asylum seekers enter are mainly border states since the country of entrance is often determined by the geographical location of that country. Also, asylum seekers that do not file an asylum request in the country of first entry need to be sent back to this country when they make an asylum request in another European member state. It appears migration trends were not taken into account when establishing the Dublin Regulation, since this is based on an equal division of asylum seekers over the European member states (Nancheva, 2015). As a result of the high numbers of asylum seekers entering Europe, European border countries started to ignore the Dublin regulation and 30 allowed asylum seekers to travel further into Europe. As a result, the gap between the EU asylum regulations and the practices of individual member states increased (Trauner, 2016).

In response to this increased gap between EU policies and its implementation on the national level of the EU member states, a policy reform process was established by means of the ‘European Agenda on Migration’ of 2015. This agenda on migration responded inter alia to the unfair burden-sharing by proposing a new asylum distribution scheme that aims to improve the management of migration flows to Europe (Trauner, 2016). This distribution was officially presented on the 27th of May 2015, little than two months after the influx of asylum seekers started to increase (Figure 3). The timing of the presentation of the new asylum distribution scheme might indicate it was developed in response to the increased influx of asylum seekers. It might be that the EU was unprepared to manage the migration flows towards Europe. Following this reasoning, the distribution scheme might be part of a trial and error of European establishments, agreements and adjustments that aim to manage the increasing numbers of asylum seekers entering Europe.

The distribution scheme aims to manage the asylum flows and lower the pressure on EU border countries Italy and Greece by redistributing the asylum seekers that arrived in those countries to other European member states. This specific distribution key is developed by means of member state criteria such as GDP, population size, unemployment rate and number of hosted asylum seekers and resettled refugees. Within the first proposal of de distribution key it was decided that 24,000 asylum applicants from Italy and 16,000 asylum applicants from Greece were to be relocated to other European member states (EuropeanCommission, 2015a). Later, the number of asylum seekers that are to be relocated increased to 160,000 (BBC, 2016; Ivanov, 2015). It is important to note that this newly developed division key is no replacement for the above-mentioned Dublin System that indicates the member state responsible for the asylum application. This means that the associated member states are not obligated to live up to the proposed division key. However, the associated member states are asked to cooperate with the proposed migration measurement voluntarily (EuropeanCommission, 2015a). Furthermore, the border member states can only benefit from this distribution scheme when they improve their fingerprinting and registration procedure as indicated by means of the EURODAC regulations (Trauner, 2016). In accordance with this distribution key of May 2015, the Netherlands is accountable for 5.12 percent of the relocated asylum seekers, which accounts for 1,228 asylum seekers from Italy and 819 asylum seekers from Greece (Perovic, 2015).

As previously indicated, the asylum flow continued to increase, and national governments of EU member states decided to take measures into their own hands by closing their borders and denying asylum seekers access to their country. Trauner (2016) stresses these activities of single member states indicate that the EU is disunited and appears incapable to find a solution to what she calls the refugee crisis (Trauner, 2016). In response to this, the EU continues their trial and error of searching for a well fitted solution by aiming to decreasing the number of asylum seekers entering Europe instead of focussing on the equal division of asylum seekers over the EU member states. In another attempt to lower the influx of asylum seekers, the first EU-Turkey summit was held in November 2015 in which a joint action plan was adopted by the European Union and Turkey to address the migration flows caused by the Syrian civil war. This joint action plan states that the European Union will support Turkey, by means of both political and financial agreements (EuropeanCommission, 2016c), in managing the current influx of asylum seekers. This joint 31 action plan aims to address the current situation by addressing the root causes of the current influx of asylum seekers derived from Syria, supporting Syrian asylum seekers and their host communities in Turkey, and by strengthening the cooperation between the European Union to prevent irregular migration flows to the EU (EuropeanCommission, 2015c).

In practice, this means the EU will provide the Republic of Turkey with financial funds to realize a humanitarian hosting situation of Syrian asylum seekers in Turkey. Furthermore, the EU will continue their support to Syrians hosted in their neighbouring countries such as Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq, as well as internally displaced Syrians who remained in their country of origin. By means of this support, it is aimed to reduce the amount of Syrians travelling towards European grounds. In return, Turkey ensures migrants registration and provide them with the proper documents improving the overall migration management strategy. Furthermore, Turkey continues to give Syrian asylum seekers access to Turkish public services such as education and healthcare, for the duration of their stay in Turkey (EuropeanCommission, 2015c).

To prevent irregular migration, the EU will continue to support Turkey in its combat against the smuggling of asylum seekers to European ground. Also, joint return operations are established in which irregular migrants are returned to their country of origin. Turkey on the other hand will strengthen the capacity of their coast guard to prevent smuggling activities. Irregular migration will further be decreased by an improved cooperation between Greece and Bulgaria to secure the land borders from irregular migrants. Furthermore, Turkey will ensure that the initiated asylum procedures are completed to prevent delays from occurring (EuropeanCommission, 2015c).

Another important aspect of the most recent agreements between the EU and Turkey reached in 2016, is the refugee exchange program. This program states that all irregular migrants crossing from Turkey to Greece, including the irregular migrants currently staying at the Greek islands, will be transferred back to Turkey. In return, the member states of the European Union will take in asylum seekers that are currently living in Turkey. By means of this establishment, a legal route to Europe is established, which might result in a decrease of irregular migrants. For every asylum seeker Turkey is taking back in, another asylum seeker is transferred to one of the European member states (EuropeanCommission, 2016a).

These recent developments show that the EU continuously aims to improve their policies to manage the asylum seekers entering Europe. There appears to be a European trial an error of new or adjusted policies that are driven by increasing numbers of asylum seekers. During the national translation and implementation process it appears some of those trials seem more successful than others. The division key proposed in May 2015 for example has not been accepted by all European member states, resulting in more unrest inside the different member states and around their individual borders (Dool, 2015). At the moment of writing this report, the EU- Turkey refugee exchange program had just been implemented so the outcome and consequences were not evaluated yet. 3.3 Context of the Dutch asylum policy In the Netherlands, people have access to asylum when they are in danger in their country of origin, for example when they are prosecuted due to their religion or descent. Once asylum has been requested, the IND (Immigration and Naturalization service)7 decides whether or not an asylum seeker is in need of

7 Immigratie- en Naturalisatiedienst 32 protection. This decision-making process is called the asylum procedure. Once an asylum request has been granted the municipalities of the Netherlands are responsible for the permanent housing of the refugees (Rijksoverheid, 2015). It is important to note that the residence permits that formally acknowledged asylum seekers receive are temporary and valid for five years. After this period IND decides whether a permanent residence permit is granted or not. This decision is, inter alia, based on the list of secure and insecure countries that is valid at the time of the decision. This list is composed by the state secretary of Safety and Justice, currently minister Dijkhoff (Laagerhuis, 2016)8. The decision on a permanent residence permit will be excluded in this research.

As previously explained, the influx of asylum seekers is an international problem, and the member states of the European Union aim to fairly divide these asylum seekers (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-d). In 2014 the COA (Central Organ shelter Asylum seekers)9 already hosted 24,929 asylum seekers in the Netherlands. This number has risen to 33,598 in September 2015 (COA, 2015). In general, the number of asylum seekers in the Netherlands has increased significantly over the last three years, as can be seen in Figure 6, which shows the total asylum requests in the Netherlands. In 2015, a total amount of 58,880 asylum seekers requested asylum in the Netherlands. These asylum seekers mostly originated from Syria (27,700) and Eritrea (8,400). Due to these numbers, the delay in advance to the asylum procedure in which the IND is deciding upon the asylum request increased in 2015 to 7 months. In 2015, 70 percent of the asylum requests were granted. In January, February the first half of March 2016 however, 25 percent of the asylum requests were denied (Rijksoverheid, 2016).

Figure 6: Asylum request in the Netherlands between 1975 and 2015. Source: (CBS, 2016a)

Since July 2010 a new asylum procedure was launched in the Netherlands that gives asylum seekers more time to prepare for their asylum application. This newly established Dutch asylum procedure is a direct

8 Interview employee VluchtelingenWerk Nederland Mrs. Laagerhuis, Arnhem, April 4th 2016 9 Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers (Central Organ shelter asylum seekers) 33 translation the CEAS as established in 2008. When asylum seekers arrive in the Netherlands they are accommodated by COA, a governmental organization that is accompanying asylum seekers prior to and during their asylum procedure (COA, n.d.-i). COA has been performing the task of arranging the shelter for asylum seekers during the Dutch asylum procedure from 1994 onwards. Until the asylum procedure has finished, asylum seekers are allowed to use the shelter arranged for them by COA. COA is not involved in the asylum procedure itself since this is a task for the IND. The national government decides upon the circumstances at the asylum shelters. It decides upon the duration of time asylum seekers are allowed to stay within the shelter locations and whether or not the asylum seekers receive money during their stay. Furthermore, the Dutch government provides COA with a grant to implement and organize the tasks given to them, this grant is derived from the budget of the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice.10 All these arrangements are enshrined in the law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers11’, which had been updated in July 2015 (COA, n.d.-c; Overheid, 2015). By means of this law, COA is responsible for the shelter of every asylum seeker in the Netherlands by placing them in the various available shelter locations in the Netherlands. More clearly, this means that by means that COA is mandatory to provide in a place to stay for every asylum seeker in the Netherlands. Furthermore, COA is responsible for acquiring, managing and closing shelter locations, and for the enforcement of internal safety at the asylum shelters themselves. Aside from this, COA is also responsible for supporting asylum seekers during their asylum procedure and provide them with necessary information. Additionally, COA is obliged to pay weekly allowances to asylum seekers that are eligible (COA, n.d.-i). In Cranendonck, it appears local residents are often unaware that the increased number of asylum centres in the Netherlands is a result of high influx of asylum seekers in Europa and, more directly, of the continuous implementation of the national law “Central Organ shelter asylum seekers”, including COAs obligation to establish in shelter locations for all asylum seekers entering the Netherlands (Groen, 2016; Kok, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016; Kuipers, 2016).

On the European level, COA is part of a network including various asylum and refugee organizations and contacts at the European Parliament. Within a European partnership called ENARO, 17 European (governmental) organizations organising asylum shelter collaborate by sharing knowledge and experience. On the national level, COA is collaborating with the IND, an agency of the Dutch Ministry of Safety and Justice that is, as described above, responsible for the processing of the asylum applications. Furthermore, the IND is responsible for the naturalisation and the boarder protecting. If asylum seekers are rejected by the IND and are no longer allowed to stay in the Netherlands, DT&V (Service Return and Departure12) ensures their actual departure. The responsibility for this departure however, lies with the rejected asylum seekers themselves. The task of DT&V is to prepare and motivate the rejected asylum seekers for their voluntary departure. Only when asylum seekers are unwilling to leave the Netherlands, the DT&V elaborates upon possibilities for a forced departure (COA, n.d.-e, n.d.-f).

Aside from IND and DT&V, other chain partners of COA are the foreign police (AVIM, Department foreign police, immigration and trafficking13), and the Royal Military Police14. Together, these organizations are

10 Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie 11 Wet Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers 12 Dienst Terugkeer en Vertrek 13 Afdeling Vreemdelingenpolitie Immigratie en Mensenhandel 14 Koninklijke Marechaussee 34 responsible for the supervision of asylum seekers. When asylum seekers are allowed to remain in the Netherlands, the AVIM provides them with their residence documents, and when the asylum request is declined, the AVIM is part of the deportation proceedings (COA, n.d.-f). 3.3.1 Asylum procedure Currently, the Dutch asylum procedure can mainly be divided over three locations: Central reception location15 (COL), Process shelter location16 (POL) and Asylum centre17 (AZC). Depending on the phase of the asylum procedure asylum seekers are in, they are hosted at one of these locations (COA, 2012). Figure 7 below provides a visual overview of the three locations of the asylum procedure, including the associated processes. It should be noted that the location types cannot be confused with the different kinds of shelters that have been established in response to the high influx of asylum seekers. These shelter types, that will be discussed in section 3.3.2, regard the internal features of the shelters that have been established.

Aside from the COLs, POLs and AZCs, there are three more possible locations to shelter asylum seekers. These locations concern unaccompanied minor locations, restricted liberty locations18 and family locations. Unaccompanied minor locations are meant for minors who entre the Netherlands without accompanying parent or adult family member. The unaccompanied minors between 0 and 13 years old are placed at foster families, where they remain until they reach adulthood. Unaccompanied minors between 13 and 18 years old however, are sheltered at special location organized by COA. These latter group of unaccompanied minors run the same asylum procedure as adults. Depending on the independence level and personal development of these minors, they are sheltered at fitted locations. These locations can mostly be divided in three groups. Small-scale apartments, children’s residential groups and campus locations (COA, n.d.-g). Section 3.3.2 will further elaborate upon the restricted liberty locations and family locations

15 Centrale ontvangstlocatie 16 Procesopvanglocatie 17 Asielzoekerscentrum 18 Vrijheidsbeperkende locaties (vbl)

Identification Start of the Rest and registration TBC screening, Asylum seeker and preperation of asylum seeker GGD meeting transfers to POL COL term (RVT) (AVIM)

Asylum seeker Start Regular IND decides prepare on the Asylum whether or not Asylum seeker POL asylum procedure (AA) asylum is transfers to AZC procedure with IND granted

Start Extended Decision made by IND, AZC Asylum asylum request is No decision made yet procedure (VA) accepted or denied

Refugee remains at AZC Asylum seeker Refugee is until a permanent AZC becomes a prepared on residence has been Asylum request refuee integration accepted indicated

Asylum seeker remains Asylum seeker is at AZC until the transfer prepared for AZC to restricted liberty departure Asylum request denied location

Figure 7: Visual overview of the Dutch asylum procedure

COL Once asylum seekers arrive in the Netherlands, they are registered by the foreign police in Ter Apel. Unaccompanied minors, however, register by the foreign police at the registration centre in Schiphol. Asylum seekers arriving by boat of aeroplane that identify themselves immediately after their arrival as asylum seekers to the Royal Military Police, are also registered at the registration centre in Schiphol. In this scenario, the Royal Military Policy is performing the registration procedure. During this procedure, information about the asylum seeker is collected, luggage is checked, and the asylum seekers have to hand in important documents such as their passport, flight tickets and diplomas for further research. However, not all residents are in possession of those documents. The previously addressed EURODAC Regulation of the European Asylum Procedure is directly translated to the national level and implement by the foreign police who take ID photos and collect the fingerprints of the asylum seekers to complete the national registration procedure (Justitie, n.d.-b).

Once the foreign police has finished the identification and registration processes, the asylum seekers will be hosted at COL where the RVT19 (Rest- and preparation term) starts. The RVT takes at least 6 days and consists of a first interrogation, a registration at the IND and an official intake including a medical check- up. This medical check-up includes a mandatory tuberculosis screening, organized by COA in collaboration with GGD (COA, 2012). Furthermore, asylum seekers meet with a lawyer and an employee of VluchtelingenWerk Nederland to discuss their upcoming asylum procedure (Justitie, n.d.-b; VluchtelingenWerkNederland, 2013). Within the COL, COA is providing shelter, meals and personal

19 Rust- en voorbereidingstermijn

36 assistance when necessary (COA, 2012) (Schippers, 2016)20. As explained above, the provision of these basic living standards during the COL, as well as in the remaining parts of the Dutch asylum procedure, are direct translations of the Reception Conditions Directive as formulated in the European Asylum Procedure. Previously, Ter Apel was the only COL in the Netherlands. However, due to the high influx of asylum seekers it was decided to open a second COL at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck in Budel (deVolkskrant, 2015). At the end of the COL procedure, if the asylum seekers are accepted in the asylum procedure. They receive an immigration number and an appointment card in preparation of this procedure (COA, 2012; MinisterieVWS, 2014). After completing the RVT, asylum seekers are transferred from a COL to a POL, where they will be accommodated during their regular asylum procedure (AA21). However, due to the current high influx of asylum seekers a direct transfer to a POL is not always possible, due to a lack of places. Therefore, additional locations have been established to shelter asylum seekers in anticipation to their transfer to a POL, after which their regular asylum procedure can start. These additional locations, in which asylum seekers await the start of their asylum procedure, are called Pre- POL’s. Currently, asylum seekers are commonly accommodated at these Pre-POL’s for six months (MinisterieVWS, 2014)(Schippers, 2016). Since there are no policies, directives or regulation constructed on the European level on handling delays the national level, the way in which these delays are managed are developed and formulated on the national level.

POL As stated above, the POL is used by asylum seekers in the first phase of the asylum procedure, the regular asylum procedure (AA). The AA, which will be further addressed below, is a direct translation of the EU Asylum Procedure and the directives and regulation of the CEAS. Once asylum seekers arrive at a POL they receive basic information on their residence and the asylum procedure provided to them by means of various sources such as DVDs, information booklets, house rules and presentations. This information includes the rights and obligations of asylum seekers in the asylum procedure. Furthermore, COA is providing the asylum seekers with a proof of lawful residence and thereafter, arranges the start of the AA (COA, 2012). The AA consist of eight days in which asylum seekers have various appointments their lawyers and with the IND. As previously explained, the IND is responsible for evaluating the asylum application and making a final decision to grant or reject this application. During these eight days’ information is collected on which the asylum application will be evaluated (COA, 2012)(Schippers, 2016). Within the first interview between IND and the asylum seeker, the IND aims to establish knowledge on the identity, nationality and escape route of the asylum seeker. This first interview is followed by a detailed interview in which asylum seekers are asked to explain their reasons for fleeing their country of origin. Furthermore, the asylum seeker is asked to explain why he or she is unable to return to his or her country of origin. To overcome a possible language barrier, these interviews are attended by trained interpreters (Justitie, n.d.-b; VluchtelingenWerkNederland, 2013), which is a direct translation of the previously explained Qualification Directive and Asylum Procedure Directive of the European Asylum Procedure.

Once the IND made the decision to honour or reject the application, the asylum seekers or refugees are transferred to regular asylum centres (Schippers, 2016). Due to the high influx of asylum seekers, the

20 Interview COA employee Mr. Schippers, Budel, January 21 2016 21 Algemene Asielprocedure 37 residence duration in the (pre-)POL is increasing. To ensure a safe health situation in early stages of the asylum process, COA requested to temporarily bring forward the vaccination of asylum seekers children from 12 to 18 months to the (pre-)POL situation. Previously the vaccination of asylum seeker children from 12 to 18 months was performed when they arrived at the AZCs. Due to the current delays, it was decided children remained unprotected for too long and therefore the request was granted and implemented on October 1st 2015 (Actizjeugd, 2015). Similar to the COL, asylum seekers staying at POLs receive shelter, meals and assistance from COA during the AA procedure. The AA procedure has three possible outcomes. The first two possibilities concern the granting or rejection of the asylum application. The third outcome of the AA procedure concerns the IND being unable to make a decision and will therefore continue the asylum investigation by means of the so called Extended asylum procedure (VA)22 (COA, 2012). After the detailed interview with asylum seekers, IND decided whether or not they will be able to decide upon the asylum request within required timespan of eight days. When they expect to be unable to do so, the regular asylum procedure is stopped, and the extended asylum procedure starts (Justitie, n.d.-b). Independently of the decision made by the IND, all asylum seekers are transferred to asylum centres after stopping or completing the regular asylum procedure (COA, 2012). Since the IND often requires more research and decision time than the original eight days of the regular asylum procedure (VluchtelingenWerkNederland, 2013) the asylum centres are often occupied with asylum seekers still awaiting the INDs final decision.

AZC AS indicated above, the asylum centres (AZC) shelter accepted, rejected, and awaiting asylum seekers at the same locations. Asylum seekers whose application is honoured are re-named refugees and receive a temporary residence permit for five years. At the asylum centre, these refugees start the pre-integration process. This process consists of assistance regarding the upcoming integration process and provides voluntary education of the Dutch language. Rejected asylum seekers start their return process during their residence in the asylum centre (COA, 2012). Once an asylum request has been rejected, the asylum seeker is obliged to leave the country within 4 weeks. During those 4 weeks the rejected asylum seeker retains the right to shelter and is able to appeal at the Dutch court (VluchtelingenWerkNederland, 2013). To accelerate the outflow from asylum centres, rejected asylum seekers might be transferred to so called restricted liberty locations. At these locations they await their return to the country of origin. At asylum centres, COA is no longer providing its residents with meals. Instead, the residents of the asylum centres receive weekly allowances for asylum seekers that can be used to provide in their livelihoods. By means of this change, it is aimed to assist asylum seekers’ integration in the Dutch society (COA, 2012).

During the entire asylum procedure asylum seekers receive a maximum of €58,00 per week for food, clothing and pocket money for other expenses. This pocket money consists of €12.95 per week and is similar for adults and children. However, the children’s money is payed to their parents. The remaining money is meant to purchase food, and the amount depends on the age of the asylum seeker and the family composition (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-b). This amount is conferred by means of a division key. This means that an asylum seeker family receives a specific allowance for each family member. However, the height of this allowance per person decreases by each family member (Zeebregts, 2016)23. Single asylum

22 Verlengde Asielprocedure 23 Interview COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts, Budel, 2nd of February 2016 38 seekers receive €45.36 per week for food, where a family with, for example, two children receives a total of €112.00 per week. This allowance decreases when asylum seekers are located at shelters in which food is provided to them (AZCs). At these location, single asylum seekers receive €29.12 euro per week, and families with two children receives a total of €68.00 per week (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-b). The Reception Conditions Directive, addressed above, includes a possibility for asylum seekers to access employment within 9 months. When translating this European directive to the national level in the Netherlands, it was decided to grant this permission under three conditions once the asylum procedure has been ongoing for a minimum of 6 months. Prior to this, asylum seekers are not allowed to work at all. Furthermore, the asylum seeker has to be able to provide his or her employer with a declaration in which COA stresses the asylum seekers departure is not an issue. When these conditions are met and asylum seekers are employed, they are allowed to work a maximum of 24 weeks a year. Furthermore, employed asylum seekers are obligated to contribute to the costs of their shelter and the payments they monthly receive from COA to provide in their livelihoods. This contribution is paid to COA. Employed asylum seekers are allowed to keep the first 25 percent of their income with a maximum of 185 euros a month. Additionally, when asylum seekers earn more money than they owe to COA, they are allowed to keep this money as well (VluchtelingenWerkNederland, n.d.). This national interpretation of the European Reception Conditions Directive is established by a direct translation of the European directive to the national level translation without additional translation difficulties, frictions or gaps. 3.3.2 Shelters and their distribution Aside from the European Asylum Procedure and the CEAS that provides national governments with rules and guidelines on the implementation and execution of the national asylum process, there are no European rules or guidelines on the hosting of asylum seekers or the management of the high numbers of asylum seekers on a national or local level. Therefore, the managing and hosting of asylum seekers on the national level is organized by national governments and their policies.

In the Netherlands, COA organized emergency shelter and crisis emergency shelter aside from the regular asylum shelters indicated above in response to the increased influx of asylum seekers. Regular shelters are established in, for example, recreational- and holiday parks, migrants housing or on similar locations. At these locations, 300 to more than 1,500 places are established for a minimal duration of 2 years. Smaller regular shelters with at least 200 places, however, can also be established when they are part of a larger regular shelter. Aside from the asylum centres, other location types (COL and POL), can be equipped at regular shelters as well COA (COA, n.d.-h).

Emergency shelters are temporarily established in response to the high influx of asylum seekers. These shelters are located at halls and former offices, preferably close to asylum centres, and are operational for a period between 6 and 12 months (COA, n.d.-h). Asylum seekers hosted at emergency shelters have often not entered the COL. Yet, on rare occasions, registered asylum seekers might also stay at emergency shelters (Lowan, 2016). To increase the amount of places offered at emergency shelters, the provinces of the Netherlands have been requested to open emergency shelters before the 1st of February 2016, offering 2,500 places for a minimum period of 1 year. Additionally, the 25 safety regions24 of the Netherlands were requested to establish one emergency location each prior to 2016, offering shelter for

24 Veiligheidsregio’s 39 at least 500 asylum seekers for a period of 3 to 6 months. The features of emergency shelters show some varieties in comparison with regular shelters. Emergency shelter, for example, offers less privacy to their inhabitants than the regular shelters. Also, they lack cooking opportunities. Despite these differences, inhabitants have similar access to health care as asylum seekers at regular shelters (COA, n.d.-h; VNG, 2015).

The third shelter possibility, crisis emergency shelters, has been declared as undesirable by the Dutch governance in collaboration with the VNG and, as of March 2016, is no longer present in the Netherlands. These crisis emergency locations were also known as 72 hour shelters and were located at accommodations meant to shelter Dutch civilians at times of incidents, disasters and crises. These accommodations are, for example, located in sport halls. The coordination of these locations lay with the safety regions, provinces or cities themselves. Asylum seekers hosted at these shelters have not been registered by the AVIM yet, neither are they screened by the GGD. These locations can therefore be described as pre-COL (Lowan, 2016). Initially, the crisis emergency shelters were meant to host asylum seekers for 72 hours until other shelters were available. In reality however, it appeared asylum seekers were transferred to various crisis emergency shelters in sequence (COA, n.d.-h; VNG, 2015). Since some asylum seekers were transferred to 7 to 8 different crisis emergency locations, VNG advised the Dutch state secretary Mr. Dijkhof to reduce and eliminate this type of shelter (Vermue, 2016)25.

The distribution of shelter in the Netherlands On the European level no guidelines of directives have been established to equalize the distribution policies of all European member states. Therefore, the internal distribution of asylum seekers over the different provinces and municipalities in the Netherlands is the responsibility of the Dutch government. According to some Dutch inhabitants, asylum seekers in the Netherlands are unequally divided over the Dutch municipalities, laying more pressure on the poorer municipalities in the Netherlands. The speculations concerning an unequal development of asylum seekers within the Netherlands is causing discontent with the inhabitants of those municipalities in the Netherlands. This indicates a formation of tensions during the translation of the nationally established theory of randomly establishing asylum centres over the Dutch municipalities based on available possible shelter location, and the local practice whereby it appears those locations are mainly present in specific municipalities. However, according to the chair of the asylum committee of the Dutch Municipalities26, Jos Wienen, the division of asylum seekers over the Dutch municipalities is not based on the income and wealth of a municipality. In fact, he states that no distinction is made between richer and poorer municipalities when asylum seekers have to be sheltered temporarily. Instead, the division of asylum seekers over the various municipalities of the Netherlands is randomly based on the availability of shelter locations. However, it appears that those locations are more often available in the poorer municipalities of the Netherlands. When the asylum process is finished and a refugee status is granted, refugees are assigned permanent housing municipalities. While dividing these refugees over the Dutch municipalities, attention is paid to a fair division of those refugees over both richer and poorer municipalities (NOS, 2015e). Communication between the government and local municipalities and their inhabitants is important for the level of tolerance of, and acceptance, by those inhabitants of the asylum seekers and refugees. Even though a

25 Interview mayor Marga Vermue, Budel, February 18 2016 26 Voorzitter van de asielcommissie van de Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten 40 majority (61%) of the Dutch population is accepting the arrival of asylum seekers within the Netherlands (EenVandaag, 2015), the Dutch citizens often feel overwhelmed by the influx in their own villages. This is partly caused by a lack of communication between the different parties involved (Pauw, 2015; Voogt, 2015). The importance of well-organized communication flows will be further discussed in chapter 6 and chapter 8.

As a result, unrest often arises in municipalities in which new asylum centres are or will be opened (Pauw, 2015; Voogt, 2015). On the local level, people experience anxiety due to the possible negative consequences of having an asylum centre within their neighbourhoods. They expect the amount of criminal activities to rise due to the arrival of the asylum seekers, and some fear for the arrival of Muslim extremists, who might be hiding between the asylum seekers. Even though this might be possible, the Dutch State Secretary of Security and Justice27 Klaas Dijkhoff explains that the chance of this happening is small and unlikely. However, the possibility cannot be completely excluded (Pauw, 2015).

Aside from the above, the discontent of local inhabitant’s increases when the number of asylum seekers in a village is expected to host transcends the total number of inhabitants. An example is the Dutch village of Oranje, located in Drenthe. Oranje counts a total number of 140 inhabitants and was expected to establish an asylum centre with 1400 places. This announcement resulted in protests of the inhabitants of Oranje. Later, it was decided to decrease the amount of places Oranje had to establish to a total of 700. However, this amount was exceeded, causing more discontent with the local inhabitants (Volkskrant, 2015; Voogt, 2015).

In October 2015 the discontent of Dutch inhabitants led to personal threats such as letters containing bullets and lit cars directed to those in favour of the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers. In response, the chairmen of the political groups of the Dutch Lower House28 sent an open letter to their voters. With this letter they ask for an increased common understanding and tolerance. They stated: “don’t confuse threats and insults with arguments. Let everyone speak up their minds, even though you totally disagree with them”29 (duPré, 2015). 3.3.3 The aftermath of the asylum procedure When the asylum procedure is finished and if the asylum request has been granted, the refugees received a temporary residence permit and become part of the Dutch society. In this case, COA has 14 days to assign these license holders to a municipality in the Netherlands. The assigned municipality is responsible for the housing of the refugee, which has to be arranged within an average period of 12 weeks. To assign refugees to the different municipalities in the Netherlands, COA is establishing information profiles on the refugees such as the family size, country of origin, language, education level, job experience and, when required, a doctor’s recommendation (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-c). To equally divide the licence holders over the Dutch municipalities, the national government makes semi-annual allocations of the number of refugees each municipality should host. This division depends on the size of the municipality and the

27 Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie 28 Tweede Kamer 29 “Verwar dreigementen en beledigingen niet met argumenten. Laat elkaar aan het woord, ook al ben je het verschrikkelijk on eens met de ander”

41 amount of inhabitants and is part of the Dutch housing law30 of June 2014 (Overheid, 2014; Rijksoverheid, n.d.-c).

On the local level, the license holders are mainly hosted in social housing. Currently the delays for Dutch residents waiting on social housing averages around 8 years and, due to the priority access refugees with residence permits have to social housing, Dutch residents are discontent and sometimes feel abandoned by their municipality and government (rtlnieuws, 2015a) (Maas & Maas, 2016)31. This priority access for refugees is part of a municipal housing regulation, stating the municipality is obligated to give priority access to various applicants, of which refugees with residence permits are one. To reduce these delays for Dutch residents, the government is willing to interfere in this municipal housing regulation. By excluding licence holders from the municipal housing regulations, the government aims to give the municipality the decision whether or not it wants to give priority access to licence holders (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-a). This way, municipalities can implement the housing regulations as fits best within their local society.

However, this adjustment to the 2014 housing law has not been approved yet, since the Dutch Upper and Lower House are still deciding upon it. Despite this, it is aimed to implement this change in July 2016 (Rijksoverheid, n.d.-a, n.d.-c). Even though this possible adjustment gives an opportunity to satisfy displeased national residents, it is not providing a handle to ensure the housing of refugees within 12 weeks. It is important however, to arrange a rapid transition from asylum centres to permanent housing, since it allows a quicker release of places at asylum centres for asylum seekers with extended asylum procedures. Therefore, a rapid transition might indirectly contribute to the decrease the current delays of the overall asylum procedure.

In relation to this, the Dutch government is also making joint efforts with housing associations and local municipalities to reduce the current pressure on social housing while contributing to the temporary housing of refugees within the chosen municipality. The national government is realizing this by offering the municipalities in the Netherlands their empty buildings, such as offices and barracks, to host refugees. Furthermore, grants became available for housing associations, municipalities and others who are willing to provide in housing for license holders. These grants are meant for the construction and renovation of living accommodations for a minimum of four refugees. These establishments contribute to an accelerated refugee housing process, which results into more available places at asylum centres and therefore decreases the current delays prior to the asylum procedure, as highlighted above. This possibility in which the municipality offers temporary housing to refugees while they anticipate their permanent housing is launched in January 2016 and called the municipal gear arrangement32. The refugees that are placed in the temporary houses do not receive social assistance yet, and the allowances provided to them by COA cannot cover the rent. Since COA benefit from the accelerated flow that leads to more available places at the asylum centres, they pay the municipalities for the houses they offer to refugees as temporary housing (COA, n.d.-d; Rijksoverheid, n.d.-c).

30 Huisvestingswet 31 Interview inhabitant Mr. & Mrs. Maas, Budel, January 18 2016 32 Gemeentelijk versnellingsarrangement

If a municipality fails to arrange housing within 14 days, but a refugee is determined to leave the asylum centre, he or she is able to arrange his or her own temporary residence, for a remuneration, until the municipality is able to provide permanent housing. This arrangement is called the ‘self-care arrangement’ or ‘spare arrangement’ 33 and is available for all refugees over 21 years old provided that they do not participate in an intensive medical care program. Families with school-age children are allowed to make use of the self-care arrangement on the condition that they stay within the municipality of the asylum centre at which their children receive schooling (COA, n.d.-k; Rijksoverheid, n.d.-c).

Deployment procedure Asylum seekers that lost their right to remain in the Netherlands after the IND made their final decision, receive a so called return decisions. This is a letter in which the departure deadline is stated. The rejected asylum seekers have until that deadline to voluntary leave the country. DT&V can support the rejected asylum seekers by their departure, however they can also arrange this themselves (Justitie, n.d.-a).

Rejected asylum seekers who cooperate with their deportation are allowed to remain in the restricted liberty locations for a maximum duration of 12 weeks, or are transferred to family locations. At the restricted liberty locations, rejected asylum seekers are temporarily sheltered on the condition that there is a prospect of the asylum seeker returning to the country of origin within that period. The conditions at these locations are strict and include a hailing or reporting duty stating that the rejected asylum seekers need to report 5 days a week. Inhabitants of these locations are allowed to leave the grounds, but are restricted to remain within the borders of the municipality in which that location is established (COA, n.d.- j).

Family locations are meant to ensure families, whose asylum request has been rejected, of a place to stay until they return to their country of origin. These family locations are sober and only provide in strict necessities. There are no restrictions for children however, since they keep access to similar facilities as were offered to them in other location. Furthermore, the children continue their education equal to children of families whose asylum request has been accepted. The assistance provided to families at the family locations is mainly aimed at their return to the country of origin. These family locations are available for families whose youngest child is a minor. Once the youngest child of a family at a family location turns 18, their stay at a family location will be ended and the family will be transferred to a restricted liberty location for the remaining time prior to their departure (COA, n.d.-j).

To motive and support rejected asylum seekers to voluntarily depart from the Netherlands, various return projects have been established, providing rejected asylum seekers with financial support or support in kind at their county or origin. These projects are, inter alia, performed by the International Organization of Migration34. Only when rejected asylum seekers are unwilling to voluntarily depart from the Netherlands and reject the help offered to them by DT&V as well as other organization, these forced departure measures will be enforced. An example of such measures is the transfer of non-cooperative rejected asylum seekers to detention centres in which they remain until their departure (Justitie, n.d.-c). In case rejected families with minor children are not willing to voluntarily leave the country, they are not

33 Zelfzorgarrangement of logeerregeling 34 Internationale Organisatie voor Mirgratie 43 transferred to detention centres but to closed family locations instead. These locations take the experiences and protection of children into account and therefore aim to ensure a decreased detention experience in relation to the detention centres (Justitie, 2014). 3.4 Conclusion In this chapter I gave an overview of the European asylum policy and procedure, and its translation to and implementation in the Dutch asylum procedure. Furthermore, additional nationally constructed laws and policies were highlighted to indicate a full overview of the Dutch asylum policy and the laws involved.

Since 1999 the EU tries to improve the situation for asylum seekers. The current influx of asylum seekers has highlighted the weaknesses of the Dublin regulation. By means of what seems a trial an error of policy adjustments and international agreements driven by the current influx of asylum seekers, the EU tries to improving the speed and quality of the European asylum procedure. This resulted in a desire to equally divide the asylum seekers over the European member states by establishing the European division key. However, because member states are not obliged to live up to the European division key, its effects are limited. Another EU-based attempt to manage the current influx of asylum seekers is formulated by the newly established EU- Turkey refugee exchange program, which aims to control the migration flows of asylum seekers towards the European Union.

Aside from the directives and regulations on the European asylum procedure and the international agreements and adjustments to decrease the migration flows towards Europe, no policies are established on the European level concerning the hosting of asylum seekers, the quality of the shelter location, or the management of delays in the asylum procedure. The national implementation of European directives, by means of the Dutch asylum procedure, indicates a direct translation of the European Asylum Procedure to the national level. This policy translation is performed without causing translation gaps or frictions on the national level. Despite this direct and well fitted translation, the increased numbers of asylum seekers that, according to the European division key, have to be hosted in the Netherlands, cause the Dutch asylum procedure to suffer from delays.

Due to a lack of those European policies, the national governments are responsible for the internal management and hosting of the asylum seekers. These nationally established policies on the management and hosting of asylum seekers, complement and expand the Dutch asylum policies that directly reflect the EU asylum policies. In the Netherlands, COA aims to provide every asylum seeker with an accommodation by increasing the Dutch shelter capacity. To continue the implementation of the law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’, various alternative shelters such as emergency shelters and crisis emergency crisis shelters have been established. Not all alternative shelters could offer the desired features and therefore the crisis emergency shelters were removed. However, to continue ensuring accommodation for all asylum seekers, the current delays have to be decreased. These delays can be influenced by the aftermath of the asylum procedure. The sooner refugees and rejected asylum seekers leave the asylum centres, the sooner places become available for asylum seekers in the extended asylum procedure. To ensure this accelerated outflow, the national government established multiple possibilities to temporarily house refugees while awaiting their permanent housing.

The establishment of the two asylum centres and the implementation of the European and national asylum policies on the local level will be discussed in chapter 4. Hereby, attention will be paid to possible translation process of EU and national policies to local practices.

4 Asylum centres in Cranendonck In this chapter I will introduce the municipality of Cranendonck and its history with hosting asylum seekers and other groups of foreigners. The establishment of the two asylum centres in Cranendonck, Budel- Dorplein and Budel-Cranendonck, will be discussed as well as their development and internal adjustments over time. In this chapter I visualize the implementation of the European and national asylum policies on the local level, while occasionally highlighting the policy translation processes. A better understanding of the implementation of European and national policy on the local level will help to identify and understand the possible frictions that come into being during the translation processes. I will address the local decision making process and indicate when local implementations are a direct or indirect translation of European or national policies to be able show, in later chapters, how those implementations contribute to the frames applied by local actors with regard to the local asylum situation and the other local actors involved.

Where the previous chapter serves as an international and national basis, this chapter serves as a local contextual basis for the analyses in the following chapters on the types of framing applied by local actors to describe the other local actors involved and to evaluate the overall asylum situation in Cranendonck. Therefore, this chapter will focus on the activities of the municipality and COA with regard to the requests of the asylum centres, the local decision-making processes and the implementation of the decisions made. By doing so, this chapter gives an insight in the development of the problems that occurred when translating and implementing the national asylum policy on the local level by hosting of asylum seekers in the municipality of Cranendonck.

In order to do so, I will first give a brief historical introduction on the formulation of the municipality Cranendonck, that consists of multiple villages. Thereafter, establishment, developments, closure and re- opening of Budel-Dorplein will be discussed and finally attention will be payed to asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck. The development of Budel-Cranendonck, from its establishment to the current situation, will be described and the proposed adjustments by COA and the municipal decision making processes will be included. 4.1 Short historical introduction of Cranendonck When in January 1997 the municipalities of Maarheeze and Budel joined and included the smaller villages of Budel-Schoot, Budel-Dorplein, Gastel and Soerendonk, the municipality of Cranendonck arose. Cranendonck is located in the province of North-Brabant, in between Eindhoven and Weert and close to the Dutch border with Luxemburg and Belgium. On December the 31st of 2015, the population of Cranendonck counted a total of 20,662 inhabitants (CBS, 2016b).

The separate villages in the municipality of Cranendonck have a history of hosting asylum seekers, refugees and foreigners. Already since the First World War, people have been offered a shelter in the area that is currently known as Cranendonck. During and after this war, Belgian residents came to the villages of Budel, Budel-Schoot, Budel-Dorplein, Maarheeze, Gastel and Soerendonk to look for refuge. They temporarily settled in the border area of the ‘neutral’ Netherlands until they were able to return to their country of origin (van Vliet, 201635). After the Belgian residents, more foreigners came to Cranendonck to look for refuge. First the Ambonese originated from the former Dutch Indies arrived in Budel to find

35 Interview inhabitant Mr. van Vliet, Budel, January 18 2016 46 shelter, secondly the Hungarian refugees who arrived in 1956, thereafter the migrant labourers arriving from Spain and Portugal and finally the German soldiers who arrived in Budel in 1963 (Graaf, 2015). Currently, the municipality Cranendonck is hosting mainly Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers and refugees in two separate asylum shelters. The first shelter, “de Cantine” is located in Budel-Dorplein re- opened in April 2014 after being closed for 3 years. The second asylum centre in Cranendonck is located at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne (GemeenteCranendonck, 2015b). 4.2 Budel-Dorplein As mentioned above, the first asylum centre in the municipality of Cranendonck is located in the so called “de Cantine” in Budel-Dorplein. Since the first time “de Cantine” was temporarily used to host asylum seekers from 1988 until 1996 under the name “Kempense Veste”, this asylum centre has been re-opened and closed multiple times (Rijksmonumenten, 2014; Roosen, 2014). Previous to the first opening of an asylum centre in “de Cantine”, this location had already been used to host foreigners. In the 1960s and 1970s “de Cantine” was used to house Spaniards and Italians working in the zinc plant.

The first time de Cantine re-opened as an asylum centre was in 1998, when it hosted asylum seekers derived from various countries until 2004. After this period, “de Cantine” was used from May 2007 until December 2008 as temporary housing for foreign (seasonal) workers (Roosen, 2014). Those seasonal workers, most of them from Polish origin, caused some nuisance and were known to be noisy, explains Mr. Jansen, local resident of Cranendonck and part-time author of Eindhovens Dagblad (Jansen, 2016)36. Also according to the mayor of Cranendonck, Marga Vermue, the hosting of these foreign employees caused some difficulties in the past due to nuisances (Vermue, 2016)37. The last time “de Cantine” opened for asylum seekers was from 2009 until 2011, when it was closed down due to an overcapacity of places in the region.

The last re-opening on the 28th of April 2014 was realized when the influx of both Syrians, Eritreans and Somalis continued to increase and the other already existing asylum centres in the Netherlands remained occupied with refugees in anticipation of housing (EindhovensDagblad, 2014c). This indicates that this final re-opening of Budel-Dorplein was realized to remain ensuring the implementation of the Dutch law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’, as explained in the previous chapter, under the increasing pressure caused by asylum seekers caused entering the Netherlands. Currently, Budel-Dorplein is functioning as a regular asylum centre in which people are hosted who completed the procedures of both the COL (Central reception location38) and the POL (Process shelter location39). The 239 available places in Budel-Dorplein are filled with people whom are either waiting for permanent housing or are prepared for their return to the country of origin (COA, n.d.-b) (van Wijk, 2015)40 .

When COA requested to re-open the asylum centre Budel-Dorplein in 2014, the building had been unoccupied for a longer period of time. However, because the local residents already experienced having an asylum centre in the past, people knew what to expect when the centre re-opened (Vermue, 2016).

36 Interview inhabitant Mr. Jansen, Maarheeze, January 7 2016 37 Interview mayor Marga Vermue, Budel, February 18 2016 38 Centrale opvanglocatie 39 Procesopvanglocatie 40 Interview COA employee Mrs. van Wijk, Budel-Dorplein, December 21 2015 47

Once the re-opening of Budel-Dorplein was announced in March 2014 (EindhovensDagblad, 2014c), the preparations were quickly completed. Due to the fact that the former zoning plan, in which the hosting of asylum seekers was allowed, was still active it was judicially possible to re-open Budel-Dorplein at short notice (Vermue, 2016).

Figure 8 below provides a visual overview of the functions of the “de Cantine” and indicates the developments of “de Cantine” from the 1960s onwards. The year gaps between the different blocks indicate time periods in which “de Cantine” was unoccupied.

1960s-1970s Housing of Spanish and 1998-2004 2009-2012 Italian Asylum Asylum guetsworkers centre centre

1988-1996 2007-2008 2014-current Asylum Housing of Regular centre Polish asylum centre guestworkers with 239 places

Figure 8: Timeline of the development of Budel-Dorplein from 1960 onwards 4.3 Budel-Cranendonck Budel-Cranendonck is the second asylum centre that has been opened in the municipality of Cranendonck, which is therefore one of the few municipalities in the Netherlands with two asylum centres. With this second centre, which provides a total of 1,500 places and a growing opportunity of 200 more places, the total amount of asylum seekers and refugees sheltered in the municipality of Cranendonck, combining the capacity of Budel-Dorplein and Budel-Cranendonck, reached a maximum of 2,000 (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016)41. The grounds of the former army, the Nassau-Dietzkazerne base consist of approximately 90 hectares, of which 10 to 20 hectares is currently used by COA to host asylum seekers. Mr. Zeebregts, location manager of the asylum centre describes the centre as a business responsible for the terrain itself, its maintenance, the various buildings and the security. A total of 60 people are employed by COA and currently work at the former Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Furthermore, around 300 to 400 external partners are stationed there (Zeebregts, 2016)42. Due to this employment rate, COA became

41 Interview municipal employees Mr. Küsters, Mrs. Kloppers, Mr. Kamps, Budel, February 18 2016 42 Interview COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts, Budel, February 2nd 2016 48 the second largest employer in Budel and is therefore of importance for the whole municipality (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

The location Budel-Cranendonck is a so called ‘shared location’, meaning it includes hosting people in various stages of the asylum procedure. As previously explained, regular asylum centres are hosting people who finished the asylum procedure and either wait for their housing or are prepared for the return to their country of origin. Budel-Cranendonck is a so-called GVL (Common Foreigners Location43), meaning that parts of the asylum procedure take place here. Currently, Budel-Cranendonck serves as both a COL and a POL, which concerns asylum seekers that are in the rest- and preparation term or asylum seekers that are within their asylum procedure (AA) as explained in chapter 3. Previously, Ter Apel was the only COL in the Netherlands. Due to the ongoing high influx of asylum seekers in the Netherlands however, a second COL was realized to reduce the delays in Ter Apel (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016) (Schippers, 2016)44. In September 2015 an additional function was added to the asylum centre of Budel-Cranendonck, by establishing 400 COL places out of the total amount of 1,500 places (Blikopnieuws, 2015). The establishment of a second COL in the Netherlands is a local levelled translation of the attempts of the Dutch government and COA to manage the influx of asylum seekers and to decrease the national delays prior to the AA as inter alia formulated in the law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’.

Figure 9 below provides a visual timeline of the developments of Budel-Cranendonck since its opening in May 2014. The separate events will be further elaborated in the remain of this chapter.

43 Gemeenschappelijke vreemdelingen locatie 44 Interview COA employee Mr. Schippers, Budel, January 21 2016 49

October 2015 September 2014 200 emergency 300 extra places shelter places are May 2014 are realized. equipped. Total Opening Budel- Total capacity of capacity of Cranendonck a Budel- Budel- regular asylum Cranedonck Cranendonck centre with 1,200 increases to increases to places 1,500 places 1,700

June 2014 September 2015 November 2015 COA requests to Budel- COA files a add 600-800 Cranendonck request to places at Budel- becomes a COL establish a Cranendonck. with 400 places. permanet asylum This request was Total capacity centre at Budel- declined remains 1,500 Cranendonck for at least 15 years. The total capacity remains 1,700

Figure 9: Timeline on the developments of Budel-Cranendonck from May 2014 onwards

4.3.1 Request to host 1,200 asylum seekers The asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck is located in the former Nassau-Dietzkazerne and opened its doors for asylum seekers in May 2014. In this period of time the influx of asylum seekers continued to increase and the real estate department of COA was ceaselessly searching for new locations to shelter those looking for asylum in the Netherlands (Zeebregts, 2016). The former Nassau-Dietzkazerne was unoccupied at that time and once it was indicated as a possible shelter location the managing board of COA filed a request with the mayor of Cranendonck, Marga Vermue, to host 900 asylum seekers (Mansvelt, 2014). On May 8th Omroep Brabant published an article speculating on the possible establishment of an asylum centre at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne for 900 asylum seekers but could not confirm this news yet (Kamp, 2014). When discussing the opening of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck with location manager Mr. Zeebregts, he also explained how 6 days before the arrival of the first asylum seekers, COA already started their preparations (Zeebregts, 2016). On the 13th of May 2014 the final decision was made by the mayor and councillors of Cranendonck to give COA permission to shelter a maximum of 1,200 asylum seekers for a period of 2 years in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne (Juda, 2014; Mansvelt, 2014). Because of the urgency of the request due to the large flow of asylum seekers in 2013 and 2014, the asylum centre had to be realized in 2 to 3 weeks after COAs request (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Therefore, the local decision making process had to happen in a short time. Alderman Jan van Tulden explained to the town council: “given the urgency expressed to us [the town council] by COA, we were unable to organize an information evening

50 concerning the arrival of 1,200 asylum seekers at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, on short notice”45 (Mansvelt, 2014). After the local councillors of Cranendonck were informed on the new situation they unanimously decided to grand permission to this request for the duration of one year, with the possibility to extend this period with another year. Due to a lack of time a regular council meeting was not held on this subject, however, the councillors were informed through their group chairman and were asked for their support. Since the majority of the councillors did not have any serious doubts this support was given (GemeenteCranendonck, 2014b) (Küsters, Kloppers, Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016). The high influx of asylum seekers in the Netherlands, pressured the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers, since the number of asylum seekers that had to be hosted increased. To ensure compliance with the law, more asylum centres had to be established in the Netherlands in a limited amount of time. On the local level in Cranendonck, this limited timespan resulted in frictions in the translation process that occurred during the shortening of the decision making process on the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck. To ensure local implementation in a limited time period, municipal councillors and local residents were excluded from the decision making process. This initiates that the fastened implementation of the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’ on the local level is not taking the local decision making process in consideration. The consequences of the exclusion of the local residents caused by these frictions in the translation process will be further addressed in section 4.3.2 and chapter 6.

As explained above, COAs housing department had 6 days to prepare for the first arrival in which the previous Nassau-Dietzkazerne was equipped and various employees were hired. Mr. Zeebregts location manager of Budel-Cranendonck explained “we had to work hard. From early morning until late at night we were busy recruiting employees. In the eventing we had job interviews after which we had to decide whom to hire and whom to decline. This process lasted until the middle of the night” 46 [free translation] (Zeebregts, 2016). Aside from the above mentioned frictions in the translation process that occurred during the local decision making process, more frictions occurred in the process of translating the law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’ to the local level. Similar to the frictions addressed above, these frictions are another consequence of the high influx of asylum seekers in the Netherlands that results in a decreased timespan in which the national law has to be implemented to the local level. These frictions in the translation process occurred during the hiring of local employees that, in practice, requires more than 6 days. As a result, many employees that were hired in the limited timespan prior to the opening of Budel-Cranendonck, appeared to be unqualified and were replaced in the first few weeks after the opening of the asylum centre (van Dijk, 2016). On the 14th of May 2014 the previous Nassau-Dietzkazerne was open as a shelter for a total amount of 1,200 asylum seekers (Zeebregts, 2016). 4.3.2 Informative meetings and periodic consultations After the town council decided that a second asylum centre would open at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, and a few days before the arrival of the first asylum seekers, the nearby residents of the former army base were officially informed by the municipality. For additional information a meeting was organized on the

45 “Gezien de urgentie zoals we dat van het COA begrepen, waren we niet in staat om op korte termijn een informatieavond te beleggen over de komst van 1200 asielzoekers naar de Nassau Dietz kazerne” 46 “Dat was even hard werken. Van s ’ochtends vroeg tot midden in de nacht waren we bezig met werving. Daarnaast hadden we s ’avonds sollicitatiegesprekken, waarna we tot diep in de nacht nog keken wie we wel of niet moesten aannemen” 51

22nd of May 2014 in which the inhabitants of Cranendonck were offered a possibility to ask questions concerning the decision of the municipality and the opening of an asylum centre at the Nassau- Dietzkazerne (GemeenteCranendonck, 2014b)(Küsters, Klopper, Kamps, 2016). To prevent any insurrections, no plenary sessions were furnished. The chairs were removed from the room and instead the room was filled with stand tables. The evening started with a short explanation by COA, explaining their request, which was followed by an explanation by the municipality. Thereafter, visitors had the possibility to walk around, ask questions and share comments and worries with fellow attendees and delegates of COA and the municipality (Vermue, 2016). Prior to this informative session some residents made an appeal to protest. A Facebook page was used to stimulate people to arrive wearing sunglasses and to bring demonstrative signs and noisy instruments. “The politics do not listen to us, so we will not listen to them either. This way we try to make a statement”47 explains a resident of the village of Gastel in an interview with Eindhovens Dagblad (EindhovensDagblad, 2014b) On the night of the gathering however, a handful of people joined the demonstrations and an actual protest held off (Smit, 201548; Maas & Maas, 201649). The activities on social media and local publications in newspapers and their possible consequences will be further evaluated in chapter 7.

To ensure civil satisfaction, mutual communication and to reduce any negative outcomes of hosting this amount of asylum seekers in Cranendonck, periodic consultations were organized by the municipality. In the starting phase, these consultations were held every two weeks. At these gatherings, local residents, COA and the municipality met to discuss complaints, worries and possible irritations that were experienced by the local residents and caused by the asylum seekers. Together, these actors looked for well fitted solutions to reduce those complaints in the future. Currently, the amount of consultations has been reduced, and they are organized once every 2 to 3 months (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016; van Vliet, 2016). These consultations are an initiative of the municipality of Cranendonck meant to provide an opportunity to include a bottom up advise on the local situation with regard to the asylum seekers. Chapter 6 will further elaborate on the outcomes of these consultations and the possibilities for local residents to advise and participate in the municipal decision making process. 4.3.3 A second and third request After a period of 2 months the mayor of Cranendonck was approached by COA again. COA filed a new request in which they asked for an increase of the 1,200 places with an addition of approximately 600 to 800 extra beds. This request was declined by the municipality without further discussion with the town council. According to the included civil servants, an increase of 600 to 800 places was too high and the request came too soon after the first opening of the former army base to asylum seekers (EindhovensDagblad, 2014f) (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016).

A third request of COA was formulated in the fall of 2014. This request comprised an increase of the amount of 1,200 places with 300 extra places. This request was proposed to the town council, which decided to grant permission on the 23rd of September 2014 (ANP, 2014). This permission was granted under the condition that an evaluation would be performed on the close of that same year. Depending

47 "De politiek kijkt niet naar ons dus kijken wij ook niet naar hen. We willen op die manier een statement maken" 48 Interview inhabitant Mr. van Smit, Budel, December 17 2015 49 Interview inhabitants Mr. & Mrs. Maas, Maarheeze, January 18 2016 52 on the outcome of that evaluation process a final go or no go would be given to COAs request to increase their capacity with 300 places. The evaluation, performed by the town council, gave no reason to decline COAs request and therefore gave permission to continue hosting a total amount of 1,500 asylum seekers in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne until the COA contract would expire in May 2016 (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps 2016; Vermue 2016).

On September 11th of 2015 the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck received an additional function and became the second application centre (COL) of the Netherlands. Therefore, 400 of the 1,500 places at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne were evacuated and resubmitted as reception location places for asylum seekers who just entered the Netherlands and were sent to Budel-Cranendonck by the original application centre in Ter Apel (deVolkskrant, 2015).

Since the start of September 2015, the Dutch ministry of Security and Justice has been making urgent appeals to the Dutch municipalities to establish temporary emergency shelter locations for asylum seekers. These appeals are a result of the pressure on the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’ to provide every asylum seeker with a shelter location, that is caused by the continuing influx of asylum seekers in the Netherlands as a result of the European policies and agreements such as the division key. Those emergency shelter locations are meant for asylum seekers who recently entered the Netherlands but who cannot be hosted in regular shelter locations yet, due to a lack of space. A similar request was sent to the municipality of Cranendonck on the 7th of October 2015. In accordance to this request, sent by the Dutch ministry of internal affairs and COA, it was decided to temporarily host an additional amount of 200 asylum seekers at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. To justify this decision, the mayor of Cranendonck explained: “we do not shut our eyes for the current situation in the Netherlands. We will provide shelter for these 200 people for the duration of a few weeks to a couple of months”50(GemeenteCranendonck, 2015b). This local development of Budel-Cranendonck indicates a direct translation of the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’, to the local level in Cranendonck.

In response to this increase of asylum seekers and to provide additional information on the extra asylum seekers that are hosted in Budel-Cranendonck, the municipality created a special webpage to give information on frequently asked questions. These questions concern inter alia the costs of hosting these foreigners, it gives an indication of the population, their daily activities and it explains some of the advantages of having an asylum centre in the municipality (GemeenteCranendonck, 2015c). 4.3.4 A permanent asylum shelter On the 30th of November 2015 the municipality of Cranendonck received an official request from COA to delay the closing date of the asylum centre at the former Nassau-Dietzkazerne. In their request to extend the current contract, COA proposed the idea of a more permanent asylum centre in the former Nassau- Dietzkazerne for a duration of at least 15 years with a maximum of 1,700 asylum seekers including the additional 200 emergency shelter places. (GemeenteCranendonck, 2015a; NOS, 2015b; Quekel, 2015b). As an explanation for its request, COA stated to be satisfied with the situation so far and the extensive

50 “Wij sluiten onze ogen niet voor de huidige situatie in Nederland. Voor deze 200 mensen gaan we uit van tijdelijke opvang voor een periode van enkele weken tot maanden” 53 grounds of the former army base, which provides their residents with a peaceful environment (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). According to an article published in de Gelderlander, it had been clear for a longer time that the asylum centre at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne would continue in some way, however the precise circumstances of this continuation were still unknown (Gelderlander, 2015).

In its current request, COA elaborates on the renewal of the current contract with preferably 15 to 30 years to an undetermined time. However, when this duration is not achievable according to the town council, an alternative period of time period is open to discussion. A longer duration of the contract ensures mutual clarity on the local situation regarding to the asylum centre. Also, COA manager Anthony Slinkert explains how a more extended timeframe is nationally needed to ensure the availability of asylum centres with good quality and standards. This explanation indicates that COAs current request visualizes a direct translation of the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’, to the local level. An extended period of time will make it financially possible and rewarding for COA to make investments on the whole terrain including its buildings. When an agreement is settled, COA is planning to invest in a better sanitation system and the reconstruction of the buildings on the terrain. Due to those and more investments of COA, the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck will become one of COAs core locations and will therefore remain open as long as possible. When the influx of asylum seekers will decrease, the amount of occupied places might decrease as well. However, due to the long-term investments, the chance of full closure prior to the ending of the contract is very narrow (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

For the future contract, COA proposes to keep the internal circumstances, such as the numbers, populations and function of the asylum centre, similar to the current situation. To clarify these three points, COA explains how the amount of asylum seekers they want to shelter at Budel-Cranendonck in the future will continue to be 1,500 with an additional emergency capacity growth of 200 places. Once the necessity of these emergency places fades, the total amount of places will shrink back to 1,500 in total. The population will consist of men, women and children of all possible nationalities, which may vary over the years. Finally, the function of Budel-Cranendonck will continue to hold both COL and POL procedures. Hereby, three different parties COA, IND and DT&V51 will collaborate on the same location, which will, according to COA, lead to an increase of the employment rate. This part of the process is currently already executed at Budel-Cranendonck. However, COA explains that by extending the duration of the contract, these processes can more structurally be elaborated (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

To establish this, COA aims to purchase the entire terrain of the army base. This is a necessity since the current owner, Rijksgebouwendienst, only wants to sell the area in one piece. However, COA is not planning to use more space for to shelter asylum seekers. Instead, COA aims towards a multifunctional usage of the former army base to increase activities stimulating the integration of the asylum seekers. These activities have not been indicated yet but can, according to COA, be determined together with the municipality to include possible municipal needs. Examples of those activities are the sportive and educational events (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

51 Dienst Terugkeer en Vertrek 54

4.3.5 Informative sessions To positively contribute to the mutual actor communication cycle, inform the inhabitants of Cranendonck of this newly presented request of COA, and to give them a possibility to ask questions and share their opinion, the municipality of Cranendonck organized three informative sessions in December of 2015. Those informative sessions were organized on three separate days and locations in Budel-Dorplein, Budel and Maarheeze from 5.00 PM to 7.00 PM (Vermue, 2016). In response to some negative comments concerning the timing of these sessions the mayor explains: “We thought consciously of these [times], and we considered that when we organize them late afternoon to early evening, and spread them [the sessions] over three separate evenings, occupied residents will have multiple possibilities to choose from, either directly after or previous to their work. Especially when the meetings are spread over three separate evenings there is always an opportunity to come by”52 (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). To inform the inhabitants of Cranendonck about these informative sessions two articles were published in the local newspaper the Grenskoerier (Vermue, 2016).

The approach of these sessions was similar to the informative meeting in May 2014 and lacked a plenary section. Delegates from the local councillors, commission members and the mayor herself were all present and approachable for comments and questions (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue 2016). Also, delegates of COA, VluchtelingenWerk Nederland, the local police, security guards, high school representatives and other stakeholders were present and could be addressed (Smit, 2015). An alternative option to share questions, opinions and reactions was offered by filling in a small form. Those forms were sent to, and discussed by the local council. Afterwards, the people that handed in such a note were sent an email by the council to confirm their receipt. On those three sessions eight different residents made use of this possibility (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

The informative sessions on both the 14th, 17th and 21st of December 2015 were visited by a handful of residents (EindhovensDagblad, 2015a, 2015c) (Kuipers, 2016)53. The second session was a day after riots occurred in Geldermalsen that started in response to the possible opening of an asylum centre in that municipality. In response to those riots the mayor of Cranendonck discussed the possibility to increase the security levels at the session on the 17th of December. However, in consultation with the local police it was decided such measures were not necessary in Budel (EindhovensDagblad, 2015a). 4.3.6 Council meeting To continue the decision making process on the acceptance or decline of COAs request to purchase the former army base and develop a durable asylum centre, this topic was discussed at the local council meeting on January 19th. This discussion was divided into two separate parts. First, Mr. Govers spoke on behalf of the local residents of the former army base, COA gave a further explanation on their request as elaborated above, and the political parties were given the opportunity to raise questions to both the representative of the local residents as to COA. During the second part of this discussion, the delegates of

52 “We hebben daar juist bewust over gedacht in de zin van, nou ja, als we dat eind van de middag doen of begin van de avond en zeker verspreid over drie avonden zijn die mensen die s avonds andere activiteiten hebben die hebben in ieder geval voldoende gelegenheid om te komen, hetzij direct na hun werk of hetzij voor hun werk en zeker als je dat verspreid over drie avonden dan is er toch altijd wel de gelegenheid om te komen” 53 Interview Mr. Kuipers, Maarheeze, January 18 2016 55 the political parties of Cranendonck were given the possibility to present their views on the subject of realizing a permanent asylum shelter at the former Nassau-Dietzkazerne (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

The pleading of the local residents emphasized on the amount of asylum seekers that are currently hosted in Budel-Cranendonck and the difficulties they entail. The main worries of the local residents concerned safety issues, manageability and nuisance caused by the asylum seekers. Also, the representative of the local residents, Mr. Govers, emphasized the negative impact hosting over a thousand asylum seekers has on the social and cultural identity of the municipality of Cranendonck. These worries have also been addressed in the periodic consultation, however, according to the local residents the proposed solutions were not executed to their satisfaction. Accusations were formulated concerning commitments, agreements and solutions that were promised by COA, but, according to Mr. Govers, were not executed to the satisfaction of the local residents. In his statement, Mr. Govers declares “We have gradually lost faith in COA and as local residents, we feel used by them. They [COA] make good impressions to outsiders by organizing, for example, periodic consultations. However, the agreements [established at these consultations], which are barely controllable by third parties, are not lived up to”54(GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). By means of this explanation, Mr. Govers highlights that due to their experiences with the practices of COA, the local residents he represents have lost their trust in COA. Additionally, he equally frames COA as an untrustworthy and dishonest organization. In response to this comment, various council members asked for further explanation and examples of those commitments, agreements and solutions that are, according to Mr. Govers, not honoured by COA. However, the representative of the local residents was unable to provide such examples. Instead mayor Vermue, who often is present at these periodic meetings, gave some examples of critical remarks addressed in the periodic consultations. Those remarks included traffic safety, where COA promised to hand out reflecting singlets and bicycle lights, waste on the site of the road passing the army base, which would be remedied by placing more waste bins and by the organization of cleaning sessions with the asylum seekers, and finally the placement of a paper container by neighbour associations on the terrain of the army base to collect more money. The mayor agreed with the local residents that COA could have acted faster and more accurately in response to some of those requests and promises (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

To continue this pleading, Mr. Govers addresses that the total amount of 2,000 asylum seekers, divided over Budel-Dorplein and Budel-Cranendonck, is too high according to the local residents. Instead they prefer this number to be phased out to guarantee the security, manageability, and the social cultural identity of the villages in Cranendonck, and to reduce nuisance caused by the asylum seekers (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). In response to this remark, councillor van Happen from CDA Cranendonck noticed “safety remains an issue whether there are 1,200 of 1,500 asylum seekers”55(GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

54 “Wij hebben het vertrouwen in het COA zo langzamerhand verloren en voelen ons als omwonende door het COA gebruikt. Naar buiten goede sier maken van kijk eens hoe wij met die betrokkenen overleggen, maar vervolgens gemaakte afspraken, door derden nauwelijks controleerbaar gewoon niet waarmaken” 55 “Veiligheid blijft evengoed een vraagstuk of het er nou 1200 of 1500 zijn”

To continue, Mr. Govers read a letter written by worried parents living in the area around of the former army base. In this letter worried parents emphasized the concerns they have for their children, when COAs request will be met, and the impact this will have on their daily lives. The letter describes how children can no longer cycle their familiar route along the bike path towards the village in safety. As an explanation the writer states: “this route is currently occupied by groups of asylum seekers, mainly young boys and men, who shout and whistle to them or who do not let them pass”56 (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). By this explanation, the writers of the letter describe the nuisance caused by asylum seekers who are framed by them as mainly male. In the conclusion of this letter, the councillors are strongly urged to imagine being a child, woman or elder losing his or her secure, trusted and peaceful environment due to the high numbers of asylum seekers hosted within their municipality (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). The opinions of local residents of Cranendonck on the local situation, the asylum seekers themselves and the activities of the municipality and COA will be further elaborated upon in chapter 5 and chapter 6.

ELAN After this first part of the assembly the local political parties were given the opportunity to explicate their statements on the possible contract extension of Budel-Cranendonck. ELAN (Real Local Attention Now57), a local party pursuing the unity and quality of life in Cranendonck occupy 5 out of the 19 seats in the town council (ELAN, n.d.; Horizon, 2014a). In this meeting, ELAN started by stating they were sorry to see that the local population of Cranendonck had not been asked for its opinion. ELAN is discontented with the informative sessions and gives preference to spreading surveys in which people can give their opinion regarding a certain situation. According to ELAN, face to face contact on such sensitive matters can be stigmatizing and does not provide a fair chance for people to share their opinion. Aside from that matter, ELAN has the opinion that the municipality of Cranendonck has a duty to contribute to solving the problems involving asylum seekers and refugees. This could, according to them, happen at the former army base under strict conditions. First, ELAN would like to see the function of Budel-Cranendonck change from a VGL back to a regular asylum centre without an application point (COL). Secondly, the availability of security services is highlighted as important. ELAN stresses this availability should not be at the expense of the current availability of security services to the original inhabitants of Cranendonck. Furthermore, ELAN wants COA to include local entrepreneurs in their future plans, by giving them a possibility to benefit from the presence of the asylum centre, for example by delivering products and services to Budel- Cranendonck. This inclusion of local entrepreneurs was highlighted by more political parties in this meeting (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). The realization of this inclusion however, is difficult, due to master contracts that are established by COA on the national level. These contracts concern collaborations between COA and different companies concerning for example the provision of food, renovation, security and cleaning and will be further discussed in chapter 6 (Meijers, 2015)(Schippers, 2016). Another important factor for ELAN that should be further elaborated upon when realizing a more permanent asylum centre is the multi-functional usage of the area in which the asylum centre is currently located (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

56 “Over het fietspad waar groepen asielzoekers waar veel al jongen jongens en mannen lopen, worden ze nageroepen, nagefloten of zelfs dat ze hen niet goed doorlaten” 57 Echte Lokale Aandacht Nu 57

ELAN stresses the importance of public support, which, according to them, is currently present in relation to the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. To retain this support, ELAN requests a substantial revision of the amount of asylum seekers that are to be hosted in Budel-Cranendonck in the possible future. The representative of ELAN, Mr. Beerten, explains: “10 percent of the residents of Cranendonck is too much according to us. The housing of asylum seekers should be equally divided over the entire country. This way there is no need for large-scale asylum centres”58 (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). As previously explained however, there is no national policy on equally dividing asylum seekers over the municipality in the Netherlands and the location where asylum centres are established is based on the availability of possible shelter locations (NOS, 2015e). Despite this lack of national policy, the preference of ELAN goes to small-scale asylum centres, and therefore they would like COA to decrease the proposed amount of asylum seekers with at least 50%. ELAN describes how small-scale asylum centres increase the possibility to guarantee the safety in- and outside the centre, and will also cause a decrease of nuisance. Despite of the proposed decrease by ELAN, they agree that an emergency capacity should be possible on occasional basis and for a short period of time. As a final note ELAN states: “to conclude, ELAN is willing to say yes to the request of a sustainable capacity for asylum seekers at the army base in Budel, when this concerns the realization of a small-scale asylum centre. Consequently, this [development of a small-scale asylum centre] will guarantee long and lasting public support of the residents of Cranendonck and the refugees that might be housed in the years to come”59 (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

CDA Cranendonck CDA Cranendonck occupies 4 of the 19 seats in the town council and is part of the current coalition with Cranendonck Actief! and the VVD (EindhovensDagblad, 2014d). At the council meeting CDA Cranendonck declares to be content with the situation concerning the asylum centre that, according to them is located on an ideal location and caused little problems in the past. To further elaborate, CDA Cranendonck stresses the importance of Cranendoncks original residents, coexisting with the asylum seekers and refugees located in Cranendonck. Even though CDA Cranendonck agrees with hosting asylum seekers at the army base, they have the opinion that COA’s current proposal lacks handles to ensure this coexisting. Mrs. Van Happen, representative of CDA Cranendonck explains: “in the past couple of days we received multiple signals from local residents, and now Mr. Govers confirms this once again, that they do not feel taken seriously. The support from local residents is very important and more effort should be made to enhance this cooperation”60 (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). CDA Cranendonck wants COA to develop a new plan in which they include the investments they are willing to make to ensure the coexistence of asylum seekers and local residents on terms of safety, the inclusion of local entrepreneurs and a more elaborated plan regarding the development of the property. Furthermore, CDA Cranendonck desires to see an elaborated plan on the usages of the areas of the army base COA is not planning on using

58 “10% van de inwoners van Cranendonck vinden wij te veel. Wij vinden dat de huisvesting van asielzoekers ook eerlijk dient plaats te vinden in en door het land. Er hoeven dan geen hele grote asielzoekerscentrums te ontstaan” 59 “Samenvattend, ELAN wil ja zeggen tegen het voorstel voor een duurzame capaciteit asielzoekers op de legerplaats in Budel, door de realisatie van een kleinschaliger asielzoekerscentrum, zodoende dat er met groot en blijvend draagvlak van de bevolking en de vluchtelingen de komende jaren gehuisvest kunnen worden” 60 “Wij krijgen de laatste dagen vanuit diverse mensen signalen en ook meneer Govers bevestigt dat nog een keer, dat zij zich niet serieus genomen voelen. Het draagvlak onder die buurt is zo belangrijk daar moet extra op ingezet worden om die samenwerking te verbeteren” 58 themselves, to guarantee the optimal usage and to ensure the preservation of the economic value the area currently has for the municipality of Cranendonck. In the meantime, when COA is developing a more extensive future plan, CDA Cranendonck agrees with continuing the current situation at Budel- Cranendonck (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

VVD Cranendonck VVD Cranendonck, currently occupying 2 seats in the town council, considers Cranendonck should contribute to the hosting of asylum seekers in the current (inter)national situation of need. As an additive VVD Cranendonck emphasized that, despite of this consideration, their overarching principle remains to shelter asylum seekers in the areas closer to the source of the problem. On a local perspective, VVD Cranendonck considers the shelter of asylum seekers at the army base has gone generally well. However, they are careful regarding long-term contracts and appointments with COA on hosting asylum seekers at Budel-Cranendonck. Instead, VVD Cranendonck prefers to implement various short-term checkpoints in which the local situation and the (inter)national problem at that time will be evaluated. They propose that based on these evaluations the possible continuation of an asylum centre in Budel-Cranendonck will be decided. Furthermore, VVD Cranendonck wants COA to include a possibility to decrease the amount of asylum seekers hosted at Budel-Cranendonck in specific circumstances. For example, when the national government decides to equally divide the asylum seekers in the Netherlands over all Dutch municipalities, VVD Cranendonck wants the amount of asylum seekers hosted at Budel-Cranendonck to decrease (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). In their monologue, VVD Cranendonck is making a distinction between their national and local position on the hosting of asylum seekers since they state that, despite of their national position, they are willing to host asylum seekers on the local level in Cranendonck. Despite this distinction, VVD Cranendonck wants to adjust to possible changes introduced by the Dutch government if they result in a decrease of asylum seekers hosted in the municipality of Cranendonck.

In rest of their monologue, VVD Cranendonck highlighted some aspects that, according to them, should be taken in consideration when extending COA’s current contract on the asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck. First they want COA to guarantee a high security rate for all local residents of Cranendonck when COA’s contract is extended (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). It should be noted that the safety within the asylum centre is one of the responsibilities of COA, but the safety outside the asylum centre is a task of the police force instead (Zeebregts, 2016). Secondly, VVD Cranendonck wants COA to clarify the possibilities of a multifunctional use of the army base terrain. To ensure this clarification VVD Cranendonck proposes three scenarios that help decide upon activities that can be executed on the army base alongside the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. The first scenario regards COA experiencing advantages of the multifunctional usages and the collaboration with third parties at the army base terrain. The second scenario regards COA experiencing no advantages nor disadvantages from the shared usage of the army base terrain. The final scenario concerns COA suffering from the shared usage of the army base terrain and their collaboration with a third party. Using these scenario’s COA can indicate the kind of activities they prefer to be carried out alongside their own activities of the asylum centre (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

In conclusion, VVD Cranendonck explains how they want to postpone their final decision on the extension of COAs contract and to give COA the possibility to further elaborate their current proposal. When a

59 renewed proposal will be presented, including VVD’s requests, they will be able to decide on the future of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

PvdA Cranendonck PvdA Cranendonck, currently occupying 2 seats in the town council, is represented by Mr. van Vliet who starts his argument by highlighting the marginal amount of incidents that have occurred since the opening of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. The argument of the PvdA Cranendonck evolves around connecting, which according to them is the key to ensure a successful collaboration between COA and the municipality of Cranendonck. PvdA Cranendonck emphasizes how the local residents of Cranendonck must be more connected to each other and to the asylum seekers hosted in their municipality. In their argument, PvdA Cranendonck explains how strengthening these connections contributes to a better understanding and collaboration between all actors involved. Mr. van Vliet refers to the monologue of Mr. Govers, the representative of Cranendoncks local residents, when he explains the necessity of strengthening the connection between COA, the municipality of Cranendonck and the local residents. The improvement of this connection and the collaboration between these actors can be ensured by improving the communication between those three actors, explains Mr. van Vliet. Furthermore, PvdA Cranendonck emphasizes the importance of connections between COA and third parties such as community organizations, sport organizations and educational to ensure a multifunctional usage of the army base terrain. The argument of PvdA Cranendonck continues by stating that once problems and bottlenecks occur during the execution of COAs future plans, they should be solved by collaborative initiatives of all actors involved. As a final note, PvdA Cranendonck recommends COA to further decentralize and to create more opportunities for local entrepreneurs and jobseekers in Cranendonck. PvdA Cranendonck is confident that the creation of such opportunities contributes to the positive attitude of local entrepreneurs and jobseekers towards COA and their future plans (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

PvdA Cranendonck ends its argument by stating that whenever the proposed frames of connecting are adopted by the town council when discussing the details of a permanent asylum centre in Budel, PvdA Cranendonck will give its full support to the final decision regarding the future of Budel-Cranendonck (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

Cranendonck Actief! Cranendonck Actief!, the biggest political party with 6 seats in the town council (Horizon, 2014a) pursues the establishment of an affordable, liveable, serviceable and attractive municipality (Actief!, 2014). Concerning the debate on the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, Cranendonck Actief! is inclining positive towards COAs request and satisfied with the way in which Cranendonck so far contributes to a solution for the international problem of asylum seekers. However, according to them some conditions have to be met before they can agree which a more permanent arrangement between COA and the municipality. To start, Cranendonck Actief! wants COA to clarify the way in which they plan to guarantee the safety and manageability both inside and outside the army base when providing shelter to asylum seekers for a longer period of time. Also, they want more information on the amount of qualified employees that are deployed to ensure the security and manageability (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

When organizing a permanent asylum centre it is, according to Cranendonck Actief! important to start educating the asylum seekers as soon as possible. Therefore, they want COA to further develop its plans

60 on how to fulfil this educational task. Aside from the educational factor, Cranendonck Actief! wants COA to assuring integrational activities and a stable environment for the asylum seekers. According to Cranendonck Actief! this is most easily arranged when hosting families only on the former army base and therefore they wonder whether this could be arranged in the future. A tuning of the nationalities and ethnicities of the people staying in Budel-Cranendonck to reduce any frictions or problems between the residents of the centre, is also desirable according to Cranendonck Actief! (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

Other points of interest highlighted by Cranendonck Actief! concern the increase of local employment at the asylum centre, the inclusion of local retailers to improve their economic situation, and the multifunctional usage of the army base. Cranendonck Actief! desires to develop the whole army base, not only the parts COA is planning to occupy. To ensure this, Cranendonck Actief! expects COA to cooperate with this collaboration (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

To conclude, Cranendonck Actief! suggests COA to develop various future scenarios on the development of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, in which they include the comments made by the political parties. Within these scenarios COA can clarify investments they have planned and the accompanying conditions, the numbers of asylum seekers and the duration of the contract they pursue. These scenarios could be expanded with corresponding pro’s and con’s that can be discussed in the town council within 6 months. In the meantime, Cranendonck Actief! suggest COA to continue their current activities at the army base (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

At the end of the council meeting of January 19th 2016, the mayor of Cranendonck complimented the attendees on their nuanced discussion and the mutual respect between all the actors involved. Finally, mayor Vermue suggested to postpone the final decision until May to give COA the possibility to further elaborate their proposal (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). At the time of writing, this elaboration- and decision making process was still on going. 4.4 Conclusion In this chapter I gave an overview of the local situation in Cranendonck, which concern the hosting of foreign residents and the development of asylum centres. By elaborating on the course of events while paying attention to the local policies and decision making processes, this chapter provides a local contextual basis for the analysis of local actions and narratives as elaborated upon in chapter 5, 6 and 7.

Asylum centre Budel-Dorplein has been opened, closed and reopened several times and is currently operable as a small-scale, regular asylum centre with 239 places. In the past, foreign residents were also hosted at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. However, this location only recently became an asylum centre. The (re-) opening of the asylum centres in Cranendonck can directly be explained by referring to the increased pressure on local implementation of the national Law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’, caused by the current numbers of asylum seekers entering the Netherlands. Since the opening of Budel-Cranendonck in May 2014, this asylum centre developed into a large-scale asylum centre with 1,500 places and an additional 200 emergency shelter places. Furthermore, Budel-Cranendonck became the second COL in the Netherlands and is currently operable as a VGL. The proposal and realization of these developments of Budel-Cranendonck can similarly be explained as the opening of the centre itself, which is stressed above.

On the local level, the high pressure of the asylum seekers on the Dutch policies and laws on managing and sheltering the asylum seekers in the Netherlands, resulted in a decreased timespan in which municipal decision on the establishment and developments of asylum centres could be made. In Cranendonck, this led to some frictions in the translation process of the national law ‘Central Organ shelter asylum seekers’ to the local level. This resulted in the exclusion of local residents and lack of prior informing provided to those residents with regard to the municipal decisions made to extend the capacity of Budel-Cranendonck and to add the application function (COL) to the asylum centre. The consequences this accelerated municipal decision making processes has on the frames applied by local residents to describe the municipality and to evaluations their activities, will be elaborated upon in the chapter 6 and 7.

It should be noted however, that those frictions in the translation process only occurred during the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck. The further developments of Budel-Cranendonck are organized and decided upon in a broader timespan. Also the current municipal decision making process on COA’s latest request is evaluated over a more extensive period of time, which ensures the inclusion of all actors influenced by the final decision made. To include the local residents of Cranendonck, the municipality organized informative sessions, and invited a local resident to speak at the commission meeting on behalf of the local residents living close to the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. The statements made by the representatives of the political parties appeared to be mainly positive towards the request, under strict conditions that have to be further evaluated by COA before a final decision can be made. However, as will further be explained in chapter 6, not all of the conditions proposed in the commission meeting can be met by COA since they are, for example, depending on the national policy.

In the following chapters I will use the information presented in this chapter as a contextual background to explain and describe the frames and perceptions of local residents in Cranendonck to describe the asylum seekers and their presence.

5 The asylum seekers in Cranendonck This chapter provides a critical analysis of the frames applied by local actors in Cranendonck to describe asylum seekers and their behaviour. Therefore, the opinions of local residents on asylum seekers, as well as the local complaints on the behaviour of asylum seekers in the municipality of Cranendonck are discussed. To indicate how various aspects can influence the establishment of different frames, I will also pay attention to the different ways in which various local residents approach and frame asylum seekers and situations involving them.

By doing so, I aim to create an understanding of the different characterization frames and risk- and information frames applied on the local level to describe asylum seekers and evaluate their behaviour and presence in the municipality. This information necessary to understand the local opinions on the establishment of the asylum centres in Cranendonck and the local actions that arose in response to this establishment, which will be more extensively addressed in chapter 7. Furthermore, highlighting and understanding the different frames applied by local actors in Cranendonck with regard to the asylum seekers and their behaviour is necessary to understand the opinions of those local actors on the activities of the municipality and COA, which will be discussed in chapter 6.

First, the different characterization frames applied by local residents to describe asylum seekers are visualized and discussed. These frames inter alia concern the sex, descent and wealth of the asylum seekers. Thereafter the worries and complaints local residents have about the asylum seekers are discussed and explained by connecting them to the characterization frames applied. Third, local narratives about the possible competition asylum seekers cause with regard to inter alia national payments, subsidies, and housing access is highlighted. These situations are also linked to the characterization frames and the risk- and information frames applied by the local residents. Thereafter, the experiences of two local entrepreneurs in Cranendonck with asylum seekers are shared and evaluated. 5.1 Local opinions on the characteristics of asylum seekers As explained in chapter 4, the inhabitants of Cranendonck have previous experiences with asylum seekers and other foreigners living in their municipality. Despite this, the residents of Cranendonck frame the characteristics of the asylum seekers currently located in the Netherlands in different ways. The frames applied by residents of Cranendonck to describe asylum seekers are divergent. The initiator of a local fundraiser, who will be discussed in chapter 7, explains: “It breaks my heart to I see them [asylum seekers] walking around, in Budel and in Weert. They are families that show strong resemblances with my own. That is an aspect that engages me. These people have nothing at all”61 (Neijnens, 2015). In this quotation, Mrs. Neijnens describes asylum seekers as families, similar to her own, that have left everything behind and are in need of shelter and support. Since this characterization frame is sympathizing with the asylum seekers, it is likely that people applying this frame aim to understand the situation of the asylum seekers and are willing to support them.

A different characterization frame is applied by Mr. Groen, local resident of Cranendonck, who explains: “There are hardly any families [of asylum seekers] here in Cranendonck. The asylum seekers are mainly

61 “Ik vind het zo hartverscheurend als ik ze zie lopen, of het nu in Budel is of hier in Weert. Een gezin, en gewoon gezin dat je kunt vergelijken met jezelf, dat grijpt gewoon aan. Die mensen hebben helemaal niets” 63 male, loud negroes. They constantly call people while running towards the cashier in the supermarkets without waiting in line. However, this behaviour has improved a little over time. During the day they [asylum seekers] constantly carry trays of beers, but since they handle alcohol badly, they are continuously drunk, which results in them yelling at our wives”62 (Groen, 2016)63. The characterization frame applied by Mr. Groen describes asylum seekers as (mainly) male negroes that are both loud and impolite. Furthermore, this explanation describes how Mr. Groen characterizes these men as people that drink often and are unable to handle the effects of alcohol, which is causing them to be rude and disrespectful to the female residents of Cranendonck. This, and similar characterization frames are likely to be applied by people who dislike asylum seekers and are against the hosting of asylum seekers.

The two quotations above are examples of the differences in characterization frames local residents can apply to describe asylum seekers. These upper statements concern asylum seekers in general. The asylum centres in Cranendonck however, currently host mainly Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers. Syrian and Eritreans differ in their religion, norms and values. Syrians are mostly Islamic while Eritreans are often Christians, explains COA employee Mrs. van Wijk (van Wijk, 2015)64. Furthermore, Eritreans are allowed to drink alcohol in contrast to the Syrians, who do not drink alcohol at all (Bakker &Bakker, 2015). COA employee Mr. Schippers also explains how he thinks Eritreans might experience more difficulties to adjust to the Dutch culture and customs: “the use of the toilet is different, waste bins, computers, some things they might have never seen before, which makes it more difficult for them [Eritreans] to integrate in the Dutch society. Therefore, they require more time and attention”65 (Schippers, 2016).

The differences between Syrians and Eritreans have likely caused the differences in the way in which asylum seekers originated from Syrian and Eritrea are framed. Mr. de Jong explains: “The people originated from Syria mainly come from cities. Those people speak proper English and are well educated. The Syrian asylum seekers are therefore likely to fit in the Dutch society. The people from Eritrea however, they are just different. They have a different attitude. All over Africa people have different attitudes and different ways to live. Those people from Africa [Eritrean asylum seekers] have no business here at all. Their culture is so different from ours, not one of them is educated. Therefore, they are unable to work and contribute to the Dutch society. They do not have a future here”66 (de Jong, 2016). With this

62 “Het zijn bijna geen families hier in Cranendonck, alleen van die luid schreeuwende nergens die met de telefoon chronisch aan hun oor in de supermarkt alle kanten van de kassa bestormen en niet eens het fatsoen hebben om aan te sluiten. Dat gaat nu overigens al iets beter. Maar dan lopen ze daar met van die blikken bier waar ze niet tegen kunnen en drinken ze bij de bushalte. Dar zijn ze niet gewent en dan gaan ze vervolgens lallend onze vrouwen na schreeuwen” 63 Skype interview inhabitant Mr. Groen, Budel-Arnhem, April 7 2016 64 Interview COA employee Mrs. van Wijk, Budel-Dorplein, December 21 2015 65 “Alleen het toilet gebruik is al anders, afvalcontainers, een computer, sommige dingen hebben ze misschien nog nooit gezien en dat maakt het voor hun een stukje lastiger om in te burgeren in de Nederlandse maatschappij daar hebben ze wat meer aandacht en tijd voor nodig” 66 “Die mensen uit Syrië, dat zijn mensen uit de stad dat zijn mensen die gewoon Engels spreken en een goede opleiding hebben gehad, die zouden hier prima huis, ja die zouden hier prima inpassen, in Nederland zeg maar. Maar die mensen uit Eritrea die zijn echt, die zijn helemaal zeg maar, heel ander volk. Ja dat is echt zo, die hebben een heel andere instelling, in Afrika ook daar zijn gewoon mensen die hebben zo’n andere instelling van hoe ze moeten

64 explanation, both Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers are framed. The characterization frame of Syrian asylum seekers describes them as people originating from the city, who are well educated and are therefore able to fit within, and contribute to the Dutch society. The characterization frame applied to Eritrean asylum seekers on the other hand, describes asylum seekers derived from Eritrea as African people with limited education levels and a lack of motivation and knowledge to contribute to the Dutch society. Furthermore, Eritrean asylum seekers are framed as useless people, who are unable to adjust to the Dutch society. Additionally, Mr. de Jong stresses only asylum seekers who are able to contribute to the Dutch society should be allowed to enter the country: “If they are unable to contribute to our society, they have no business here […] I do not see any reason why we should let those kind of people enter our country. Because they are pathetic? Almost all people in Africa are pathetic, I think that is a poor reason”67 (de Jong, 2016).

Generally, Eritrean asylum seekers have received less education in comparison to Syrian asylum seekers. They therefore experience more difficulties in learning and speaking English (van Vliet, 2016; van Wijk, 2015; Schippers, 2016). This difference in education level is explained by Mr. van Vliet by stating that Syria is a developed country and therefore, on average, the Syrian asylum seekers are higher educated in comparison to Eritrean asylum seekers. He explains: “You often see that whenever there are problems [in a country or region], those who received the best education and those who have money are the ones that can more easily flee [from the country]. People who have nothing are unable flee, even if they want to”68 (van Vliet, 2016). In this quotation, Mr. van Vliet also highlights the wealth of some of the asylum seekers. This wealth, especially from the Syrian asylum seekers who fled a developed country, might be a thorn in the eye of some local residents, stresses Mr. van Vliet. He explains the possession and use of mobile phones by asylum seekers as normal behaviour. According to him, mobile phones are the only communication tool the asylum seekers have to contact relatives and friends who stayed in their country of origin (van Vliet, 2016). Municipal official Mrs. Kloppers agrees with Mr. van Vliet and explains how people often assume asylum seekers and refugees to be poor. Therefore, there is a lack of understanding when those people are in possession of luxury items and goods such as mobile phones. These assumptions cause misunderstandings and a loss of overall support towards the asylum seekers (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

This reasoning is followed by one of Cranendoncks residents, Mr. Maas, who explains: “The principle of hosting asylum seekers is okay when this concerns people that were bombed in their country of origin. However, there are many others who never experienced any difficulties that add themselves to the

leven. Die mensen uit Afrika hebbe hier gewoon niks te zoeken, dat is zo’n andere cultuur, die hebben allemaal geen opleiding gehad, als je kijk naar wat voor werk ze kunnen doen, niks. Die hebben geen toekomst hier” 67 “Als je niet bij kunt dragen aan de samenleven, dan heb je hier toch niks te zoeken. Waarom zouden we die mensen dan hier toelaten, omdat het zielig voor hun is. In Afrika zijn ook heel veel mensen zielig weet je wel. Dat vind ik zo’n slechte reden” 68 “Want vaak zie je dat als er problemen zijn, diegene die het best opgeleid zijn en geld hebben, die kunnen het makkelijkst vluchten. Mensen die niks hebben, ja die kunnen ook niet vluchten, ook al zouden ze willen”

65 current flow of asylum seekers”69 (Maas & Maas, 2016). To strengthen this case, Mrs. Maas, who is a shop assistant in a local supermarket adds: “if you would see how much money they pull out of their pockets in my shop, well, I do not have that kind of money in my wallet. And indeed, they [the asylum seekers] possess the most expensive phones. All of them [the asylum seekers] have mobile phones so they are able to call everyone […] I don’t know, I think it is a criminal organization”70 (Maas & Maas, 2016)71. Within these upper quotations asylum seekers are framed as poor people that fled their country of origin due to bombings. Wealthy people however, have mingled in the current group of asylum seekers stresses Mr. Maas. In addition to this explanation, Mrs. Maas frames these wealthy asylum seekers with (expensive) mobile phones as part of a criminal organization. This indicates her distrust for asylum seekers with (expensive) mobile phones.

These different explanations on asylum seekers possessing luxury items are based on different characterization frames applied by the residents to describe asylum seekers. Where Mr. and Mrs. Maas express their disbelief in and discontent with the wealth of the asylum seekers, Mr. van Vliet stresses the asylum seekers are similar to the Dutch residents and experience the same feelings and worries. To add to this reasoning he explains: “Dutch residents explain they [the asylum seekers] all have the newest iPhone and think it is a shame. […] Why are we allowed [to have the newest iPhone] while they are not? They [the asylum seekers] have to be poor, they have to have nothing, they need to say ‘thank you’ and sit on their knees all day. We have to stop this behaviour and treat them [asylum seekers] as normal people. We should act in a normal way to these people”72[free translation] (van Vliet, 2016).

“Unknown makes unloved,”73 explains Mrs. Kloppers while emphasizing how people often base their feelings or situation evaluation on a certain vision of the truth which does not necessarily have to be correct (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). With this explanation Mrs. Kloppers elaborates on how characterization frames applied by actors do not have to be true for them to influence risk- and information frames applied by the same actors. These risk- and information frames are again influencing the way in which those actors evaluate a specific situation. An example where a certain vision of the truth influences the feelings of local residents is the perception that the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck are only young and unmarried males (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

Aside from Mr. Groen, who explained in a previous visualized quote asylum seekers are male negroes, multiple other residents of Cranendonck indicated the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck are mainly

69 “Het principe is oké, kijk mensen die het nodig hebben zoals die arme mensen die gebombardeerd worden oké, maar er zijn er een hele hoop die mee komen waaien en die het helemaal niet moeilijk hebben” 70 “Jij ziet wat bij mij in de winkel wat ze zo uit hun zakken toveren nou, dat heb ik niet in mijn portemonnee zitten. Ja en de duurste telefoons, ze hebben hier allemaal een telefoon ze kennen iedereen bellen… ik weet niet, dat is een grote criminele organisatie volgens mij” 71 Interview inhabitants Mr. & Mrs. Maas, Maarheeze, January 18 2016 72 “Nederlanders zeggen van ze hebben allemaal de nieuwste IPhone en dat vinden ze dan een schande…. Waarom mogen wij wel en zij niet? Zij moeten arm zijn, zij hebben niks, en zij moeten alleen maar dank je wel zeggen en op hun knieën zitten de hele dag dan denk ik hou toch eens op, het zijn gewoon mensen. Doe nou eens normaal tegen die gasten” 73 “Onbekend maakt onbemind”

(young) males (Maas & Maas, 2016; Huisman, 2016; Kuipers, 2016). To broaden this perspective, these explanations on a majority of male asylum seekers in Cranendonck are supported by 38.8 percent of the respondents of an online questionnaire who state asylum seekers are mostly young men, who are disrespectful towards women. On the other hand, 35.0 percent disagreed with this statement. In response to these statements, municipal officials explain there are children hosted at the asylum centre as well. A primary and secondary school are established for them to ensure their education. People that have the opinion mainly male asylum seekers are hosted in Cranendonck, are often unaware of this (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

In relation to the idea that the asylum seekers in Cranendonck are mainly male, some residents have expressed difficulties in understanding the reasons why fathers or husbands left their wives and children behind to flee to Europe themselves (Jansen, 2016; Kuipers, 201674; Maas & Maas, 2016). This lack of understanding towards the male asylum seekers travelling without their families might cause a decrease in support towards (male) asylum seekers. This decision of male asylum seekers to leave their family behind is also used as an example of the cultural differences between the asylum seekers and the Dutch residents: “When I would need to flee due to a war in my country of origin, I would flee with my entire family instead of going alone. That [going alone] is not the way we Westerns do things”75 (Maas & Maas, 2016). Cultural differences between asylum seekers and Dutch nationals are highlighted more often by residents of Cranendonck while explaining why asylum seekers do not fit in the Dutch society (de Jong, 2016; Groen, 2016).

This relation between the characterization frame of asylum seekers as young males and the vision that asylum seekers do not fit in the Dutch culture is, in a broader perspective, also indicated by a positive correlation in the online questionnaire between respondents indicating the asylum seekers are mainly young males who treat women disrespectfully and respondents agreeing that asylum seekers will not be able to adjust to the Dutch society due to their culture and religion. In total, 51.3 percent of respondents agree with the statement that the asylum seekers will not fit within the Dutch society due to the difference in culture and religion. On the other hand, 30.0 percent of respondents does not agree with this statement. 5.1.1 Worries and complaints Culture based behaviour caused more difficulties with the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck. When Budel-Cranendonck had just opened, for example, multiple complaints of local residents were filed concerning the toileting of asylum seekers in the open air. “They [asylum seekers] were defecating and urinating on the roads towards the village. I think that behaviour is culture based, these people are used to it that way”76 (Timmermans, 2016). Here, Mr. Timmermans explains this behaviour by referring to cultural differences. It appeared the asylum seekers defecating and urinating in the outside were mostly

74 Interview inhabitant Mr. Kuipers, Maarheeze, January 18 2016 75 “Als ik oorlog heb en ik vlucht, dan vlucht in met mijn eigen gezin en dan ga ik niet alleen. Zo zitten wij westerlingen niet in elkaar” 76 “Ze deden hier op de snelweg naar het dorp deden ze hun behoefte. Ik denk dat dat meer een cultuur kwestie is, dat zijn die mensen zo gewent”

67 derived from Eritrea where, especially in the rural areas, this is common behaviour (Schippers, 2016). Despite this, various residents of Cranendonck explained how this behaviour was unacceptable and scared some inhabitants away from the area around the asylum centre (Overtoom, 201577; Timmermans, 2016; Smit, 2015). When the news of this toileting behaviour spread, COA anticipated it, and since then include the Dutch toileting customs in the information they provide to new asylum seekers. Inter alia, this information includes sitting on the toilet, wiping, throwing the used toilet paper inside the toilet instead of in the bin, and flushing. Furthermore, parents are asked to teach and guide their children with this Dutch toileting behaviour (Schippers, 2016). Mrs. Huisman explained how this problem of defecating and urinating in the outside was indeed quickly resolved and no longer appears (Huisman, 2016)78.

Other complaints of nuisance and possible incidents concern the walking behaviour of asylum seekers over the bicycle path, the provincial way and the A2 highway. Even though the walking over the A2 is currently prevented - signs and fences are placed close to the A2 highway and COA pays attention to this situation in their information which is provided on arrival - this used to be an issue worrying many local residents (Bakker & Bakker, 2015; Smit, 2015; van Dijk, 2016; Kuipers, 2016). Various residents have explained how the asylum seekers do not care about the roads or sidewalks, they just walk and cause dangerous situations. Mr. de Jong explains how he almost hit an asylum seeker once who crossed the road without looking first: “It was a darker boy, and it was dark so he was not really visible, he had camouflage colours, and he just crossed over an 80 km/h road. He did not even look, he just crossed. I think that is amiss. And I honked and got angry, full on the breaks and he walks away like he does not even care”79 [free translation] (de Jong, 2016). With this explanation Mr. de Jong expresses his dissatisfaction on the casual attitude of the asylum seeker on the dangerous traffic situation he caused. This nonchalance is explained by other residents not as a lack of interest, but as a cultural difference since the asylum seekers might not be used to the Dutch road or have varying crossing rules (Timmermans, 2016). These two statements on this issue indicate how different characterization frames can lead to different understandings and explanations of similar situations and therefore to different risk and information frames. While Mr. de Jong frames this asylum seeker as ignorant towards the Dutch traffic rules and towards his fellow road users, Mr. Timmermans on the other side explains the situation applying a characterization frame in which asylum seekers are framed as people who are unaware of the Dutch traffic rules.

Aside from complaints on asylum seekers’ road crossing behaviour, local residents also filed complaints with the local police concerning asylum seekers’ walking or cycling in the middle of the road (Bakker & Bakker, 2015). This too is a matter of informing, according to Mr. Bakker who is a local police officer in Cranendonck. “They [the African asylum seekers] have been taught this [walking behaviour] on an early age because the roadsides [in Africa] are full of pests such as snakes. When you get bitten, you will die.

77 Interview inhabitant Mr. Overtoom, Budel, December 7 2015 78 Interview inhabitant Mrs. Huisman, Budel, January 18 2016 79 “Dat was ook nog een donkere jongen, ja het was donder dus die zag je niet zo goed echte schutkleuren en toen stak hij gewoon echt over, een 80 weg. Hij keek niet eens, hij stak gewoon over. Dat vind ik kwalijk. En dan toeter ik en dan ben ik daar een beetje kwaad over, vol op de rem en dan loop hij zo verder van ja het kan hem eigenlijk niets schelen zo”

This knowledge is taught from their [ the asylum seekers] childhood onwards, which explains why Africans always walk in the middle of the road in Africa, but in the Netherlands as well”80 (Bakker & Bakker, 2015). This explanation again highlights how a difference in culture can explain specific behaviour of asylum seekers. Understanding the reasons behind ones’ behaviour might contribute to the characterization frame applied to describe the people carrying out this specific behaviour. Mr. Bakker for example, is unlikely to apply a similar characterization frame as Mr. de Jong, who, as explained above, described asylum seekers as ignorant. Indeed, Mr. Bakker frames asylum seekers as refugees, who had to flee their country due to unrest and war. Even though he is aware of the cultural differences that might cause some issues in the Netherlands, he stresses communication is the key towards solving those issues. “Those people are refugees who had to flee from their countries of origin due to the internal circumstances, after which they had to survive a dangerous boat trip to arrive in Europe […] They do have different norms and values, which is easy to notice. We might even call them rude. However, some of their behaviour can be explained by the culture and customs in their country of origin.”81 (Bakker & Bakker, 2015).

Despite the possible explanation on the behaviour of the asylum seekers, the statement of Mr. de Jong above, indicates that the asylum seekers are sometimes hardly visible in traffic, which might cause dangerous situations. The occurrence of dangerous situations due to a lack of visibility is also noted by various other local residents (Bullemans, 2015; Jansen, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). In response to these possibly dangerous situation Mr. Jansen stresses how asylum seekers could and should be educated to prevent this kind of situations (Jansen, 2016). Mrs. Kloppers, municipal official indicated how this visibility issue has been mentioned by local residents of Cranendonck since a year and a half (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). COA employee at Budel-Dorplein, Mrs. van Wijk, indicates that the visibility issue does not necessarily result in local complaints, but in worried citizen instead. She explains: “lightning on the bicycles is something they [the asylum seekers] do not completely understand yet and people [the residents of Cranendonck] worry about the children walking to school. They mostly worry, there are not necessarily complaints. Currently we start a program on traffic lights and safety and they [the asylum seekers] all receive a light”82 (van Wijk, 2015). At the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck this issue is also addressed. COA employee Mr. Schippers explains: “in December we [COA] organized a bicycle lighting action and this is repeated in January. Then they [the asylum seekers] all receive a strap and some bicycle lights. And we also ask the reception desk to make sure the people [the asylum seekers] going outside have lights on them. If they [the asylum seekers] go outside without lights, write down their names so we can address

80 “Dit hebben ze van kinds af aan geleerd want in de berm zitten allemaal ongedierte bijvoorbeeld slangen en als die je bijten ga je dood. Dat leer je dus al als kind en daarom loopt een afrikaan altijd in het midden van de weg en dat deden ze dus hier ook” 81 “Die mensen zijn vluchtelingen die moesten vluchten voor oorlog. Ze hebben een hele bootreis gehad om hier in Europa aan te komen […] ze hebben ook echt andere normen en waarden en dat kun je heel goed merken. Er is een duidelijk verschil. Wij zouden ze onbeschoft kunnen noemen. Maar sommige manieren vallen ook uit te leggen door verschillen in cultuur […] Dat zijn allemaal van die dingen die je moet zou moeten uitleggen want dan snappen de mensen dat wel” 82 “Verlichting op de fiets dat snappen ze nog niet helemaal en mensen maken zich ook zorgen ook om de kinderen die naar school lopen of gevaarlijk en, ze maken zich vooral zorgen het zijn niet per se klachten, en nu gaan we dus een programma opzetten met ook verkeersverlichting en veiligheid en ze krijgen allemaal een lichtje en”

69 them”83 (Schippers, 2016). Despite of these actions in which using lights is pointed out to asylum seekers, they cannot be forced to use them. If they decide not to use them this is on their own risk, indicates municipal official Mr. Kamps (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

Other issues addressed by local residents concern violations of privacy and territory. When the first asylum seekers arrived at Budel-Cranendonck they were not informed on Dutch privacy and territory rules causing them to sit and eat in people’s front yard. This behaviour led to various responses of local residents of Cranendonck. Some of them were bothered by it (Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016) while others laughed about the asylum seekers sitting, relaxing and sometimes photographing people’s front yard (Jansen, 2016; van Dijk, 2016). Mrs. Dijk expressed her amuse when she found two asylum seekers taking pictures while lying in her front yard: “It made me laugh out loud, maybe they share those pictures to show they already have a house with a yard. Anyways, it made me laugh, they were only in my front yard, I see no harm in that”84(van Dijk, 2016). On the other hand, Mr. Kuipers expressed his annoyance over this behaviour and his consideration to install an electric fence around his yard to prevent asylum seekers from entering. He adds: “they cause a lot of problems and nuisance after which they continue their business as if nothing happened”85. Furthermore, Mr. Kuipers adds complaints on asylum seekers using various front and backyards of local residents as garbage belts, causing owners to have to clean their yards continuously without any help from COA, the municipality or the asylum seekers themselves (Kuipers, 2016). The different ways in which Mrs. van Dijk and Mr. Kuipers approach the situation of asylum seekers entering their property is likely to be caused by the different frames they apply to describe asylum seekers. The tolerant and understating frame applied by Mrs. van Dijk can be explained by her own experiences since she lived and fled from Syria herself, she explains: “I am very capable of understanding why these people fled their country, I can emphasise with their situation and therefore I have no difficulties with their presence”86 (van Dijk, 2016). Mr. Kuipers on the other hand frames asylum seekers as fortune seekers who aim to improve their own future: “they have not all fled due to bad circumstances, they are well aware of the opportunities in the Netherlands in terms of education, for themselves as well as their children, and subsidies”87 (Kuipers, 2016). This situation indicates how a characterization frames can influence the way in which people approach and evaluate a situation, the so called risk- and information

83 “We hebben in december een fiets verlichting actie gedaan die gaan we nu in januari nog een keer doen, dan krijgen ze allemaal een bandje ook wat fietsverlichting. En dan geven we ook bij de receptie aan van zorg dat die mensen met licht naar buiten gaan. Als ze niet met licht naar buiten gaan, schrijf die namen op en dan kunnen we ze daarna aanspreken” 84 “Ik moest zo lachen, echt. Ik had zoiets van ja, zo meteen sturen ze die foto naar huis van kijk we hebben al meteen een woning met tuin. Ja, ik moet daar dan om lachen en als dat dan in mijn tuintje zou gebeuren, ik bedoel een voortuintje, hoe spannend is het?” 85 “Ze maken een hoop stennis en problemen en vervolgens gaan ze vrolijk verder alsof er niets aan de hand is 86 Ik heb er geen enkele probleem mee gewoon omdat ik de mensen die gevlucht zijn heel goed kan begrijpen en ik kan mij inleven in hun situatie” 87 “Die zijn niet allemaal gevlucht vanwege de ze het slecht hebben in dat land, ze weten dondersgoed in Nederland kunnen ze goed terecht voor studeren en de kinderen kunnen er goed, een vak of gebied leren, ze krijgen geld, ze krijgen alles”

70 frame. Due to the various characterization frames people apply to describe asylum seekers, similar situation can be differently experienced and evaluated.

A final complaint that possibly originates from a difference in culture is also addressed by Mr. Kuipers and concerns asylum seekers opening up packages in supermarkets and tasting products before buying them. He explains: “they [the asylum seekers] open up the lid and taste it, and when they dislike the flavour they put the lid back on and place the jar back into the shelf. This leads to other people buying jars that have been opened by at least 3 to 4 people”88 (Kuipers, 2016). This behaviour is known by both COA and the local supermarkets, and is explained by them as a cultural difference, which can be solved by providing information and explanation on the Dutch customs (JumboBudel, 201689; Zeebregts, 2016).

The nuisance caused on the local level due to cultural differences as explained above is, on a broader local perspective, also found in the online questionnaire. A significant negative correlation has been found between the respondents holding the opinion that asylum seekers will not be able to fit in the Dutch society due to their culture and religion and those residents that think the asylum seekers cause little nuisance. A positive correlation related to the first is found between respondents with the opinion that asylum seekers will not fit within the Dutch society due to their culture and religion and respondents indicating the amount of incidents in the municipality of Cranendonck increased after the arrival of asylum seekers.

In response to the nuisance caused by asylum seekers that might be explained by cultural differences between Dutch residents and asylum seekers, multiple residents of Cranendonck indicated they want more attention to be paid to information provision to the asylum seekers on the Dutch norms, values, culture and customs and to support them in their integration in the Dutch society (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(de Jong, 2016; Smit, 2015). Mr. van Vliet explains: “of course the asylum seekers have to live by our norms and values, that is my opinion at least. Also, when our norms and values are offended by the asylum seekers they have to be punished and dealt with”90 (van Vliet, 2016). To invest more time in educating asylum seekers about the Dutch norms, values and habitations Mr. de Jong (2016) proposed the idea to create a mandatory two weeks’ course for all asylum seekers in which they have daily classes of one hour, after which they have to make an exam on the norms and values in the Netherlands. Currently, the asylum seekers receive information on the Dutch culture, norms, values and habitations once, at the moment of their arrival at a COL such as Budel-Cranendonck. There is a possibility to reread the provided information afterwards (Schippers, 2016) but this is not checked by the authorities.

Despite of this education on arrival, Mr. and Mrs. Maas explain how they fear the Netherlands is losing its own identity and is turning into a state dominated by Islamic residents due to the lack of attention paid

88 “Die schroeven gewoon de deksel van het potje en proeven eraan dan denken ze oh nee dat is vies, en dan draaien ze het potje weer dicht en die zetten ze zo terug in het vak. En jij koopt dat potje waar al 3 of 4 mensen al uit hebben zitten eten” 89 Interview Jumbo location manager Budel, Budel, February 8 2016 90 “Ze moeten zich natuurlijk wel houden, tenminste dat is mijn opvatting, ook die asielzoekers moeten zich gewoon houden aan onze normen en waarden en als ze die overtreden moeten ze gewoon gestraft worden en aangepakt worden”

71 to educating asylum seekers on the national norms and values (Maas & Maas, 2016). Mr. Groen shares this feeling while stating: “the Netherlands is swamped by Muslims [the asylum seekers] and their influence is easily noticeable. I think it is regrettable we throw away our own identity by letting these people enter our country”91. Mr. Groen stresses the loss of Dutch identity due to the arrival of Muslim asylum seekers who are, according to him, influencing our society in a negative way. This statement indicates bot a characterization frame and a risk- and information frame. First asylum seekers are framed as Muslims who influence the Dutch society. Thereafter, the effect of their arrival is expressed by a risk- and information frame describing the likelihood of an identity loss caused by the Islamic influence of the asylum seekers. This identity loss if further stressed by stating it is already noticeable in the Dutch society. When further elaborating on this, Mr. Groen gives examples of this identity loss by referring to the discussion around Black Peter and another situation where a Dutch catholic school decided to cancel their Easter parade to prevent their Muslim pupils from feeling disrespected (Groen, 2016).

In total, 48.8 percent have indicated to worry about the future of Cranendonck versus 37.5 percent of the respondents who gave an opposite answer. These worries are also stressed by Mr. Groen who, aside from fearing for the national society, also fears for impact asylum seekers have on the local community. He explains that the townscape of Cranendonck is changing due to presence of the asylum seekers. He adds: “Sometimes I feel like I live in Mogadishu. In a village this small it is noticeable when dark coloured people pass by on a daily basis, as well as all the inconveniences they sometimes cause”92. To further elaborate on this in a broader local perspective, a small but significant correlation has been indicated between the respondents agreeing with the upper mentioned statement that asylum seekers bring their political issues towards the Netherlands and respondents worrying for the future of their municipality due to the hosting of asylum seekers.

Aside from the explanations above, the Islamic influences the asylum seekers have on the Dutch society are also addressed by local residents who refer to the words of Dutch politician Geert Wilders (Bakker &Bakker, 2015; Smit, 2015; van Vliet, 2016). Mr. Wilders is strategically applying a risk and information frame that actively highlights the dangers of including Muslims and decedents of Islamic societies in the Dutch society (@geertwilderspvv, 2016; PVVpers, 2015; rtlnieuws, 2015b). Mr. van Vliet, member of the PvdA Cranendonck, explains: “look, those people who are very afraid, are those in the corner of Wilders. However, this is more than 1/3 of the [Dutch] society, if I look at the polls. […] Wilders currently holds 41 seats, that is almost 1/3 of the residents, yes, that is anxiety. And Wilders contributes to this growing anxiety of course, he is feeding it”93 (van Vliet, 2016). This explanation indicates Mr. van Vliet is aware of the strategically applied risk- and information frame by Mr. Wilders, but also stresses his application of his frame seems to have an effect on Dutch voters. Multiple residents of Cranendonck agree with Mr. van

91 “Nederland word overspoeld met moslims en hun moslim invloed, dat merk je nu al. Het is zo zonde want we vergooien onze eigen identiteit, als volk, door die mensen toe te laten” 92 “Ik denk af en toe dat ik in voorstad van Mogadishu zit. In een klein dorp valt dat natuurlijk op dagelijks donkere mensen soms met alle overlast van dien” 93 “Kijk de mensen die heel erg bang zijn dat zijn toch de mensen die erg zitten op de hoek van Wilders hè, maar toch meer als 1/3 van de bevolking he, als ik naar de peilingen kijken… Wilders staat nu op 41 zetels, ja dat is bijna 1/3 van de bevolking en ja, dat is ja, angst. En Wilders kweet die angst ook natuurlijk, die voedt dat” 72

Vliet and expect Wilders to get many votes in the future elections (Bakker & Bakker, 2015; Jansen, 2016; Postma, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016).

Besides, the upper explanations of local residents on this topic and the worlds of Mr. Wilders, the local questionnaire indicates that, on a broader local perspective, 58.8 percent of the respondents agree asylum seekers bring the political problems from their country of origin towards the Netherlands. Additionally, 12.5 percent of the respondents expressed their disagreement in regard to this statement. 5.1.2 Competition caused by asylum seekers Aside from the culture based concerns and complaints, local residents of Cranendonck have also expressed their worries concerning the competition from asylum seekers concerning jobs, housing and subsidies. Some of these subjects were also discussed in the commission meeting of January 19, 2016. In this meeting however, COA highlighted how the hosting of asylum seekers can lead to a local growth in employment (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). This advantage is also addressed by the municipality which indicates COA currently is the second largest job facilitator in Cranendonck (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Despite this, local worries on these subjects remained.

With regards to the worries on the availability of houses, local policeman Mr. Bakker indicates the allocation of social housing to asylum seekers is an issue indeed: “our own people have to wait for years and they [the asylum seekers] receive priority. You cannot leave your own people on the streets, then you will get problems and people [the local residents] will act rebelliously. That is a logical response. This way you get people to hate asylum seekers”94 (Bakker & Bakker, 2015). By means of this statement, Mr. Bakker stresses how a priority treatment for asylum seekers might cause local residents to disgust them. Mrs. Bullemans used to work at the housing association and explains how they received certain targets regarding numbers of asylum seekers they had to house in a certain amount of time. She explains: “we did not put these houses [social houses] in the newspaper but we reported them [social houses] to COA by saying a house would be released with 3 bedrooms, meaning a family with 2 or 3 children could go there. That way we immediately housed 4 to 5 people. As a result, however, other people [non asylum seekers] with a registration time between 4 and 5 years, had to wait for that period of time. Asylum seekers are not asked to wait that long”95 (Bullemans, 2015). Mrs. van Wijk, COA employee, indicates those housing rules have been adjusted to speed up the process. Asylum seekers currently do not receive whole houses anymore. Instead they receive rooms in houses, office building or housing containers (van Wijk, 2015). In section 3.3.3 I already stressed how the priority access of asylum seekers is no longer a given fact.

94 “Eigen mensen moeten jaren wachten en hen krijgen dan voorrang. Je kan de mensen van hier niet gewoon op straat laten staan want dan krijg je problemen en dan gaan mensen opstandig worden. En dat is logisch. Zo krijg je ook de haat tegen asielzoekers” 95 “Wij zetten die woning dan niet in de kranten, we melden die bij de COA er komt een woning vrij met 3 slaapkamers dus er kan een gezin in met 2/3 kinderen, en dan heb je gelijk 4 of 5 mensen gehuisvest maar dat betekend wel dat de ander, die mensen met een inschrijftijd van 4 tot 5 jaar, ja die wacht gewoon inderdaad gewoon zo lang. En die asielzoeker die wacht niet zo lang”

Some local residents of Cranendonck worry about national cutbacks and their relation to the subsidies provided to asylum seekers. It appears they link the cause of these national cutbacks to the increased governmental expenses towards asylum seekers. Creating this link might lead to the feeling that the national government prioritizes helping foreigners instead of Dutch residents. Ms. Maas for example explains: “I do not mind those people [the asylum seekers] being here, but let us take care of our own people first. Make sure they [the Dutch residents] do not have to go to the food bank anymore, and make sure that the elderly do not have to sit in their own shit” 96 (Maas & Maas, 2016). In this explanation, an indirect link is created between the hosting of asylum seekers in the Netherlands and the poor situation of some Dutch residents and elderly. Hereby, the asylum seekers are indirectly blamed for the poor living conditions of some Dutch residents and elderly people. Mr. Groen implies a more direct link between the two variables and states: “Many people [asylum seekers] came here, based on false pretences, for the financial assistance. These people currently feel like they found their Walhalla. Looking for fortune is understandable, but it should not happen at the expenses of the national residents who suffer through hard times themselves. People say they [the asylum seekers] fled, but for what I wonder. Looking for a better life standard is my guess”97 (Groen, 2016). In this statement, the characterization frame applied to asylum seekers describes them as people looking for fortune under false pretences and people who experience no difficulties reaching this at the expenses of others. This explanation of Mr. Groen indicates a risk- and information frame describing the Dutch residents suffer because of the presence and sheltering of asylum seekers.

The direct and indirect links created by some residents between the national cutbacks and the subsidies provided to asylum seekers, are not shared by all local residents of Cranendonck (Bullemans, 2015; van Vliet, 2016). Mr. van Vliet explains the establishment of the link between national cutbacks and expenses on asylum seekers by stating that people are selfish. To support this statement, he adds: “at the end of the day, all people are [selfish]. Those people think about the refugees that arrive here in the Netherlands and that are entitled to subsidies and in need of money by stating they take our jobs and they take our houses. That is a kind of fear you can trace back to peoples own interest, on their property, possession, wealth and income”98 (van Vliet, 2016). This statement expresses that people might not necessarily be against the asylum seekers themselves, but against the effects, but against the (national) money they cost and the negative consequences local residents might experience because of those (national) costs. Within this quotation of Mr. van Vliet, people that are against the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers are framed as selfish people who are afraid of the possibility they might suffer from it. Similar frames applied to describe opponents of asylum seekers are expressed in social media. This will be highlighted in chapter

96 “Ik vind het niet erg dat die mensen er zijn maar help eerst de eigen mensen. Zodat die niet meer naar de voedselbak hoeven en dat die oudjes niet meer in hun eigen stront hoeven blijven zitten” 97 “Er zitten hier zat bijstand toeristen die met valse voorwendselen denken walhalla gevonden hebben. Geluk zoeken is niet erg maar niet ten koste van de burger die het al moeilijk heeft. Men kan een standpunt innemen van ze vluchten … maar voor wat? Tsja, gewoon een beter leven” 98 “Aan het eind van de rit zijn mensen dat allemaal, want ja die vluchtelingen komen hier en die moeten uitkeringen hebben, die moeten geld hebben, die pakken ons werk af, die pakken onze huizen [...] Die angst kun je eigenlijk helemaal terugvoeren op eigenbelang op je eigen eigendommen, je eigen bezit, welvaart, inkomen”

7. On a broader local perspective, it appears more than half of the respondents of the online questionnaire, 51.2 percent share the opinion that asylum seekers compete with national Dutch residents on jobs, housing and various kinds of payment. On the other hand, 35.0 percent of the respondents declared to disagree with this statement. 5.2 Local entrepreneurs and supermarkets One of the advantages of hosting asylum seekers on the local level that is often highlighted by COA and concerns the contribution asylum seekers make to the local economy (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Zeebregts, 2016). “COA stated that the local entrepreneurs would benefit because the asylum seekers would receive money cards worth 50 euros a week,”99 explains Mr. Jansen (2016). He adds how this information appeared to be wrong afterwards since the asylum seekers at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne do not receive any money at all (Jansen, 2016). As previously stressed in chapter 3, COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains this by stating that asylum seekers only receive money when they are in an official asylum centre, which means they have to have passed the COL and POL procedures. During these procedures the asylum seekers receive no money but they are provided with the basic necessities of life by COA (Zeebregts, 2016). This means that the majority of the asylum seekers hosted in the municipality of Cranendonck is not receiving any money, since the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck is only hosting asylum seekers in the COL and POL procedures. Once these procedures have finished the asylum seekers are transferred to other asylum centres such as Budel-Dorplein, where they will receive money.

To grasp the financial impact asylum seekers’ have on a local level in Cranendonck, their shopping behaviour was discussed with the location managers of Jumbo Budel and Jumbo Cranendonck. Referring to this topic, the location manager of the Jumbo supermarket in Budel explained how the asylum seekers are an addition to their revenue, since they do their groceries at the local supermarkets leads to an increase in customers and therefore more income. However, their impact cannot be translated into an increase in turnover. The location manager explains: “this [an increase in turnover] cannot be indicated but I estimate that, at the highest, it leads to an increase of 1 to 2 percent in turnover”100 (JumboBudel, 2016). The location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze the asylum seekers do not influence their turnover at all: “They [the asylum seekers] mainly buy mobile credit cards, alcohol and sometimes cigarettes […] therefore I cannot say that our turnover has spectacularly increased, no”101(JumboMaarheeze, 2016)102. This statement of the Maarheeze location manager is on a broader local perspective supported by 42.2 percent of the respondents of the online questionnaire, who have indicated that the local entrepreneurs in Cranendonck do not benefit from the asylum seekers. On the other hand, 33.7 percent of the respondents think local entrepreneurs are positively affected by the asylum seekers in Cranendonck.

99 “COA zei dat mensen die krijgen, de plaatselijke ondernemers die gaan er alles van merken want die mensen krijgen zakgeld, 50 euro per week” 100 “Je kunt het ook niet aantonen hoor maar ik schat dat dat hooguit 1 a 2 procent is wat onze omzet daardoor gestegen is” 101 “Die kopen vooral telefoonkaarten, die kopen wat alcohol en sigaretten […] dus ik kan niet zeggen dat nou hierdoor onze omzet spectaculair is gestegen ofzo, nee” 102 Interview Jumbo location manager Maarheeze, Maarheeze, February 8 2016 75

The different explanations of the Jumbo location managers of Budel and Maarheeze can be explained by a difference in numbers of asylum seekers visiting their shops, however, it can also be caused by the different characterization frames applied by the location manages. It appears the location manager of Jumbo Budel and Jumbo Maarheeze have different explanations and responses to similar situations occurring in the Jumbo supermarkets. The location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze for example, explains the asylum seekers have a more negative than positive influence on the local supermarkets since they are often not aware of the Dutch customs in shops and supermarkets. “We [Dutch residents] do not try things in advance, we do not open anything, we do not eat in shops, but these kind of things have to be explained to them [asylum seekers]”103 (JumboMaarheeze, 2016). Here, the location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze highlights that asylum seekers visiting his shop are unaware of what they are not supposed to do according to the Dutch shopping customs. Also, an employee of Jumbo Maarheeze shares her experiences by stating: “they empty the entire shop if you do not pay enough attention. They are always headed to the cigarette corner immediately, where they are impatient and expect to be assisted at once. When I indicate there is a waiting line they become rude, especially to women”104 (Maas & Maas, 2016). Furthermore, she adds how the asylum seekers are often unable to speak English or Dutch, which often leads to difficulties (Maas & Maas, 2016). Within her explanation of the behaviour of asylum seekers in the supermarket she applies a characterization frame in which asylum seekers are described as impolite, demanding and impatient.

In the Jumbo supermarket in Budel similar situations are experienced as in the Jumbo in Maarheeze such as asylum seekers opening up packages and tasting food. In Budel however they do not experience problems with the behaviour of asylum seekers. According to Budels location manager the asylum seekers have to be familiarized in the shop and its customs: “Maybe it [people tasting the food prior to buying it] is normal in their culture, but when we identify this we explain it to them this is not allowed in Dutch supermarkets they understand that after which they adjust their behaviour”105 (JumboBudel, 2016). Both location managers stress the behaviour of asylum seekers in the supermarkets can probably explained by their cultural customs. The location manager of Jumbo Budel adds however that the asylum seekers are willing to adjust their behaviour to fit within the Dutch standards, when they become aware of the behavioural difference.

There appears to be a difference in the risk- and information frames applied by the location managers to describe the asylum seekers as well as the overall situation. Where the location manager of Budel states: “I think it is all fine, I experience no difficulties with these people and well, all sales are a bonus to us so let them come”106 (JumboBudel, 2016), the location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze is more suspicious and

103 “We proberen niks, maken niks open, we eten niet in de winkel nou ja dat soort dingen moet denk ik heel duidelijk gemaakt worden” 104 “Ze halen de winkel leeg hoor als je niet op let. Ja, en ze gaan ook meteen naar die sigarettencorner en ze verwachten gewoon dat ze meteen geholpen worden, ongeduldig, en dan zeg ik altijd en wijs ik altijd van ja, je kunt achteraan sluiten. Maar ja, dan hebben ze meteen een grote mond als het ze niet zint, zeker tegen vrouwen” 105 “Misschien vanuit hun cultuur wat gewoontjes, maar als we dat zien dan leggen we dat even uit en dan, ja, dan snappen ze dat ook wel en passen ze zich aan” 106 “Ik vind het allemaal prima, ik heb geen moeite met die mensen en goed, alle beetjes omzet zijn voor ons mooi meegenomen dus laat maar komen”

76 states: “I think these people [the asylum seekers] come here and see a plethora of stuff, and I think it is normal for them to think ‘they have more than enough here so one less product will not matter, they will not miss one piece’. These are things we obviously experience here on a regular basis”107 [free translation] (JumboMaarheeze, 2016). Comparing these statements indicates the two risk- and information frames applied by the location managers as well as the characterization frame applied by the Maarheeze location manager. This characterization frame describes asylum seekers as culture based thieves, for who stealing is normal. This characterization frame of asylum seekers, stimulates the risk- and information frame applied by the same location manager in which he is convinced of a high likelihood the asylum seekers will steal from his shop. Following his reason, he experiences theft by asylum seekers on a regular basis. These experiences of theft and the risk- and information frame he applies to describe the likelihood of theft occurring in his shop, are likely to have influenced the characterization frame he applies to describe the asylum seekers.

To continue on the topic of shoplifting, the location managers use different approaches and frames to describe this situation. The location manager of Jumbo Budel explains: “Everyone steals sometimes, and the people [asylum seekers] that are currently here know there is a possibility to do so. I always say however, ‘under the Dutch among us there are also people who are doing the same [stealing]”108 (JumboBudel, 2016). This quote shows that the Budel location manager is familiarizing the asylum seekers by comparing them to Dutch residents. This might indicate he equally treats them as normal customers. The location manager of Maarheeze however is highlighting the differences between the asylum seekers and the local residents in Cranendonck. When discussing theft, the Maarheeze location manager explains: “we regularly catch one of them [asylum seekers] stealing or eating things they have not paid for. We live in a village where we rarely experience any theft […] and currently, since the asylum centre arrived, we have a lot more problems with it. That is annoying”109 (JumboMaarheeze, 2016). Additionally, he explains how shoplifting incidents cost a lot of time since the suspects have to be followed in the shop to make sure they have stolen something. Due to the informing, guidance and watching of asylum seekers in the supermarkets Jumbo Maarheeze had to hire more staff to ensure the regular shopping experience of the other customers (JumboMaarheeze, 2016). The above quote and additional explanation are in linked with the applied characterization frame of the Maarheeze location manager as previously indicated, where asylum seekers are described as thieves.

The latter, more negative approach towards the behaviour of asylum seekers in local shops is shared by a shop assistant of Budels Albert Heijn who indicates how the increase of shoplifting incidents in

107 “Ik denk dat die mensen hier een beetje binnen komen en die zien hier de overvloed van een aantal dingen, en dan denk ik dat het voor hun heel gewoon is van ja, hier hebben ze toch genoeg dus er kan er wel eentje af, eentje missen ze niet zal ik maar zeggen. Dus ja ook dat zijn dingen waar we natuurlijk toch ook regelmatig wel een keertje tegenaan lopen” 108 “Pikken doen we allemaal weleens. En ja die mensen als die een tijdje hier zijn weten ze ook dat die mogelijkheid geschept wordt. Maar goed, ik zeg altijd ja, onder ons Nederlanders zijn er ook genoeg mensen die dat doen” 109 “We pikken er regelmatig eentje uit he die we betrappen op diefstal of op het nuttigen van dingen die niet afgerekend zijn. We zitten in een dorpje en we hebben hier zelfden diefstal […] sinds het AZC, hebben we er toch wel wat meer last van ja. Dat is vervelend”

Cranendonck can for 100% be explained by the arrival of the asylum seekers. He denies shoplifting never happened before the arrival of the asylum seekers, however he explains: “It is within the culture of a village to mutually solve those kind of issues [shoplifting]. For example, by saying to shoplifters ‘if you come and bring it back or still pay for it you are lucky and then it is ok”110 (Timmermans, 2016). The explanation of Mr. Timmermans indicates the Albert Heijn in Budel is unequally treating asylum seekers and local residents, since shoplifting asylum seekers are mentioned to the police, while similar incidents with local residents are internally solved. The explanation 100% of the shoplifting incidents can be explained by the arrival of asylum seekers, is incorrect according to Mr. van Vliet. He explains that the 56% increase of shoplifting is not due to the asylum seekers in Cranendonck. “There are a few asylum seekers among them [local shoplifters], but there is a similar, or higher, amount of Dutch residents involved [in local shoplifting]”111 (van Vliet, 2016). There are no numbers on how the asylum seekers divide themselves over Budel and Maarheeze when they do their groceries. Therefore, it is uncertain whether the location managers of the Jumbo in Budel and Maarheeze have different experiences with the asylum seekers due to a varying number of asylum seekers that enter their shops. The location managers themselves are also unaware of this division, however, the location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze states that is might be possible more asylum seekers visit Budel to do their groceries, since the centre of Budel is bigger and has more shops than the centre of Maarheeze (JumboBudel, 2016; JumboMaarheeze, 2016).

This above statement shows the different risk and information frames applied by the location managers. The Maarheeze location manager believes there is a chance that more asylum seekers visit the Jumbo in Budel, however he is still more negative towards the asylum seekers than the location manager in Budel. Furthermore, the Maarheeze location manager claims the asylum seekers steal more than local residents and cause a lot of problems by opening products. If he is right on the division of asylum seekers over the different two stores, it is expected similar situations occur in both stores. The number of incidents is then expected to be divided over the stores in the same ratio as the asylum seekers. Assuming the location manager in Maarheeze is right regarding the amount of asylum seekers visiting the different shops, he is either very unlucky because all trouble making asylum seekers visit his store, or his risk-and information frame describing the situations caused by asylum seekers is more negative than the frame of the manager in Budel. Based on the same assumption, a similar point can be made regarding the Jumbo in Budel. If the Jumbo in Budel indeed has more customers living in the AZC, the location manager is lucky that troublemakers choose to shop in Maarheeze, or he is more positive in general regarding the situation than the manager in Maarheeze. Since there are no clear indications from other sources that Maarheeze has more problems with asylum seekers in comparison to Budel, it is assumed that, for both location managers, the latter explanation is more likely. This indicates that the characterization- and risk- and information frames applied, influences the way in which similar situation are experienced.

According to Mr. van Vliet, people with emotionally based arguments will explain the above-mentioned increase of shoplifting by the arrival of the asylum centre since those activities fit with the image they have of asylum seekers anyway (van Vliet, 2016). With this explanation Mr. van Vliet indicates how a persons’ specific characterization framework towards asylum seekers, can cause them to make

110 “Het is ook de cultuur van een dorp om dat onderling op te lossen, van he kom het even terug brengen of betaal nog even dan heb je geluk en dan is het goed zo” 111 “Er zitten wel een paar AZC-ers bij maar er zitten ook evenveel of nog veel meer Nederlanders bij” 78 assumptions and conclusions that fit within that framework but are not necessity correct. Those assumptions and conclusions are based on their risk and information frames. In this explanation, Mr. van Vliet indicates the importance and influence characterization frameworks have on peoples’ judgement and the associated risk and information frames. Combining this statement to the comments of the supermarket location managers visualizes two different frameworks. The location manager of Jumbo Maarheeze, who indicates the amount of thefts has increased since the arrival of the asylum seekers is, in accordance with the explanation of Mr. van Vliet, using emotionally based arguments that fit within his characterization framework of asylum seekers. Within this framework, the asylum seekers are likely to be thieves since the Maarheeze location manager assumes theft is normal behaviour for asylum seekers. In relation to the theft, the location manager of Jumbo Budel appears to frame the asylum seekers as no different from his other customers since he highlights similarities in their behaviour.

As discussed before and shown in the upper example, it is possible that the risk and information frames applied to evaluate a situation involving asylum seekers, are dependent on the characterization frame on asylum seekers applied by that same actor. It is expected that the overall perception of a situation can be improved by the alteration of the frame on asylum seekers in general. 5.3 Conclusion In this chapter I visualized the different frames local residents of Cranendonck apply to describe asylum seekers and, to a lesser extent, evaluate the situations in which these asylum seekers are involved. The applied characterization frames concern asylum seekers’ descent, sex, wealth, as well as their reason for travelling to Europe. The distinguished frames appear to be unconsciously based on stories, assumptions and experiences of the actors themselves or shared to them by other (local) actors or media sources, such as traditional and social media. In chapter 7 I will further elaborate on the publications on traditional and social media, and their influence on frames applied by local residents in Cranendonck. When studying the worries and complaints of local residents with regard to the behaviour of asylum seekers and the frames applied when addressing those complaints, it appears the behavioural problems are mainly caused by cultural differences and a lack of knowledge of the Dutch culture, customs, norms and values.

It appears that the characterization frame applied by a local resident to describe asylum seekers, is likely to determine whether he or she is bothered by the asylum seekers’ behaviour or not. Residents who are bothered by specific behaviour of asylum seekers, are more likely to frame those asylum seekers in a more negative way, for example as people ignorant of the Dutch culture and customs. Residents who are not bothered by similar behaviour on the other hand, tend to apply another characterization frame. Those residents, for example, frame asylum seekers as people who lack knowledge on the Dutch culture and customs but who are willing to adjust their behaviour whenever they are aware of the cultural differences.

Furthermore, in this chapter I indicated a link between the applied characterization frame and the risk- and information frame. The visualization of the different frames applied by local entrepreneurs showed how characterization frames applied by actors to describe asylum seekers, influence the risk- and information frames applied by the same actors to evaluate situation in which asylum seekers are involved. In relation to this, it might be expected that the overall perception of a situation can be improved by the alteration of the characterization frame on asylum seekers in general.

Further adding to the knowledge gained in this chapter, the next chapter will further elaborate on the frames applied by local residents to evaluate the asylum situation in Cranendonck, and to characterize COA and the municipality of Cranendonck.

6 Narratives of local residents In this chapter I will discuss and highlight stories of local residents concerning the local situation in Cranendonck. Where the previous chapter concerned the characterization frames and the risk- and information frames applied by local residents of Cranendonck to describe the asylum seekers, this chapter will provide a critical analysis of the frames applied by local actors to describe the characteristics of the asylum centre and the activities of COA and the municipality of Cranendonck. In doing so, the activities and communication practices of COA and the municipality of Cranendonck towards the local residents are highlighted and evaluated by means of local stories and experiences. This way, the establishment of local characterization frames applied to describe COA and the municipality are addressed and explained. Furthermore, I will use this chapter to address the characterization frames applied by both the municipality of Cranendonck and COA to describe each other.

By these analyses, I will continue to visualize the frames established and applied by different local actors in Cranendonck and explain. Furthermore, these analyses address how (unconscious) framing contributes to perceptions and opinions of actors regarding the asylum centre and the other local actors involved with the establishment and developments of this asylum centre. This will, in turn, contribute to the overall understanding of the establishment of locally applied frames.

In this chapter, I will first discuss the local internal circumstances of the asylum centre. Hereby, attention will be payed to the frames applied by local residents to describe these circumstances and to express their desires regarding the future developments of the asylum centre. Thereafter the perceptions and frames applied by local residents to describe the activities of COA will be discussed. These frames will be highlighted and used to critically evaluate the activities of COA. Thereafter, I will discuss the activities of the municipality. In doing so, I will highlight the frames applied by the local residents of Cranendonck to describe the municipality of Cranendonck and their activities regarding the hosting of asylum seekers. 6.1 Framing of local circumstances According to the previously explained law “Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers”, COA is inter alia responsible for the acquisition, management and closure of shelter locations. This means COA has to establish shelter locations spread over the Netherlands by negotiating with the municipalities involved (COA, n.d.-i). COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains how the real estate department of COA considered the Nassau-Dietzkazerne as a possible shelter location for a longer period of time before they contacted the municipality of Cranendonck with their request to open an asylum centre at the former army base (Zeebregts, 2016)112. The former army base and current asylum centre is a decentral location at a forested area close to the A2 highway. Due to the size of the terrain and the trees surrounding the various buildings, the asylum centre is only partly visible from the road (Vermue, 2016113). One respondent explains in the online questionnaire that “the Nassau-Dietzkazerne is located in such a way that most

112 Interview COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts, Budel, February 2nd 2016 113 Interview mayor Marga Vermue, Budel, February 18 2016

81 residents barely notice the presence of the asylum seekers in the municipality”114 (Boere, 2015). The total army base consists of 70 acres of which 10 to 20 acres are occupied by COA and currently functions as the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck (Schippers,2016115; Vermue, 2016).

The asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck is located in between two villages, Budel and Maarheeze. The village centre of Budel is 5 kilometres away from the asylum centre at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne (Googlemaps, 2016a). The walk from the asylum centre to the village centre takes around one hour. An alternative possibility is provided by public transport since there is a bus stop in front of the gates of the asylum centre. The bus ride from the Nassau-Dietzkazerne to the village centre of Budel takes 11 minutes and costs 1.53 euro one way (9292, 2016a; Googlemaps, 2016a). The centre of Maarheeze lies 3.2 kilometres from the army base, and the fastest way to walk from the army base to Maarheeze takes 39 minutes. The Bus to Maarheeze, which also leaves from the bus stop in front of the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, takes 5 minutes and costs 1.25 euro one way (9292, 2016b; Googlemaps, 2016b).

Various COA employees, municipal officials and local residents have indicated the location of the Nassau- Dietzkazerne is ideal for an asylum centre (Küsters, Kloppers, & Kamps, 2016116; van Vliet, 2016117; Jansen, 2016118; Schippers, 2016). Local resident Mr. Jansen explains: “I do not believe anyone suffers from it [the hosting of asylum seekers at Budel-Cranendonck]. The location is ideal. However, I am unsure about the level of local support if they [the asylum seekers] would be sheltered at the edge of the village, and if that might lead to an increase in nuisance”119 (Jansen, 2016). Within this statement, Mr. Jansen indicates how the current location of Budel-Cranendonck is ideal and might contribute to the current local support and lack of nuisance experienced by the local residents of Cranendonck. Furthermore, Mr. van Vliet also explains how the location of Budel-Cranendonck contributes to the local support and the lack of nuisance experienced by local residents regarding the asylum centre and its inhabitants (van Vliet, 2016). On a broader, local perspective it appears more residents of Cranendonck agree with Mr. Jansen and Mr. van Vliet. In the online questionnaire 60.2 percent of the respondents indicated the Nassau-Dietzkazerne is an ideal location for an asylum centre.

Aside from Mr. Jansen and Mr. van Vliet, several residents explain how the location of Budel-Cranendonck contributes to the low degree of nuisance. Mrs. van Dijk expresses this possible relation by stating: “I hardly hear anything negative [about the asylum seekers]. Local residents only see them [the asylum seekers] in the supermarkets, and I think people [local residents] are therefore not troubled by them [the

114 “De Nassau-Dietz kazerne ligt zodanig dat de meeste burgers überhaupt weinig van de aanwezigheid van asielzoekers in de gemeente merken” 115 Interview COA employee Mr. Schippers, Budel, January 21 2016 116 Interview municipal employees Mr. Küsters, Mrs. Kloppers, Mr. Kamps, Budel, February 18th 2016 117 Interview inhabitant Mr. van Vliet, Budel, January 18 2016 118 Interview inhabitant Mr. Jansen, Maarheeze, January 7 2016 119 “Nou ik geloof niet dat iemand er last van heeft. Nee, die locatie is ideaal. Kijk als ze hier aan de rand van het dorp zouden zitten, ja dan weet ik niet hoe dat draagvlak zou zijn en of er dan overlast is

82 asylum seekers]”120 (van Dijk, 2016)121. This explanation indicates that due to the location outside the town centre, local residents have little contact with asylum seekers which might contribute to a lack of nuisance. Budel-Cranendonck provides the asylum seekers with different facilities such as educational facilities, a general medical practice and out-door space, resulting in limited reasons for asylum seekers to leave the former army base terrain. Since there are no supermarkets or other shops on the terrain of the asylum centres, the asylum seekers have to go to Budel or Maarheeze for their groceries and other supplies (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Zeebregts, 2016; Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Despite the possibility of travelling to the city centre by public transportation, most asylum seekers visit the village centres by foot to avoid spending money on public transport services (Bullemans 2015)122. Therefore, the asylum seekers are often seen walking towards the village and back to the asylum centre, explains Mr. Smit, a local resident of Cranendonck. “One is bothered by it and another one is not, but the streetscape is changing, that is for sure”123, he adds (Smit, 2015)124. This statement indicates that, according to Mr. Smit, there is a change in the local streetscape independent of whether or not local residents of Cranendonck suffer from the asylum seekers or experience nuisance caused by them. This statement by Mr. Smit might also indicate that the way in which local residents experience the change in streetscape, depends on the risk- and information frame they apply to describe the local situation with regard to the hosting of asylum seekers. In another statement, Mr. Smit explains he is bothered by the change in local streetscape: “Their [asylum seekers] presence is bad for the streetscape because they lack knowledge and acceptance of local norms and values. We [local residents] live in the Netherlands, however, currently it does not feel like we live in the Netherlands anymore due to the lack of integration [of asylum seekers] and the nuisance caused by that”125 (Smit, 2015). By means of this explanation, Mr. Smit links the changes in streetscape to the lack of integration of asylum seekers, and the nuisance this lack causes. Furthermore, this statement indicates the characterization frame applied by Mr. Smit whereby the asylum seekers are described as people unware of the local norms and values and unwilling to adjust their behaviour to the national norms and values. This characterization frame results into a risk- and information frame whereby the presence of the asylum seekers is experienced as something that negatively influences the local streetscape.

Aside from Mr. Smit, Mr. Groen also indicates the local streetscape is changing due to the asylum seekers. He explains how this is highly noticeable since Cranendonck is a relatively small municipality which is more sensible to changes caused by the arrival of asylum seekers. Additionally, he states: “the cosiness and openness is gone. People integrate based on their nationality and race. It is not my intention to discriminate, but it is a fact. Little islands based on race and nationality are formed within this municipality,

120 Ik hoor eigenlijk heel weinig negatieve dingen. En ik snap het ook goed want je ziet mensen in de supermarkt en verder heb je er ook, in mijn ogen helemaal geen last van” 121 Interview inhabitant Mrs. van Dijk, Budel, January 14 2016 122 Interview inhabitant Mrs. Bullemans, Budel, December 14 2015 123 “De een stoort zich eraan en de ander stoort zich er niet aan maar het beeld van het dorp veranderd, dat is zeker” 124 Interview Mr. Smit, Budel, December 17 2015 125 “Negatief is vooral het straatbeeld, de normen en waarden die hun niet kennen, die ze soms ook niet accepteren. Mensen hebben zoiets van we leven hier in Nederland maar we leven hier eigenlijk ook weer niet in Nederland, doordat zij niet integreren ontstaat er allemaal overlast”

83 which is likely to result in issues and nuisance”126 (Groen, 2016)127. Here, Mr. Groen indicates the local cosiness and openness of Cranendonck disappeared due to the presence of the asylum seekers. Furthermore, he indicates the asylum seekers and the local residents do not integrate, which results in the development of local division and distinction based on nationality and race. The risk- and information frame applied by Mr. Groen to evaluate this situation indicates the local nationality- and race based distinction as well as the lack of integration are likely to result in issues and nuisance.

This link between the applied risk- and information frame to evaluate the impact asylum seekers have on the local streetscape and the level of experienced nuisance, as indicated by Mr. Smit and Mr. Groen, can also be indicated on a broader local perspective. The online questionnaire shows a correlation between a negatively changing streetscape and asylum seekers causing little nuisance. This outcome corresponds with the first and second statement of Mr. Smit that people who have indicated to experience nuisance due to the asylum seekers, are more likely to have the opinion that the streetscape of Cranendonck is negatively changing due to the asylum seekers. The same goes the other way around.

In contrast to the above explanation on the changing streetscape, some residents believe the streetscape is not drastically changing at all. Mr. Jansen stresses this point by stating: “They can occasionally be seen walking around or riding their bicycles, but the streetscape is not drastically changing because of that. I think that can also be explained by the location of the asylum centre, which is in between the two villages Budel and Maarheeze. Most asylum seekers in Budel-Cranendonck are divided over these villages, and others do not leave the terrain of the centre at all”128 (Jansen, 2016). The risk- and information frame applied by Mr. Jansen describes a limited likelihood of asylum seekers’ presence influencing and changing the local streetscape in Cranendonck. This is explained by the location of the asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck, causing asylum seekers to spread over two villages. Furthermore, the size of the terrain, giving the asylum seekers the possibility to go outside without leaving the grounds of the asylum centre. Hereby, it appears the local situational circumstances influence the risk- and information frame applied by Mr. Jansen. This link between the location of the asylum centre and the lack of changing streetscape is also indicated on a broader local perspective by means of the online questionnaire. Hereby, a correlation is found showing that residents liking the location of Budel-Cranendonck also tent to experience no negative influence on the local streetscape caused by asylum seekers. 6.1.1 Number of asylum seekers The number of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck has increased over time. When Budel-Dorplein was the only asylum centre in the municipality, a maximum of 239 asylum seekers could be hosted within the municipality (COA, n.d.-b). Currently, the total capacity of the two asylum centres combined is approximately 2,000 asylum seekers (COA, n.d.-a).

126 “Gezelligheid en openheid is weg. Mensen zoeken elkaar op naar nationaliteit of ras en dat bedoel ik niet discriminerend maar als feit. Er zijn eilandjes binnen de straat gemeente gebaseerd op nationaliteit en ras, dat is vragen om problemen en overlast” 127 Skype interview inhabitant Mr. Groen, Budel-Arnhem, April 7 2016 128 “Je ziet ze rondlopen te voet of op de fiets ooit. Maar dat heeft geen drastisch effect of het straatbeeld, dat vind ik niet en dat komt denk ik door de locatie van het AZC en ook omdat de mensen die daar zitten zich verspreiden over twee kernen. Dat verspreid zich wel. En ik denk ook dat er een aantal zijn die nooit van het terrein afkomen” 84

Municipal official Mrs. Kloppers addresses the difficulties to decide upon the number of asylum of asylum seekers that should be hosted in the municipality of Cranendonck. This is caused by a lack of arguments on why a specific amount, for example 500 asylum seekers, is acceptable, while another, for example 600, is too much (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). More residents expressed their difficulty with indicating a specific number of asylum seekers that could be hosted in Cranendonck or in the Netherlands for that matter. Mr. Jansen describes the statement of Diederik Samson in which he claims the Netherlands can easily provide shelter for 200,000 asylum seekers as stupid: “one cannot live up to it. What is that number based upon? What do you do when there are 200,000 [asylum seekers], and number 200,001 arrives?”129 (Jansen, 2016). In addition, municipal official Mr. Kamps highlights how the statements of individual politicians do not amount to much, and stresses that national residents should not rely on those statements, since they do not concern official decisions (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

Some residents in Cranendonck lean towards small-scale shelter, while others see advantages in hosting asylum seekers on a larger scale. With regard to small-scale shelters, it is assumed they contribute to maintaining the order and ensuring security both inside and outside the asylum centre (Jansen, 2016). COA employee Mrs. van Dijk agrees with this and explains how at a small-scale asylum centre it is possible to personally know the inhabitants, which according to her reduces the possibility of uncontrollable situations (van Dijk, 2016). She states: “I understand why people fear for large scale asylum centres. It makes us [local residents] unaware of the people living there. I notice it myself as well that at bigger asylum centres, the chance issues occurring increases. This is because we [employees at the asylum centre] are unable to know all the inhabitants [of the asylum centre], and because they [the asylum seekers] are with so many”130. This statement indicates how the applied risk- and information frame on the likelihood of issues occurring with asylum seekers at the asylum centres, might change depending on the number of asylum seekers hosted in one asylum centre.

Different COA employees have highlighted the advantages of large scale asylum centres, which include an increased possibility to include cultural, sportive and educational activities (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Jansen, 2016). Few local residents indicated Cranendonck is able to shelter large numbers of asylum seekers at Budel-Cranendonck (van Vliet, 2016; Jansen, 2016), however, none of the interviewed residents of Cranendonck mentioned any advantages of large scale asylum centres. On a broader local perspective is also appears more than halve of the respondents, 57.3 percent, state small-scale asylum centres have more benefits in relation to large-scale asylum centres. Additionally, 17.9 percent of the respondents indicated large-scale shelter have more advantage than small-scale shelter location.

In relation to this, Mrs. van Dijk explained: “COA is continuously looking for places and locations where new asylum centres can possibly be established. Due to the high influx of asylum seekers, we currently

129 “Je kunt het niet waar maken. Waar is het op gebaseerd? Wat doe je als er 200.000 zijn en nummer 200.001 komt aanzetten” 130 “Ik snap die angst voor een groot centrum, dat kan ik me heel goed voorstellen van mensen. Je weet niet wat daar zit, en ik merk zelf ook op een groot centrum is gewoon de kans dat er dingen misgaan, ja dat is gewoon groter. En er gaan vaker dingen mis. Inderdaad omdat je bewoners niet kent, maar ook, ze zijn met heel veel ja”

85 aim to establish large-scale asylum centres, while 8 months ago there was a different approach”131 (van Dijk, 2016). This explanation indicates that COA’s translation processes of the national law “Central Organ shelter asylum seekers” to the local level, result in the attempt to establish large-scale asylum centres. Mrs. van Dijk explains how these large-scale asylum centres are a necessity for COA to continue their ability to provide in high quality shelter locations for every asylum seeker in the Netherlands, despite of the increasing numbers of asylum seekers. Furthermore, Mrs. van Dijk explains that due to the current pressure of asylum seekers COA had to change its approach to continue to provide in high quality shelter locations changed. Following this reason, it might be that COA is continuously looking for the best way to establish enough high quality shelter locations by a trial and error of different approaches. In correspondence to this search of the best practices to establish in the right amount of asylum shelter locations, COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains how the discussion on large- or small-scale asylum centres is still ongoing within the national politics. Additionally, he explains how COA depends their decision on the establishment of a small- or large scale asylum centre on the local situation and location. When a location such as the Nassau-Dietzkazerne offers large-scale possibilities, COA is likely to aim towards establishing an asylum shelter on a large scale, especially when the national situation is requiring more shelter locations due to the increased influx of asylum seekers (Zeebregts, 2016).

Mr. de Jong indicates how the number of asylum seekers local residents of Cranendonck are willing to host in their municipality might also depend on the kind of asylum seekers that are hosted in Cranendonck. He explains how people are, according to him, more likely to support hosting asylum seeker families than a group of negro men: “I think people would experience less difficulties by accepting to host Syrian families who fled their country than accepting to host 2,000 negro man who are only causing nuisance in the municipality”132 (de Jong, 2016)133. By means of this explanation, Mr. de Jong is making a distinction between different groups of asylum seekers and depending on the group, different characterization frames as well as different risk- and information frames are applied. Syrian families are framed as asylum seekers who fled their country and who are less likely to cause nuisance on a local level. Negro male asylum seekers, on the other hand, are framed as people only causing local nuisance and therefore, it is less likely they are accepted by the local residents of Cranendonck according to Mr. de Jong.

Mr. Jansen makes a connection between the local support and acceptance of hosting the current number of asylum seekers in the municipality, and the lack of issues involving those asylum seekers. He explains this by stating: “look, once people are assaulted, for example an elderly women’s purse is wrenched out of her hands, which does not necessarily have to be done by asylum seekers, this could also be another

131 “Er wordt heel erg gezocht van wat, waar, waar zijn plekken waar wij eventueel een nieuw centrum kunnen beginnen. Ja en vanwege die grote instroom wordt er een beetje ingezet op van die grote centra, terwijl we acht maanden geleden nog andere ideeën hierover hadden” 132 “Ik denk dat mensen dan zouden zeggen van ja, een aantal gevluchte gezinnen, Syrische gezinnen, dat vind ik niet zo erg dat die komen. Maar als je meer dan 2000 negroïde mannen daar neer zet, die alleen maar voor overlast in de gemeente zorgen, dat gaan mensen niet accepteren” 133 Interview inhabitant, Mr. de Jong, Budel, January 27 2016

86 coloured person, to say it that way, then the situation can overturn”134 (Jansen, 2016). By means of this explanation, Mr. Jansen indicates that the risk- and information frame that currently results in the local level of support, is likely to shift when a situation occurs in which asylum seekers appear to be negatively involved. Following this reason, a shift in the risk- and information frame can occur regardless of the actual involvement or guilt of an asylum seekers as long as any coloured person is involved. Additionally, this argument is based on Mr. Jansen framing the local residents in Cranendonck as people that apply a characterization frame whereby asylum seekers are described as colours people.

The connection between the local support for higher amount of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck and a lack of nuisance and incidents, means that the local support of asylum seekers might decrease or disappear when the amount of incidents or nuisance caused by asylum seekers increases. This is also addressed by Mr. de Jong and Mr. Timmermans. Mr. de Jong explains: “I think that when something bad happens here [due to the asylum seekers], for example a girl is assaulted, local support will disappear completely. Then there will be a fire lit at the asylum centre or something similar would happen. Even thought there might be nice people among them [the asylum seekers], something like that only has to happen once. […] Thereafter, the local support will decrease to zero”135 (de Jong, 2016). Mr. Timmermans adds: “the image of these nice people [asylum seekers] will disappear at the moment you will hear about lots of negative things”136 (Timmermans, 2016)137. This explanation indicates that once the local situation changes, the applied characterization frame will change as well. It might be that once a negative situation involving asylum seekers occurs, the risk- and information frame applied by local residents will adjust, which also result in a shift in the applied characterization frame to describe asylum seekers, as indicated by Mr. Timmermans. The link between the lack of nuisance in the municipality and the local support of asylum seekers, is also designated on a broader local perspective. A correlation is found in the online questionnaire between respondents’ opinion that large-scale asylum centres have more advantages than small-scale centres and respondents that have stated the asylum seekers cause no nuisance in Cranendonck. Furthermore, a second correlation of -0.550 is indicated between respondents indicating that large-scale asylum centres have more advantages over small-scale asylum centres, and respondents stating that, due to the asylum seekers, the amount of incidents in Cranendonck has increased.

Some residents expressed ideas on how to ensure a stable situation in Cranendonck regarding the hosting of asylum seekers or how to equally divide the asylum seekers over all municipalities in the Netherlands. Mr. van Vliet, local resident of Cranendonck and member of PvdA Cranendonck, proposes to introduce multiple evaluation moments in which the different aspects of hosting asylum seekers in Cranendonck will be evaluated. Based on this evaluation, it could first be decided whether to continue hosting asylum

134 “Kijk zodra er mensen lastiggevallen worden, stel als er bij een oud vrouwtje de tas uit de handen gerukt wordt, ja dat hoeft dan niet eens een asielzoeker te zijn, maar een anders getinte om het zo maar te zeggen, dan kan het zo omslaan” 135 “Ik denk dat als je hier een negatief ding krijgt als hier bijvoorbeeld meisjes worden aangerand ook, dan is het echt klaar, wat zal ik zeggen, dan breekt er opeens brand ofzo uit. Dus het is zo van, ook al zitten er heel veel aardige mensen dan, dat hoeft echt maar een keer te gebeuren. Dan is hier nul draagvlak meer als hier dat soort dingen gebeuren” 136 “Het beeld van die aardige mensen verdwijnt op het moment dat je veel negatieve dingen mee krijgt” 137 Interview inhabitant Mr. Timmermans, Budel, February 27 2016 87 seekers, and secondly whether or not to increase or decrease the amount of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck. Mr. van Vliet stresses the importance of ensuring a high quality of life in the asylum centres in Cranendonck, independent of the number of asylum seekers hosted. As previously addressed, Mr. van Vliet has the opinion that the municipality of Cranendonck experiences no difficulties in hosting 2,000 asylum seeker and should therefore continue to do so, until an extended evaluation has indicated that there are good reasons to adjust this amount (van Vliet, 2016). This proposal of establishing evaluation moments between the municipality of Cranendonck, COA and the local residents on the asylum centre and its inhabitants, was also included in the online questionnaire and 76.7 percent of the respondents have indicated such evaluations are important when a permanent asylum is established at the Nassau- Dietzkazerne. On the other side, 9.1 percent of the respondents indicated such evaluations are not important when a permanent asylum centre is established at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne.

Former alderman of CDA Cranendonck, Mr. Postma, has a different vision for the future of Cranendonck related to the hosting of asylum seekers. He thinks Cranendonck should host “a few hundred asylum seekers, however in a good manner, including education from the first day onwards and new facilities. We should go back to the basics and start sheltering people with the warmness of the heart”138 (Postma, 2016)139. He stresses that, for the time being and within the current situation of need for hosting places, he agrees the Nassau-Dietzkazerne should remain open. However, when the necessity decreases, the amount of asylum seekers in Cranendonck should, according to Mr. Postma, be reduced as well. The discussion in the commission meeting of January 19th 2016, discussed in chapter 4, indicates that more residents and some representatives of local political parties agree with the shrinking possibility mentioned by Mr. Postma (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Postma, 2016). Furthermore, Mr. Postma thinks the asylum seekers should more equally be divided over all municipalities in the Netherlands by obliging all municipalities to host 2 to 3 percent of the asylum seekers. In accordance with this reasoning, the amount of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck should decrease, and larger cities such as Eindhoven and Amsterdam should take in more asylum seekers (Postma, 2016).

In COAs request of November 30th 2015 in which it proposes to purchase the Nassau-Dietzkazerne to continue using it as an asylum centre, it also proposes to keep the amount of asylum seekers hosted at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne unchanged. This means that, if COAs request is approved, the Nassau- Dietzkazerne will continue to host 1,500 asylum seekers. In case of emergency this amount might temporarily increase to a maximum of 1,700, after which it will decrease again back to the initial maximum amount of 1,500. Additionally, when the contract between COA and the municipality of Cranendonck concerning Budel-Dorplein ends, COA would like to transfer the asylum seekers in Budel-Dorplein towards Budel-Cranendonck. This possibility is not included in the current proposal of COA and will be addressed if that situation arises (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016).

As already stressed above, multiple residents of Cranendonck have indicated they prefer a small-scale asylum centre over a large-scale asylum centre. On a broader, local perspective, 11.2 percent of the respondents of the online questionnaire indicated they want Cranendonck to host 1,501 to 2,000 asylum

138 “Een paar honderd, maar dan op goede wijze, met onderwijs vanaf de eerste de beste dag dat ze er zijn, nieuwe voorzieningen en waarmee we begonnen zijn, met een warm hart mensen opvangen” 139 Interview inhabitant and former CDA Cranendonck politicus Mr. Postma, Budel, January 21 2016 88 seekers. A similar percentage of the respondents indicated to prefer 1,001 to 1,500 asylum seekers to be hosted in Cranendonck. 18.0 percent of the respondents have the opinion that 501 to 1,000 asylum seekers can be located in Cranendonck, and the highest percentage of the respondents, 34.8 percent, think 1 to 500 asylum seekers should be hosted in Cranendonck. Additionally, 4.5 percent indicated Cranendonck could host more than 2000 asylum seekers. 6.1.2 Habituation Even though the numbers of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck might cause some fear with people, Cranendonck has experience with hosting even more foreigners in the past as addressed in chapter 4. In the time the German soldiers occupied the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, the amount of foreigners in Cranendonck increased to 3,000 soldiers (van Vliet, 2016). Mayor Vermue also highlights Cranendoncks previous experience with hosting foreigners as a positive contribution to the current support towards hosting asylum seekers in Cranendonck (Vermue, 2016). Multiple local residents have also highlighted how the inhabitants of Cranendonck are used to having foreigners in their municipality, which led to the current support of hosting the asylum seekers at Budel-Dorplein as well as at Budel-Cranendonck (Bakker & Bakker, 2015140; Smit, 2015; Jansen, 2016; van Dijk, 2016; Postma, 2016).

The arrival of German soldiers happened in 1963, less than 20 years after the second world war. This decision led to some dissatisfied citizen, angry with the decision of the municipality to host what they called ‘war criminals’ in Cranendonck (Jansen, 2016). In the end, however, the German soldiers were completely integrated in the municipality and contributed to the development of Budel as a village and to the wealth of the social middle class (Graaf, 2015)(Smit, 2015; Kok, 2016141; Postma, 2016). Mr. Jansen explains: “The only thing that happened [with the German soldiers] was that bicycles were stolen on a regular base. When someone lost his or her bicycle, they had to go to the barracks where they were likely to find them back. The negative consequences [of the presence of the German soldiers] remained limited to the stolen bicycles, and furthermore, those negative consequences were outshined by the benefits [of the presence of the German soldiers] for the entire society. The local residents earned a lot of money [due to the German soldiers]. This [making money] is currently happening again”142 (Jansen, 2016). When the German soldiers left Budel both the social middle class as well as the whole municipality was financially affected by it (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Postma, 2016). Within his explanation, Mr. Jansen links the amount local support concerning the hosting of foreigners is related to the positive consequences these foreigners have on the village. In his example, he highlights the positive financial contribution of the German soldiers to the local municipality. Due to these financial benefits, the negative consequences, such as stolen bicycles, were compensated. According to Mr. Jansen, the local community is currently also experiencing financial benefits from the asylum seekers, which might, following his reason, result in more local support for the hosting of asylum seekers.

140 Interview inhitants Mr. and Mrs. Maas, Budel, December 14 2015 141 Interviews inhabitant Mr. Kok, Budel, January 7 2016 142 “Het enige wat er gebeurde was dat er regelmatig fietsen gejat werden. Dus als je je fiets kwijt was ging je naar de kazerne want dan stond hij daar. Maar als het daarbij blijft en je hebt voor de rest als gemeenschap eigenlijk alleen maar profijt. De mensen die vingen daar een grote zak geld van, dat gebeurt nu ook weer” 89

However, not all residents agree with Mr. Jansen that the German soldiers had a similar effect on the municipality as the asylum seekers currently have. Other residents explain how, according to them, the current situation with the asylum seekers is different because the local residents of Cranendonck do not benefit from the presence of the asylum seekers the same way they did with German soldiers. Furthermore, the cultural differences with the asylum seekers are greater than those with other previous foreigners staying in Cranendonck. Mr. de Jong explains how the German soldiers had, despite of their different country of origin, a western orientation and lived by similar rules, norms and values as the people in the Netherlands. The same applied to the migrant labourers from Poland and Hungary: “those people come here to work hard and I always say there is nothing wrong with that […] That is another story. I currently always feel like they [asylum seekers] do nothing at all, they just come here and profit from the welfare state, they [asylum seekers] are not people that contribute to anything”143 [free translation] (de Jong, 2016). Mr. de Jong applies a characterization frame in which asylum seekers are described as people that do not contribute to the local society but only aim to benefit from the welfare state instead. Hereby, Mr. de Jong indicates the local benefits of the asylum seekers are highly limited and outweighed by the cultural differences and the associated behaviour.

Aside from guest workers from inter alia Spain, Portugal, Poland and Hungary, ‘de Cantine’ in Budel- Dorplein has also been occupied by asylum seekers several times (Postma, 2016). Mayor Vermue explains how some of these guest workers caused nuisance in the municipality, while the asylum seekers never caused any problems in the past. When the asylum centre re-opened, the local residents knew what to expect (Vermue, 2016). This explanation highlights the benefits of the habituation of local residents with having foreigners hosted at ‘de Cantine’ and the contribution it makes to the current local support of the asylum seekers. Mrs. van Dijk, local residents and COA employee, agrees with the mayor and gives a similar explanation on why the asylum seekers that were previously hosted in Budel-Dorplein never caused any nuisance. The previous lack of nuisance caused by asylum seekers has probably influenced the current risk- and information frames applied by the local residents. Following his reason, the current risk- and information frame presumably describes a situation in which the hosing of asylum seekers results in little to no nuisance. Furthermore, the past experiences might have contributed to the characterization frame applied by local residents whereby asylum seekers are described as people causing little to no nuisance. Another benefit of the hosting of asylum seekers at Budel-Dorplein is mentioned by former CDA Cranendonck alderman Mr. Postma, who adds that the arrival of asylum seekers helped the local school that almost had to close due to a lack of pupils. Since the children of the asylum seekers became pupils at the local school, it remained open (Postma, 2016). Similar to the statement made by Mr. Jansen above, Mr. Postma also stresses how benefits established by hosting asylum seekers, might positively contribute to the local support of hosting those asylum seekers in the municipality. As a final note, Mrs. van Dijk adds that, due to the past experience the inhabitants of Cranendonck have with hosting various foreign groups of people, they are used to having asylum seekers in their municipality and are familiar

143 “Die mensen komen hier gewoon om hard te werken en daar zeg ik altijd van daar is niks […] Dan vind ik dat een ander verhaal. Ik heb nu altijd al wel het gevoel van die voeren hier geen klap uit en die komen hier alleen maar en profiteren hier een beetje van de verzorgingsstaat, maar dat zijn niet echt mensen die een bijdrage hebben”

90 with, and prepared for, the influences asylum seekers might or might not have on their society (van Dijk, 2016).

On a broader local perspective, it also appears the habituation caused by the hosting of other foreigners in the past, positively contributes to the current acceptance of asylum seekers in Cranendonck. In the online questionnaire, 44.5 percent of the respondents indicated to agree with this statement. On the other side, 21.7 percent of the respondents have indicated to disagree with this statement. The disagreeing residents are likely to follow a similar reason as indicated by Mr. de Jong above. 6.2 Local opinions on COA COA is both a shelter centre and a company with multiple responsibilities according to location manager Mr. Zeebregts. Approximately 80 COA employees operate at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, as well as a similar amount of IND employees. Furthermore, COA has master contracts with various companies and has therefore hired external parties on a national level for the provision of inter alia food, cleaning and security. At the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck about 300 to 400 external employees are occupied as well, resulting in COA being the second biggest employer in the municipality of Cranendonck (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Schippers, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016).

Despite this contribution of COA toward the community, it appears, that many local residents have issues with the presence of COA in the municipality of Cranendonck (Smit, 2015; Jansen, 2016; Overtoom, 2015; Postma, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). Mr. Smit explains: “The local anger, hate and discontent is directed towards COA […] the trust in COA is completely gone. COA totally ruined it”144 (Smit, 2015). This statement visualizes the characterization frame applied by Mr. Smit that describes COA as a hated and untrustworthy organization, who’s activities result in local anger and incomprehensibility. Following this characterization frame and statement, Mr. Smit is likely to apply a similar risk- and information frame whereby COAs activities result into undesired situation. In response to the negativity of some local residents, mayor Marga Vermue explains: “I think COA has an image problem. Those people [COA employees] do their very best, that is not the problem, however, they do not show that enough [to the local residents]”145 (Vermue, 2016). By means of this statement, the mayor of Cranendonck appears to recognize the negative characterization frame applied by multiple local residents to describe COA. To change these applied characterization frames and increase the levels of trust towards COA, mayor Vermue proposes COA should be more transparent in showing their efforts to manage the local situation with regard to the asylum seekers and the asylum centre.

The negative attitude of local residents towards COA can also be indicated on a broader local perspective by means of the online questionnaire. This shows that 49.4 percent of the respondents are dissatisfied with the local activities of COA, versus 18.00 percent of the respondents that state to be satisfied with COAs activities.

144 “De grootste woede en de grootste haat ofzo, onvrede zit toch echt naar het COA […] Het vertrouwen in de COA is gewoon echt totaal weg. De COA heeft het helemaal verpest” 145 “Ik denk dat COA echt een imagoprobleem heeft. Die mensen doen hun stinkende best, daar ben ik helemaal niet ongerust in, maar dat laten ze onvoldoende zien” 91

6.2.1 Communication When it comes to communication towards local residents and informing them on recent or future developments and situations, COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains this is the responsibility of the municipality of Cranendonck. However, COA can decide to endorse this communication of the municipality (Zeebregts, 2016). Despite this division of tasks and following the above proposal of mayor Vermue, COA is providing information to the local residents of Cranendonck as well by means of the local newspapers. De Grenskoerier is used by COA to communicate to the local residents of Cranendonck about the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, and HAC Weekblad is used by asylum centre Budel-Dorplein for the same purpose. Budel-Dorplein has a monthly column, mainly to highlight the positive activities at the asylum centre, the activities of the volunteers and the local establishments. For Budel-Dorplein, those columns provide the only form of communication to the local residents about the asylum centre and its residents (van Wijk, 2015). Budel-Cranendonck is providing updates on the asylum centre and its inhabitants through de Grenskoerier every other week (Schippers, 2016). These columns mainly provide information on the activities at the asylum centre, the country of origin and the number of asylum seekers hosted. Also, whenever COA needs volunteers or donations a request is added in the column (Bullemans, 2015; Schippers, 2016; Kuipers, 2016). Despite COA receiving positive reaction on the column in de Grenskoerier (Zeebregts, 2016), they appear to lack explicit information on changes and actual situations at the asylum centre, causing residents to feel uninformed about the local developments on the asylum centre (Kuipers, 2016). COA has been discussing various possibilities with de Grenskoerier to upgrade the columns and to improve the overall quality. They want the column to be more interesting to read and therefore they aim to make it less standard by providing more useful information about the actual ins and outs of the asylum centre (Schippers, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016).

Despite various explanations of local residents about de Grenskoerier being widely read (Postma, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016), COAs communication is not well received. Mr. Smit expresses his discontent towards COAs communication by stating: “they [COA] should be responsible for the communication towards the local inhabitants by sharing information on the developments and situation inside the asylum centre, however they do no such thing at all, we are left in the dark […] When they [COA] do talk they lie about the internal situation and developments at the asylum centre. In an attempt to please the local residents, they make the internal situation appear as if everything is going great, but I know better”146 (Smit, 2015). Within this explanation Mr. Smit stresses COA is not well nor honest in the communication towards the municipality. Hereby COA is framed as a dishonest and untrustworthy organization. The addition of Mr. Smit stating “but I know better”, might indicate that, due to his previous experiences with COA, he is not listening to them anymore. Furthermore, this addition might indicate that his applied risk- and information frame to evaluate the internal situation at the asylum centre is also affected. This frame might involve an increased likelihood of incidents and other undesired situation occurring at the asylum centre. Aside from the explanation of Mr. Smit, Mr. Groen also expresses his discontent of the communication of

146 “De COA hoort eigenlijk de bewoners ook voor te lichten met hoe zit het nu op een azc, en mensen vertellen over de dingen die daar binnen allemaal gebeuren en voorvallen, maar dat doen ze niet! Ze vertellen ons niets […] Ja wat doet het COA wel, liegen, mensen voorliegen over dat er niets gebeurd op het azc terwijl dat wel zo is, en ja, af en toe de schijn wekken van we willen wel de bewoners horen om ze zo tevreden te houden. Maar ik weet wel beter”

COA towards the local residents. He explains that the lack of communication resulted in the emergence of a trust issues aimed towards COA. Furthermore, COAs communication technique is criticized by Mr. Groen. He explains: “I expressed my concerns to COA regarding the numbers of ambulances and trauma helicopters that were called towards the asylum centre and the expenses of those actions. I found a list of those [numbers] on 112drimble147. And in response to my concerns they asked if it was my hobby to look out for ambulances and helicopters. They [COA] were so condescending and arrogant to me. It indicates that the worries of local residents are not taken seriously at all”148 (Groen, 2016). Within this explanation, COA is framed as an organization that is communicating in a condescending and arrogant way, and that is not taking the local residents, nor their worries, seriously. On a broader, local perspective, 55.1 percent of the respondents gave an opposite answer and indicated COA is not communicating well towards the inhabitants of Cranendonck. On the other hand, 15.7 percent of the respondents are satisfied with COAs communication towards local residents. In chapter 5, multiple statements of Mr. Smit and Mr. Groen are visualized whereby their experienced nuisance and applied characterization frames on asylum seekers are highlighted. Residents such as Mr. Smit and Mr. Groen, that are more negative about the asylum seekers and experience nuisance because of them, are more likely to frame COA, the organization that is responsible for the hosting of those asylum seekers, in a negative way as well. This could also mean the opposite, namely that the communication and information given to local residents by COA is influencing the characterization frames they apply to identify asylum seekers. Less communication and information provides to local residents might, following this reason, result in a more negative characterization frame to describe asylum seekers. Following the reason established in the previous chapter that the applied characterization frame influences the nuisance experienced by local residents as a result of the behaviour of asylum seekers, improved communication of COA towards local residents might indirectly cause them to experience less nuisance and possibly more understanding towards the behaviour of asylum seekers. If this is true, it is important to improve the communication between COA and the local residents to gain support towards asylum seekers and the overall local situation.

The relation between the satisfaction concerning COAs communication and the experienced nuisance due to asylum seekers can also be indicated on a broader local perspective by means of a correlation in the results of the online questionnaire. This correlation is found between respondents stating to be satisfied with COAs communication and respondents stating they experience less nuisance caused by asylum seekers.

To improve COAs communication towards the residents of Cranendonck, some residents proposed the idea COA should use social media sources instead of de Grenskoerier to provide in information. According to them, social media are more accessible and will therefore reach more people (Kuipers, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). Although Facebook is an easy medium to share information and stimulate a proper

147 A website providing an overview of all the local-levelled 112 notifications 148 “Ik sprak mijn zorgen uit over de het aantal ambulance ritten en enkele traumaheli die zijn geweest, is een hele polonaise, en mijn vraag was wie betaald dit. Ik had die lijst trouwens op 112 drimble gevonden. Maar dus toen ik vroeg van leg mij dit eens uit, hoe verklaar je die kosten. Wil je horen wat antwoord was op die bezorgdheid: Ohh is dat je hobby? Naar ambulances en helikopters kijken. Laatdunkend en arrogant of niet! Dan word je gewoon niet serieus genomen in de zorgen die je als omwonende hebt”

93 discussion, the downside is everyone can post anything, which might lead to offensive situations or harm COAs image (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Schippers, 2016 Maas & Maas, 2016). In chapter 7 I will further elaborate on the use of social media as an information proving tool.

Aside from the local newspapers, COA also applied other techniques to communicate to local residents of Cranendonck. For example, by consultations with COA, the representatives of the municipality, including the mayor, representatives of the local police and local residents living in the area of the former army base, every 3 to 4 months and occasional home visits (Schippers, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016). Also, when COA filed their request to increase the capacity of Budel-Cranendonck with an extra 300 places in September 2014, they sent a communicative note to all local residents informing them about this request (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). However, since the army base has only few neighbouring residents since it is secluded from the village centres, only few residents are involved in these forms of communication (van Vliet, 2016). 6.2.2 Transparency Aside from an increased quality of information and communication, local residents want COA to be more open and transparent on its daily activities and especially the incidents occurring at the asylum centres. Various residents feel like COA is hiding information on incidents and fights at the asylum centre (de Jong, 2016; Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016). One resident explains: “COA can claim nothing happens at the asylum centre, but it is impossible for outsiders to enter the terrain, so there is no proof. That is the actual problem. In principle, COA can state whatever they want on the internal situation at the asylum centre, because no one will find out whether or not their stories are true. That is the entire issue”149 (Smit 2015). This explanation shows the distrust Mr. Smit has towards COA. Furthermore, Mr. Smit stresses how the arrival of police cars, ambulances and trauma helicopters are explained by COA referring to small incidents or misunderstandings. Subsequently however, it appears they were called for bigger incidents, such as fights including various asylum seekers. Hereby, Mr. Smit refers to, inter alia, the incidents in September and December 2014 (Smit, 2015). More local residents refer to the arrival of various police cars at the asylum centre, without COA giving a statement on the reason for their arrival (Jansen, 2016; Kuipers, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016; Groen, 2016). This lack of communication and transparency contributes to a characterization frame whereby COA is described as a non-transparent and untrustworthy organization.

Mr. van Vliet explains how the number of police cars that arrive at the asylum centre depends on the communication from COA’s security employees towards the police. Miscommunications or unclear notifications might cause more police cars to arrive since the local police is extra cautious. According to Mr. van Vliet, this state of alertness indicates the line between the local and national politics, where State Secretary Dijkhoff wants to decrease the number of incidents as much as possible (van Vliet, 2016). By this statement Mr. van Vliet gives an insight in the translation of this national levelled desire of State Secretary Dijkhoff to a local level which, in this case, appears to lead to confusion and suspicion of local residents concerning the situation and incidents at the asylum centre. This is an example of how the

149 “De COA kan wel zeggen van er is niets aan de hand, maar daar is niemand die op het terrein komt, want je komt daar gewoon echt niet op dus er is geen bewijs. En dat is eigenlijk het probleem, het COA kan in principe zeggen wat ze willen wat dat komt toch niemand achter, dat is het hele punt” 94 translation of national policies to the local level can cause friction and undesired outcomes, such as distrusting residents.

To continue, part of the police cars arriving daily at the asylum centre can also be explained by routine surveillance that happens four to five times a day. Local residents, however, appear to be unaware of these routine surveillances (Schippers, 2016). If this would be more clearly communicated towards the local residents of Cranendonck, the amount of suspicious feelings of local residents might decrease. However, municipal official Mrs. Kloppers explains “we can continue to explain the situation, however, people will not hear what they do not want to hear”150[free translation] (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). This explanation links the characterization frame applied by residents to their openness to listen to information provided to them by the framed actor. In addition to this, this explanation indicates the municipal official believes it is impossible to change the characterization frame applied by local residents by giving them information that contradicts that frame. In accordance to the explanations of the residents described above, the lack of communication and transparency might strengthen their characterization frames. It is unclear however, if this characterization frame would indeed change when all internal developments and incidents are communicated in a transparent way, or if some local residents would still believe COA remains non-transparent.

Despite the suspicious feelings of local residents towards COA, COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains his organization is transparent in their communication on all occurrences and incidents in the asylum centre. COA has a media policy which states that COA employees never speak to the media themselves. This task is executed by COA’s spokespersons. Although employees are not allowed to speak about the situation at the asylum centre, all local residents are able to get information on the registration of incidents. However, those registrations do not give a proper representation of the incidents at the former army base terrain, since minor occurrences are included within the COA’s list of incidents, as is stressed by Mr. Zeebregts. For example, when people miss their hailing, a duty whereby asylum seekers are obligated to report their presence, this counts as one incident. Therefore, this incident registration can give people the wrong idea cause of the total amount of incidents, which residents might explain by, for example, fights between asylum seekers. The number of incidents may appear to be high, but in reality this does not mean many major incidents have occurred at the asylum centre (Zeebregts, 2016). Notwithstanding this transparency and the possibility to retrieve the registration of incidents, improving the communication towards local residents might decrease the suspicion of local residents and increase their feeling of security within the municipality.

In an attempt to decrease the closed character of COA and the asylum centre, to contribute to COAs transparency, and to give the residents of Cranendonck an idea of the situation in an asylum centre, COA organized annual open houses at the Budel-Cranendonck and Budel-Dorplein. Mr. Zeebregts explained this open house as a successful event that drew many curious visitors and COA employee Mr. Schippers explains: “we anticipated on 1,500 visitors, that amount doubled. Looking back on the reactions in the guest book we had, and hearing people still talk about their positive experiences and how their vision

150 “Wij kunnen praten als Brugman, maar weet je wat mensen niet willen horen, horen ze toch niet”

95 changed after their visit, we can conclude it was definitely a success”151 [free translation] (Schippers, 2016). This explanation indicates that the visions and frames applied by local residents to describe the asylum seekers and situation in which they are involved can change due to personal experiences. Also Mrs. Huisman, local resident of Budel, explains how activities such as these are a good way to approach the local residents of Cranendonck, while making the first steps of integration between the local residents and the asylum seekers easier (Huisman, 2016). Aside from visiting the asylum centre during an open house, local residents also have access whenever they are invited by one of its inhabitants or when they request a guided tour provided by COA, which is possible for all residents. The information on the possibility to arrange such tours has been published by COA in de Grenskoerier (Schippers, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016). However, it appears a few local residents are aware of this possibility to visit the asylum centre since they claim it is almost impossible to enter the Nassau-Dietzkazerne (de Jong, 2016; Overtoom, 2015; Smit, 2015; Maas & Maas, 2016). According to Mrs. Huisman these possibilities to access the former army base terrain are mainly used by residents who already are rather positive about the asylum centre and its inhabitants, meaning they apply positive characterization-, and risk- and information frames. She explains it is more difficult to approach local residents who are sceptical about COA, the asylum centre and its inhabitants. Despite of this, providing these possibilities to visit the asylum centre decreases the threshold for opponents to be more open about their positive opinion on asylum seekers (Huisman, 2016).

Aside from the positive reaction, the annual open houses also led to local residents accusing COA to use these days to give the wrong impressions of the actual situation at asylum centre (Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). A local news photographer explained how, on these occasions, the grounds of the former army base are cleaned to give people the impression everything is well organized, while at the end of these events everything goes back to the regular situation. According to him, these appearances cause people to develop angry feelings and make them lose faith in COA as an organization (Smit, 2015). Despite Mr. Smit has not visited the asylum centre during an open house himself, his opinion is shared by other residents who gave similar explanations: “they make it nice and cosy, they serve good food and do nice things […] They apply a similar tactics as secondary schools when organizing open houses, where they make the situation appear nicer than it is in reality. After the open house at the asylum centre, only one week later, news spreads that the police had to interfere in a fight between asylum seekers. That makes me wonder how stupid can they [COA] be? Making local residents believe everything goes well at the asylum centre, while they are fully aware this is not the case”152 [free translation] (Kuipers, 2016). By means of this statement, Mr. Kuipers shares his discontent with the organization of the open house at Budel-Cranendonck, whereby he frames COA as dishonest and misleading. The characterization frame applied by Mr. Kuipers to negatively describe asylum seekers, highlighted in chapter 5, might explain this

151 “We hadden gerekend op zo’n 1500 bezoekers, dat zijn er denk ik het dubbele geworden en als we reacties terugzien in het gastenboek dat we hadden en als we mensen hoorde dat ze er nu nog steeds over praten hoe positief het was en dat hun beeld toch veranderd is ten opzichte van wat ze eerst hadden dan is het zeker succesvol geweest” 152 “Dan wordt het gezellig gemaakt en er worden lekkere hapjes gegeten en allemaal leuke dingetjes […] Als je open dag hebt op je school dan maak je het toch ook altijd mooier dan de werkelijkheid is. He en dan is dat voorbij en een week later hoor je weer van de politie heeft weer uit moeten rukken want er is daar weer gevochten en dan denk ik hoe dom kan je zijn. De buurt een beetje laten geloven dat dat goed gaat, terwijl je weet dat het zo niet is” 96 characterization frame, following the reason mentioned above. Furthermore, this would be in line with the explanation of municipal official Mrs. Kloppers above, which indicates that negative characterization frames applied by local residents to describe COA, are difficult to change by providing these residents with information that contradicts the frame they apply. 6.2.3 Promises As indicated within the elaboration of the commission meeting of January 19th 2016 in chapter 4, accusations have been made concerning COA not living up to its promises (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). An example of these failed promises mentioned in the commission meeting concern ensuring the visibility of asylum seekers participating in traffic. It has already been mentioned above which attempts have been made by COA to ensure this visibility. However, according to the local residents the lack of visibility remains a pressing issue and therefore COA is accused of not living up to its promise of improving this situation (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). In response to these accusations Mr. Kamps, municipal official explains how these promises failed due to external factors instead of COAs lack of effort. “COA would be taking care of this situation by providing the asylum seekers with reflecting vests to make the refugees more visible on their bicycles. The provision of these reflecting vests is not the issue. Instead, the issue is whether the asylum seekers will wear the reflecting vests […] If not, this is not COAs mistake. More specific, COA is living up to their end of the agreements, however, local residents are not experiencing this the same way”153 (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Within this statement Mr. Kamps visualize two different risk- and information frames that are applied when evaluating whether COA is living up to their promises. Mr. Kamps explains how residents making accusations do not feel like COA is living up to their promises because, in this case, they do not see an improvement of the situation and the asylum seekers remain hardly visible in traffic. However, broadening up this perspective or risk- and information frame shows that external factors are also involved in the outcome the situation COA attempts to improve. Depending on the frame applied, actors can draw various conclusions on whether or not COA is living up to their promises. The frame in which COA is not living up to their promises, could be a result of the way in which local residents frame COA as an organization (the characterization frame). It has already been highlighted how some residents explained they have completely lost faith in COA. Those people are likely to frame COA as an untrustworthy organization. Additionally, COA not living up to their promises due to a lack of effort fits in this frame of untrustworthiness. The municipality however, is collaborating with and thus biased towards COA and, as will be explained, is more informed on the local situation at the asylum centres than the residents of Cranendonck. Due to these two factors, the municipality and its employees are likely to apply a characterization frame describing COA in a different way than the characterization frames applied by suspicious residents. This characterization frame applied by the municipal officials appears to leave more room for alternative explanations on COAs failed promises, in accordance to Mr. Kamps’ statement. By increasing the provision of information and the communication towards local residents by COA on their activities and attempts to live up to their promises while including the outcomes of these attempts and the influences of external factors, could lead to a broader perspective and frame as explained by Mr. Kamps above. This broader perspective might result in more positive evaluations of

153 “COA zou zorgen voor hesjes waardoor vluchtelingen op de fiets beter zichtbaar zouden zijn. Ja, het COA kan wel zorgen voor hesjes dat is het probleem is. Het is het probleem van trekken die mensen zo’n hesje aan… COA is dan niet fout. COA houdt zich aan de afspraken alleen wordt dat niet op die manier beleefd door de lokale bevolking” 97

COA following up to the opinions and comments of the local residents. However, as explained in the previous paragraph, various residents have indicated this provision of information and communication is currently lacking (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Smit, 2015).

Another promise of COA which is, according to many local residents not held, concerns the increase in local employment as a result of hosting asylum seekers in the municipality. This positive consequence of opening an asylum centre is often highlighted by COA as well as the municipality of Cranendonck (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016)(GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). On the national level however, COA has multiple master contracts that often make it impossible to reach out to local entrepreneurs when, for example, buildings of the asylum centre in Budel need to be repaired. As a result, COA is not proving local entrepreneurs with the opportunity to benefit from their presence, which is causing dissatisfied citizen and entrepreneurs (van Vliet, 2016; Schippers, 2016).

Regarding this situation, a local resident explains that “they [COA] does not make any [local] friends”154 (Jansen, 2016). In addition to this, it is explained how COA pledges on multiple meetings in the municipality that local entrepreneurs should benefit from their presence and that they should be involved as much as possible. However, according to Mr. Jansen this is currently not happening. He explains: “I got a feeling COA is fairly well endowed from The Hague”155 (Jansen, 2016). With this latter statement Mr. Jansen creates a direct link between the local situation and the national policies created by the Dutch government and COA. In accordance with the above statement, it appears that the national policy on the establishment of master contracts with national and internationally oriented companies, is not well received on the local level (Meijers, 2015)(Jansen, 2016; Schippers, 2016; Postma, 2016). COA spokesperson Jan-Willem Anholts explains to be aware of the critiques on the local level but indicates there is lack of time which makes it impossible for COA to create separate contracts for all asylum centres and emergency shelter locations. Additionally, he explains that by establishing these mantel contracts COA is able to function as flexible as the situation requires (Meijers, 2015). On the local level COA is also aware of this issue and tries to include local entrepreneurs as much as legally possible. When the company of their master contract is unable to fulfil a specific task, the local entrepreneurs are enabled, and when there are staff trainings a local bakery is approached to provide a lunch (Schippers, 2016). Despite of this, a lack of inclusion of local entrepreneurs has been indicated as an issue by many local residents (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016)(Overtoom, 2015; van Vliet, 2016; Jansen, 2016; Huisman, 2016). Mr. Jansen explains: “They [COA] should ensure to include local entrepreneurs since it is likely to influence the local level of support. During one of the first commission meetings whereby the asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck was discussed, a COA employee ensured that local entrepreneurs would indeed benefit from the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck. Additionally, they explained all asylum seekers would receive 50 euro a week, which they would spend at the local shops. Afterwards however, this appeared to be a lie”156 (Jansen, 2016). This statement indicates that the inclusion of local entrepreneurs might influence

154 “Daar maken ze geen vrienden mee” 155 “Ik heb toch het idee dat COA redelijk bedeeld wordt vanuit Den Haag” 156 “COA moet ervoor zorgen dat ze die plaatselijke ondernemers mee betrekt want dat maakt dat mensen het gemakkelijker accepteren dat er een asielzoekerscentrum komt. In eerste instantie is ook gezegd tijdens een van de eerste commissievergaderingen over Budel-Cranendonck, waarbij iemand van het COA zei van, de plaatselijke

98 the local level of support towards the establishment of an asylum centre on the local level. In relation to the lack of inclusion of local entrepreneurs, Mr. Overtoom states: “local entrepreneurs were not included at all, despite the promises of COA that they [local entrepreneurs] would benefit from their [COA] presence [...] Due to these situations whereby COA did not live up to their promises, their credibility is currently non existing”157 (Overtoom, 2015). Within this explanation, Mr. Overtoom stresses that the credibility of COA has disappeared due to their failed promises. 6.3 Local opinions on the municipality of Cranendonck The establishment and development of asylum centres within municipalities in the Netherlands is based on the cooperation between the various involved parties. Once a request is filed by COA to open an asylum centre it is up the municipality to decide whether or not permission is granted to perform this request. Even though requests can be invigorated by the national government, for example by a visit of the state secretary Mr. Dijkhof, a municipality cannot be forced within their decision (GemeenteCranendonck, 2016). Despite this, multiple residents of Cranendonck feel like the municipality has little to say in the final decision (Bullemans, 2015; Bakker & Bakker, 2015; Smit, 2015; Neijnens, 2015; Overtoom, 2015; Jansen, 2016; Postma, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). Mr. Smit stresses this point by stating: “in this situation [regarding the establishment of asylum centres], the municipality is COAs lap dog, which gives COA the possibility to walk all over them. They [COA] come here [in Cranendonck] and present their idea [of establishing the asylum centre] and state we [the municipality] can cooperate to ensure a proper collaboration, or we can work against them, after which COA talks to state secretary Klaas Dijkhof who enforces the local establishment of the asylum centre anyways. The municipality cannot argue with that”158 (Smit, 2015). Hereby, Mr. Smit frames COA as the malefactor collaborating with the national government, while the municipality is framed as an organization that has no power and is unable to do anything about the local establishment of asylum centres.

In response to the local statements on the lack of influence of the municipality, Mrs. Kloppers, municipal official of Cranendonck explains: “that idea arose after to that situation in which state secretary Dijkhof visited a municipality after COA filed a request to establish an asylum centre there. That situation makes people think the municipality has nothing to say about the establishment of asylum centres on a local level […] In principle, however, the government nor COA are willing to force this decision upon local municipalities, because it does not result into a [positive] collaboration and therefore everybody [the

ondernemers die gaan er alles van merken en worden erbij betrokken. Die mensen krijgen zakgeld, 50 euro per week wat ze zullen uitgeven in het dorp. Maar achteraf bleek daar niets van waar te zijn” 157 “Lokale ondernemers worden negens bij betrokken, ze mogen geen eens offertes maken. Terwijl COA had gezegd dat ze zouden profiteren in de nieuwe situatie […] De geloofwaardigheid van het COA en de gemeente is tot een nulpunt gedaald. Door al die beloftes die niet worden nagekomen” 158 “De gemeente is meer een schoothondje van de COA, de COA komt, het is eigenlijk als een wals het COA dat werkt echt als een wals, die komen, die leggen op tafel van dit willen wij, en jullie kunnen nou toestemming geven en dan doen we het op een leuke weg en dan zijn we allemaal met elkaar eens, geven jullie toestemming niet dan gaan we naar minister Klaas Dijkhof of op een andere manier, maar ze zorgen dat het er alsnog komt, de gemeente kan daar niets tegen in brengen”

99 government, COA, asylum seekers, local municipality and the local residents] loses”159 [free translation] (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). In spite of this, it must be noted that the competences of the municipality are not big and mainly evolve around the zoning plan. Because collaboration between the municipality and COA is a necessity, COA often conforms to the decisions made by the municipality (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016).

Aside from the lack of influence of the municipality, some local residents stress that the financial compensation offered to the municipality for hosing asylum seekers is an important reason for them to accept the local establishment of asylum centres (Bullemans, 2015; Smit, 2015; Overtoom, 2015 Timmermans, 2016; Maas & Maas, 2016). To further elaborate on this, Mr. Overtoom states: “even when all local residents in Cranendonck openly state they are against the establishment of an asylum centre, it will still be enforced by COA on the municipality. The municipality might want to listen to the local residents, however the financial benefits provided to them [the municipality] when an asylum centre is established, appear to be more important than listening to the opinion and desires of the local residents”160 (Overtoom, 2015). By means of this explanation, Mr. Overtoom stresses the municipality is more influenced by financial arguments than by the desires and wishes of its local residents. In response to these suspicions, the municipality explains they are indeed receiving money from the government for hosting asylum seekers within the municipality. The amount of money received from the government depends on the amount of shelter places the municipality is offering. The governmental payments are meant to cover the municipal expenses as a result of the establishment of asylum centre and the asylum seekers. Currently, this money is broadly spent on establishing primary and secondary education facilities for the children of the asylum seekers in Cranendonck, resulting in no financial gain for the municipality. In addition to this, municipal official Kamps stresses that the money provided to municipalities to compensate the costs of establishing asylum centres and hosting asylum seekers are usually not enough to cover all the costs made by municipality (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

Due to the broadly applied characterization frame that describes the municipality as an organization with limited influence on the decision whether or not an asylum centre will be established on the local level, it is likely that COA is framed as the malefactor by these residents. Due to this characterization frame, the residents might be more negative towards all activities involving COA, including their communication. The explanation highlighted in the previous chapter whereby the negative characterization frame on asylum seekers is causing residents to apply negative risk- and information frames to evaluate situations involving asylum seekers as well, does also apply to COA. When local residents apply a negative characterization frame on COA, their activities are likely to be negatively approached as well in a risk and information frame. Since the municipality appears to be framed as an actor with a low influence on the municipal

159 “Het is natuurlijk door die ene situatie waar Dijkhof kwam dat mensen denken dat de gemeente daar zelf niks over te zeggen heeft […] In principe is dat niet de insteek van het Rijk of van het COA om een gemeente dat op te leggen want daar krijg je geen samenwerking voor elkaar dan heb je uiteindelijk alleen maar verliezers” 160 “Al zegt Cranendonck van we willen het niet, het komt er toch, dan dringt de COA het gewoon door en dan heeft de gemeente zoiets van we willen wel luisteren naar de bevolking maar dat weegt minder dan het geld dat ze krijgen als zee en permante azc laten komen. Het weegt gewoon te weinig wat de bewoners willen en vinden, dus ze luisteren er niet naar”

100 asylum situation, their activities and communication are likely to be more positively evaluated by the local residents of Cranendonck. This trend can also be seen on a broader local perspective and is indicated by means of the online questionnaire. By comparing the outcomes on questions evaluating the activities and communication of COA and the municipality of Cranendonck, it appears local residents are more satisfied with the municipality than with COA.

Aside from the competences of the municipality on the local level, the mayor of Cranendonck also is a participant in the VNG161 task force and asylum committee, a committee with councillors and mayors of municipalities with asylum centres. Within this committee, the representatives of participating municipalities discuss the policies of the national government on the asylum procedures and their interpretation on municipal level. Within these meetings the representatives are able to advise the involved state secretary on the national decision made with regard to the asylum policy. When, for example, the national government decided to temporarily establish 72-hour crisis emergency shelters location, the VNG committee gave their advice to dismantle these shelter location as soon as possible. The mayor of Katwijk is chair of the VNG task force and asylum committee and together with a delegation, he is discussing the VNG advice with the state secretary. By means of this task force and the VNG in general, the local implementation of national policies is discussed, possible gaps and flaws are appointed and bottom-up advise is given on existing and future policies. On a regular basis the VNG advise the state secretary to adjust, do or change things in the national asylum procedure. The mayor of Cranendonck stresses the importance of the VNG advices because the municipalities implement national policies, which requires support from the government by means of manpower or available budget (Vermue, 2016). In addition to the communication towards the national level, the VNG also provided an informative video for all Dutch residents in which the asylum procedure is explained step by step (VNG, 2015). In a more unofficial way, the various municipalities in the Netherlands also exchange experiences on the local situation with regard to the establishment and management of asylum centres and the informing of the local residents on the phone (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016).

To improve the local levelled collaboration between the municipality of Cranendonck and COA, occasional meetings are organized in which the location managers of the asylum centres, municipal representatives, the mayor and occasionally the police, come together to discuss various aspects of the asylum centre and its inhabitants. Furthermore, there is a separate safety consultation in which COA, the policy and the security employees participate. These latter consultations concern the situation at the asylum centre and the occasions in which the police, and possibly the ambulance were enable are discussed as well as their cause. This way, the municipality keeps abreast on the kind and amount of incidents that occur at the asylum centres (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). 6.3.1 Communication towards local residents With regards to the communication towards residents on the local situation concerning the asylum centre and its inhabitants, it appears COA and the municipality do not share the same idea on who is responsible for this. Where COA indicated the communication with the local residents is mainly a task of the municipality, the municipal officials explain the responsibility of this task lies with COA as well as themselves. Therefore, the municipality has urged COA to improve their communication with the

161 Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeente 101 residents. By strengthening these communication flows, in addition to their own communication with the residents, the municipality wants to ensure the local support and prevent any sort of resistance (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Hereby, the municipality links the level of local support to the strength of the communication and information flows towards the local residents. This link is agreed upon by Mr. and Mrs. Bakker, who stress the importance of clear, open and honest communication to ensure local support concerning the asylum centre and its inhabitants. According to them, the municipality is currently informing the local residents in good way by means of different communicative activities (Bakker & Bakker, 2015). Furthermore, the previous chapter also highlighted how communication and information contributes to the understanding of the behaviour of asylum seekers, which in turn positively influences the lack of experienced nuisance by local residents with regard to the behaviour of asylum seekers. Additionally, this can be explained by the influence communication and information have, on the characterization frame that is applied by local residents.

The municipality of Cranendonck applies different techniques and sources to communicate to the local residents about the asylum centre and its inhabitants, as is highlighted by Mr. and Mrs. Bakker. First, all information on the asylum centres and its inhabitants has been published on the municipal webpage from May 2014 onwards. This information includes municipal decisions, local developments and establishments, frequently asked questions and an overview of the reports of nuisance in Cranendonck and at the asylum centres in the municipality (GemeenteCranendonck, 2014a). Also, the informative sessions organized by the municipality in May 2014 and December 2015 to communicate to local residents and inform them on the local situation.

Another communication technique of the municipality concerns the organization of periodic consultations, which is done since the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck. Within these consultations, COA, representatives of the local police and residents living close to the asylum centre discuss the local situation with regard to the asylum centre and the asylum seekers. The mayor is also participating in these consultations as often as possible. In the starting phase, the consultations were organized every 2 weeks, now they have been decreased to approximately every 3 to 4 months. The consultations are organised upon the request of the local residents. They provide a platform enabling communication and the exchange of information between the various actors involved on a small scale. The consultations are mainly used by the residents to comment on the local situation, share their critiques and positive notes on the asylum centre and their inhabitants, possible consequences and the overall situation (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016; Vermue, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016). These consultations however, only include local residents living close to the asylum centre, causing other residents to feel left out (Overtoom, 2015; Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016). In response to this, Mr. Smit explains: “this [inclusion of a limited number of resident] has been an issue from the moment the asylum centre was established. Residents living close to the asylum centre are included while the rest [of Budel and Cranendonck] is left out. However, since only a few houses are close to the asylum centre [Budel-Cranendonck], very few residents are involved in these consultations with the police and municipality. And aside from those consultations, there is no communication with other local residents. They [the municipality] do not care about the rest of Budel”162

162 “Dat is eigenlijk vanaf het begin af aan al een probleem geweest, directe omwonende, ja dat zijn er maar een paar want je hebt gezien hoe afgelegen dat [het asielzoekerscentrum] is. Er zijn maar een paar huizen. Die worden

102

(Smit, 2015). In his explanation, Mr. Smit might not consider the informative sessions in 2014 and 2015, and the information provided on the municipal website as communication techniques. Another explanation for the statement of Mr. Smit might be he is unaware of the organized meetings and the website.

In addition to the municipal communication, the residents of Cranendonck are also informed by national and the local media. The media as a communicative tool can be used to harm or strengthen the reputation of asylum seekers in general, as will be explained in chapter 7. A broadcaster such as PowNed, who published various news items on the asylum seekers in Cranendonck, might have harmed the general reputation according to some local residents. Mr. Bakker explains how it is important to debunk some of the untrue statements made on the sensational media: “media can be dangerous because it influences the way in which people see asylum seekers. To prevent this from happening, Rutte, as well as the local municipalities have to clearly communicate to the local residents to explain all aspects of the asylum centre, and the asylum procedure”163 (Bakker & Bakker, 2016). This explanation stresses the importance of informing and communicating to local residents about the asylum centre and the asylum procedure. This way, residents become aware of the facts, which makes them less influential by frames presented within the media. This argument is further stretched by Mr. Timmermans by stating a lack of communication results in local unrest and a decrease in local support: “currently a lot of information is lacking in the communication towards local residents. This should be improved because the lack of communication and information [about the situation at the asylum centres] towards the local residents results in local unrest and speculation [by local residents of Cranendonck]. This again negatively influences the local level of support [for the asylum centre and its inhabitants]”164 (Timmermans, 2016). By means of this statement, Mr. Timmermans highlights that improving the quality and the quantity of the communication towards local residents might increase the local support towards asylum seekers. Aside from Mr. Timmermans more residents indicated that a lack of communication and transparency of official sources such as the municipality is contributing to the suspicious feelings on the internal situation at the asylum centres and the trustworthiness of these sources (de Jong, 2016; Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016). Following this reasoning, a lack of communication and transparency might contribute to a characterization frame that describes official sources, such as the municipality and COA, as untrustworthy. Furthermore, a lack of communication and transparency might negatively contribute to the risk- and information frames applied by local residents to evaluate the internal circumstances at the asylum centre and the likelihood this might escalate both COA and the municipality. This is also shown in a broader local perspective by means of the online questionnaire, which indicates a positive correlation between respondents satisfied with the communication of the municipality and respondents indicating Cranendonck should host asylum

betrokken in die bewoners overleggen met de politie en de gemeente maar dat is ook echt alles. Verder is er geen communicatie en aan de rest van Budel hebben ze geen boodschap, helemaal niks” 163 “De media is heel gevaarlijk op dat gebied want het beïnvloed de manier waarop mensen naar asielzoekers kijken. Daarom moet Rutte en de lokale gemeente heel goed communiceren en uitleggen hoe alles zit met de asielzoekerscentra en de asielprocedure” 164 “In de communicatie naar de mensen ontbreekt er een hoop informatieve. Dit moet echt verbeteren want daardoor er zo weinig communicatie is ontstaat alleen maar onrust en beginnen mensen te speculeren. Het draagvlak van de bevolking valt weg op die manier” 103 seekers. A correlation is found between respondents satisfied with the communication of COA and respondents indicating Cranendonck should host asylum seekers.

Mr. Küsters, municipal official in Cranendonck, also acknowledges the influence of the national and local media and agrees there are many national and local speculations about the asylum centres, its inhabitants and the local situation regarding those two topics. In Küsters’ opinion it is impossible to respond to all comments. Therefore, the municipality has to find a balance between responding to all the negative feedback while in the meantime showing local residents the positive aspects and consequences asylum seekers have on the local community (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). To do so, the municipality occasionally publishes articles on the asylum centre, its inhabitants and local developments regarding these topics. These articles are published within the local newspaper de Grenskoerier (Bullemans, 2015; Timmermans, 2016; Jansen, 2016; Kuipers, 2016). 6.3.2 Local participation Aside from communication with the local residents on the situation at the asylum centre and recent develop-and establishments, communication concerning the municipal decision making process appears to be important as well. Varying opinions on local inclusion within this municipal decision making process currently cause local residents to be dissatisfied with the decisions and activities of the municipality of Cranendonck with regard to the asylum seekers. Many residents have indicated the municipality makes decisions without giving the inhabitants the possibility to participate in the decision making process and without listening to their arguments (de Jong, 2016; Smit, 2015; Kuipers, 2016; Postma, 2016). “It duly stings when they [the municipality] say there is participation, but there is not. We have no say”165 explains Mr. Kuipers (Kuipers, 2016). Mr. Kuipers declares that there is no participation with local residents in the municipal decision making process, even though the municipality claims there is. Mr. Groen has a similar opinion and states: “they claim to be listening [to the local residents], but big parts of the councillors and municipal employees are categorically in favour [of the asylum seekers], which causes them to brush off all the disadvantages and counter arguments”166 (Groen, 2016). Mr. Groen frames the councillors and municipal employees as supporters of the asylum centres and their inhabitants, who do not listen to opponents and counter arguments. The previous chapter visualized that the interviewed residents that declared to be left out of the municipal decision making process, referred to above, are all opponents of the asylum centre and its inhabitants. This might support the statement of Mr. Groen, that the municipally is not listening to opponents and counter arguments. Also on a broader local perspective, a correlation indicates a link between respondents stating the municipality is listening to the opinions and arguments of the local residents, and respondents indicating to be in favour of hosting asylum seekers in the municipality. Altogether, 51.7 percent of the respondents in the online questionnaire have indicated the municipality is not listening to the opinions and comments of the residents in Cranendonck. On the other hand, 24.7 percent of the respondents have indicated that the municipality is listening to the opinions of the local residents. The statement made by Mr. Groen about the councillors and municipality listening to proponents and arguments in favour of the asylum seekers can also be explained by the municipal

165 “Dat steekt toch al behoorlijk dat ze dan zeggen er is inspraak maar dat is er niet. Inspraak dat hebben we niet” 166 “Ze zeggen te luisteren maar een grote groep binnen wethouders en gemeente zijn pertinent voorstander dus je botst tegen grote muur van voor, daardoor worden alle tegen geluiden afgewimpeld” 104 decisions made with regard to this topic, which led to the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck and its current capacity of 1,700 asylum seekers.

In response to the comments about the councillors and the municipal employers not listening to the opinions and arguments of local residents. Mr. Küsters, municipal official, explains how the informative sessions in December 2015 were meant to give the residents of Cranendonck the possibility to share their opinion and discuss their possible worries with all actors involved. By organizing these meetings, the municipality aimed to stress they listen to the local opinions and thoughts on the asylum situation in Cranendonck. To further stress this, the visitors of the meeting had the possibility to (anonymously) write their stories, thoughts and worries on paper. Those notes were shared with the town council after the meetings and made publicly available on the internet. The residents that used this possibility received an email from the town council in which the delivery was confirmed and that the notification were discussed within the town council. This way the municipality aimed to ensure the transparency of the decision making process (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016, Vermue 2015167; Vermue, 2016).

Despite these measures, some residents remained convinced they were offered false participation and therefor they did not visit the informative sessions at all. “I have the feeling that residents have zero say in it. The municipality takes all the decisions whether we residents agree or not. Even if I would throw a brick through a window of the town hall or something similar, those people [asylum seekers] will be sheltered here [in Cranendonck]. They [the municipality] do whatever they want, therefore I see no reason to go [to the informative sessions]”168 (de Jong, 2016). In this explanation, Mr. de Jong applies a characterization frame to describe the municipality of Cranendonck as an organization that is not taking the local opinions and arguments into account despite the informative meetings they organized. It might be, that Mr. de Jong has the opinion these meetings are organized to make local residents believe the municipality is listening to the local residents, when in reality they are not. Mr. Smit expresses a similar argument by stating: “they [municipal officials] are present at the informative sessions and at that moment they indeed listen to us. However, when the meetings finish and they get into their cars to drive home they just start laughing about everything we said and all the worries and arguments we expressed. They do not care about them [the expressed worries and complains]. Face to face they tell us they will look in to it and get to work [with the feedback of the local residents], however they do not explain what they plan to do and they never get back to us about it. So why should we believe they do anything at all.”169 (Smit, 2015). This statement indicates the characterization frame applied by Mr. Smit to describe the municipality. It appears, he frames the municipality as a dishonest organization that does not care

167 Interview mayor Marga Vermue, Budel-Dorplein, January 18 2015 168 “Ik heb het gevoel dat je als inwoner en nul, nul invloed op hebt. Het is gewoon, we maken de beslissing ook al ben je het er niet mee eens. Ook al gooi ik een baksteen door het raam van het gemeentehuis, die mensen komen er. Ze doen toch wat ze willen dus ik kom niet [naar de informatieavonden]” 169 “Bij die info markten, kijk ze staan daar, ze luisteren je aan en als ze straks in de auto stappen met zijn allen of in het busje naar huis hebben ze de grootste lol van ja, ze trekken zich daar echt helemaal totaal niks van aan, van niets wat we zeiden. Ze zeggen tegen ons van nou we gaat ermee aan de slag, maar ze zeggen niet hoe dat ze daarmee aan de slag gaan, je merkt ook niet terug dat ze ermee aan de slag gaan. Waarom zouden wij dat dan moeten geloven dat ze wat doen”

105 about its residents, and makes them believe they are taken seriously, when in reality they are not. This characterization frame might stimulate a risk- and information frame whereby all the events organized by the municipality to give local residents the possibility to share their opinions and arguments, are likely to mislead the local residents in thinking they are listened to, taken seriously and included in the municipal decision making process. The municipal officials deplore this position (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016) and during one of the informative meetings in December 2015, mayor Vermue responded to these convictions by emphasizing that it is unfortunate that some of Cranendonck residents assume a decision has already been made, and by highlighting that the informative meetings are meant to include the residents in the decision-making process (Vermue, 2015).

The residents’ dissatisfaction with their influence in the decision making process can, according to Mrs. Kloppers, be explained by a false expectation of the residents on their opportunities for public participation. She stresses that, according to the Dutch system, the local residents have indirect influence on the decision made by the town council because the residents have democratically elected their representatives in that council (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). To further explain the inhabitants’ influence on the municipal decision-making process, Mrs. Kloppers tries to highlight the difference between how the residents explain public participation and the way in which the public participation is adjusted to the national and municipal system. According to her, the false impression of the residents of Cranendonck is caused by differing definitions of the word ‘participation’. She stresses: “The decision is made by the municipal government, the board and finally the council. So if local residents think they have a final say in whether or not something will happen [on the municipal level], they think wrong. That is not the way our national and local system works […] So if that is their idea on how they participate and influence the final decision made, it is true they are not listened to”170 (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). With regard to local participation in municipal or national decision making processes, local residents do have a say in the developments because they have selected their representatives in the town council or in the national government. Those representatives in turn, make the final decision. According to this system however, the influence of local residents on the final decisions made is indirect, which might cause local residents to feel they have no influence at all (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

This misunderstanding and the different definitions of ‘participation’ might be addressed as a communicative issue between the local residents and the municipal- or national government. If people become more aware of their position within the democratic system by raising more awareness on the overall decision making process, these kind of misunderstandings and different definitions might decrease. This might lead to an increased emphasis on the local political parties and their political statement. In chapter 4 the various statements and positions of the local political parties with regard to the future development of Budel-Cranendonck have been discussed. If local residents should be aware of the statements and political positions of these parties since the residents are represented by them in the town council. Increasing the connection, communication and explanation between the local residents and the political parties might increase the local feelings of inclusion in the decision making process and

170 “Het besluit ligt bij het bestuur, bij het college, die ligt bij de raad. Dus op het moment dat mensen bedoelen, wij hebben te zeggen wat er wel of niet gebeurd, ja zo zit het niet in elkaar […] Dus als dat hun idee is, dan klopt het dat daar niks mee gedaan wordt”

106 therefor decrease the amount of complaints directed towards the municipality. As a result, the characterization frames applied to describe the municipality as a dishonest organization that makes it residents believe they are involved in the decision making process when in reality they are not, might change as well. This indicates that knowledge on specific system, situation or process might influence the characterization frames applied to describe actors involved in those systems, situations and processes. As explained above, the applied characterization frames applied to describe specific actors, might influence the risk- and information frames used to evaluate situations in which those actors are involved. Following this reason, a change in the characterization frames applied to describe the municipality of Cranendonck, might lead to a shift in risk- and information frame eventuating the organized events and activities of the municipality as well. 6.4 Conclusion In this chapter I analysed and discussed the narratives of local residents on the local asylum situation, COA and the municipality of Cranendonck. Studying the historical situation of Cranendonck indicates that the frames applied by local residents to describe foreign residents can, aside from the external factors mentioned in the previous chapter, also be influenced by the pros and cons experienced as a result of the presence of those foreigners. In accordance with this chapter I like to stress that when the experienced benefits outweigh the disadvantages, characterization frames are positively influenced and when the experienced disadvantages outweigh the benefits, characterization frames are negatively influenced.

Furthermore, I critically evaluated the frames applied by the local residents of Cranendonck when discussing the characteristics of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck and the organizational actors involved with the establishment and development of both asylum centres in Cranendonck. By means of this evaluation, I indicated how the characterization frames applied by local residents to describe actors such as COA and the municipality are connected to their actives and communication towards the local residents. It can be concluded that the activities and communication flows of COA and the municipality towards local residents of Cranendonck also influence the levels of trust local residents have in these organizational actors. Furthermore, I also indicated how characterization frames that negatively describe the organizational actors and the local mistrust of those actors also result in a decreased openness of local residents to listen to the communication flows and arguments shared by those organizational actors.

In addition to this, I showed how the characterization frames applied by local residents can influence their risk- and information frames used to evaluate situations in which the characterized actors are involved. These frames can be influences by external factors such as (personal) experiences and knowledge as well. Also, I stressed how the local outcome of policy translations can also influence the risk and information frames of local residents. In doing so, I highlighted how the desire of Mr. Dijkhoff to decrease the amount of incidents at asylum seekers led to high alertness at asylum centres with regard to incidents. This resulted in the, sometimes, preventive involvement of police, ambulances and trauma helicopters. The appeal to these emergency services in combination with the lack of communication concerning their inclusion causes confusion and suspicion by local residents concerning the situation and incidents at asylum centres and the trustworthiness of the information actors.

Finally, I like to stress how local residents are on average more negative about the communication and activities of COA in comparison to the communication and activities of the municipality of Cranendonck. 107

This can be explained by the believe of local residents that the municipality has limited influence in the establishment and developments of asylum centres on the local level, which influences the characterization frames they apply to describe the municipality. COA on the other hand, is mainly framed as the malefactor. These external factors influencing the frames applied by local residents, might be supported or shaped by communication and information flows provided by COA, the municipality and media sources. The influence of media sources will further be discussed in the following chapter. In this chapter however, I visualized how transparency and communication and information flows provided by COA and the municipality can positively influence the local level of support and the characterization frames applied by local residents to describe COA and the municipality. More information, communication and transparency result in a more understanding characterization frame applied by local actors to describe COA and the municipality.

108

7 The role of media in framing In this chapter, I will perform a media analysis to increase the understanding of the establishment of frames applied by local residents to evaluate the local asylum situation and to characterize actors involved in the establishment, development and management of this situation. Local newspapers such as Eindhovens Dagblad and Omroep Brabant published articles on the recent development of the asylum seekers and the asylum centres in Cranendonck (EindhovensDagblad, 2014e; Quekel, 2015b), and also on social media sources Facebook and Twitter, these topics are discussed (Facebook, 2014b; Twitter). Therefore, I will focus on the influence and activity of both traditional- and social media publications regarding local asylum seekers and the asylum centres on the frames applied by local residents in Cranendonck as presented in the previous chapters.

I will analyse the international, national and local media that published articles on the asylum flow, the asylum seekers themselves and their accommodation on local level. To visualize the influence media can have on residents’ opinions, these publications are connected with individual frames of residents in Cranendonck. Also, the applied strategic and/or unconscious frames applied in traditional as well as social media will be visualized.

Furthermore, to analyse the local practices and developments in Cranendonck with regards to the establishment of the asylum centres and the sheltering of asylum seekers, I will also discuss those practices and their (online) promotion this chapter.

To perform these analyses, I will first give a short introduction on the influence media publications might have on it audience. Thereafter, the official news publications will be analysed, including the influence these news items had on local residents of Cranendonck. Third, the publications by local residents and activity of social media sources Facebook and Twitter will be displayed. The local (and national) situation concerning asylum seekers led to the establishment of some local actions regarding the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck. Therefore, attention will finally be given to three local actions on the asylum centres and their residents. 7.1 Short introduction on media influence Asylum seekers and asylum centres are common topics in the international, national and local media (NOS, 2015d, 2015e; OmroepBrabant, 2015). The media and the frames they apply influence the opinions and arguments of their audience (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016)171. A local media photographer of Cranendonck explains how the media can create the message they would like to share by cutting and pasting different pieces of information (Smit, 2015)172. Specific situations in which incidents occur regarding asylum centres of with asylum seekers are highlighted while little attention is paid to the municipalities and centres where the asylum seekers cause little issues (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016;

171 Interview municipal employees Mr. Küsters, Mrs. Kloppers, Mr. Kamps, Budel, February 18th 2016 172 Interview inhabitant Mr. van Smit, Budel, December 17 2015

109 van Vliet, 2016173; Schippers, 2016174; Zeebregts, 2016175). “You will never read anything in the media derived from [the municipality of] Cranendonck, we will never say we do a good job. Even though, we think we do a good job we will never, consciously, mention this. Because there is no point in doing that. The situation can escalate here as well, and something bad can happen here too, that is possible”176 [free translation] (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016). Mr. van Vliet, local resident of Cranendonck and active member of the local political party PvdA, explains how the media is creating an incorrect image of the actual situation and is therefore often wrongly influencing its audience (van Vliet, 2016). COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts explains: “Not a single day passes without it [the topic of asylum seekers and asylum centres] occurring in the media […] not thinking about it [the current situation concerning asylum seekers] is almost impossible […] they [the media] keep the story alive”177 (Zeebregts, 2016).

Various residents of Cranendonck explained how the media images have changed their perspective on the current situation concerning asylum seekers (van Dijk, 2016178; Neijnens, 2016179). The picture of the drowned Syrian boy that was spread on the news on September 2nd 2015, for example, gave Mrs. Neijnens the motivation to start her own fundraiser called “Pass the Warmth”. “Those pictures, confronting as they are, were necessary for people to realise how tough this is. This could be any child. My kid is sleeping in his bed the same way [as the drowned boy lied on the beach]. This [drowned] boy however, will never wake again”180 (Neijnens, 2016). Additionally, an employee of VluchtelingenWerk Nederland indicated how the amount of their volunteers doubled from in September and October of 2015 (Laagerhuis, 2016)181. The news items on the terroristic attacks in Paris and the mass assaults in Köln are in the media associated with the asylum seekers and might therefore also influence its audiences’ opinion on asylum seekers and their residence (van Dijk, 2016; Zeebregts, 2016). Mayor Marga Vermue explains how the focus on the asylum policy is changing due to the media “when the picture of the drowned boy spread, everyone pitied, more people [local residents] volunteered and everyone thought ‘we have to do something, this cannot happen, we cannot let this happen’. But then, after the Paris attacks [7-1-2015 (NOS, 2015a) and 13-11-2015 (NOS, 2016b)] this feeling changed, and the same happened after Köln [31- 12-2016 (NOS, 2016a)]. These situations [in Paris and Köln] changed the vision of local residents [towards asylum seekers] since it indicated that those entering our country [the asylum seekers] are not all darlings.

173 Interview inhabitant Mr. van Vliet, Budel, January 18 2016 174 Interview COA employee Mr. Schippers, Budel, January 21 2016 175 Interview COA location manager Mr. Zeebregts, Budel, February 2nd 2016 176 “Vanuit Cranendonck zal je daar nooit in de media iets over lezen, wij zeggen nooit van onszelf van het gaat heel goed. Dat vinden we wel, maar we gaan het nooit roepen, bewust. Want dat heeft geen zin. Ook hier kan het een keer fout gaan en ook hier kan een keer iets gebeuren, dat kan” 177 “Er gaat geen dag voorbij en het is in de media […] Er niet aan denken is bijna onmogelijk […] het verhaal wordt levend gehouden” 178 Interview inhabitant Mrs. van Dijk, Budel, January 14 2016 179 Interview founder of “Pass the Warmt” Mrs. Neijnens, Weert, December 14 2015 180 “Die foto’s, hoe hard ook, zijn wel nodig geweest om bij veel mensen even te laten beseffen hoe hard het is. Dit kan elk kind zijn, zo ligt mijn kind op zijn buik in zijn bedje te slapen en dat jochie wordt nooit meer wakker” 181 Interview employee VluchtelingenWerk Nederland Mrs. Laagerhuis, Arnhem, 4th of April 2016

110

People start thinking, what does that mean for us, and these thoughts increase fear”182 [free translation] (Vermue, 2016)183. By means of this explanation, mayor Vermue indicates how international events and the media attention influence the characterization frames local residents have towards asylum seekers. Furthermore, this explanation shows how the by media influenced characterization frames influence the risk and information frames of local residents as well since fear is increasing.

Figure 10 below provides a chronological timeline of the developments in the municipality of Cranendonck with regard to the asylum seekers, from the opening of Budel-Cranendonck in May 2014 until March 2016. The events highlighted in this figure resulted in publication on both traditional and/or social media. Those events will be further addressed in the following chapter. This timeline is partly similar to the timeline in chapter 4 on de developments regarding Budel-Cranendonck (Figure 9), however there are some differences. Events that were mentioned in Figure 9 but did not receive traditional/social media attention were excluded in the timeline below. On the other hand, events that were not included in Figure 10 but did receive traditional/social media attention are included in this timeline.

May 8th 2014 May 13th/14th 2014 nd municipality of Cranendonck Official announcement and May 22 2014 unofficially gave COA opening of Budel- Informative meeting on permission for Budel- Cranendonck for 1,200 Budel-Cranendonck Cranendonck asylum seekers

November 24th 2014 November 11th 2014 - September 23rd 2014 th Media publicity on previous November 12 2014 300 extra asylum seekers fight Budel-Dorplein Fight between asylum sheltered in Budel- (November 11 -12) seekers at Budel-Dorplein Cranendonck

December 6th 2014 October 7th 2015 November 30th 2015 Another fight between 200 emergency shelter COA files a request to asylum seekers at Budel- locations equipped at Budel- establish a permanet asylum Cranendonck Cranendonck centre at Budel-Cranendonck

Figure 10: Local events resulting in traditional and/or social media attention

182“Kijk toen dat jongetje aanspoelde op die foto had iedereen zo van ahh, en toen kwamen er heel veel vrijwilligers extra en had iedereen zoiets van hier moeten we wat aan gaan doen want dat kan toch niet, dat kunnen we niet laten gebeuren. Maar toen na Parijs, die aanslagen, dan zie je echt een kentering en dan na Keulen natuurlijk ook weer. Dat heeft wel de blik veranderd van nou dat zijn niet allemaal lieverdjes die hier het land binnen komen. Mensen gaan denken van wat betekend dat dan voor ons en daar is de angst wel mee vergroot” 183 Interview mayor Marga Vermue, Budel, February 18 2016 111

7.2 Reactions on local, traditional, media The news on the establishment of a second asylum centre in the municipality of Cranendonck in May 2014, caused a variety of responses by the local residents of Cranendonck. Various news stations published on the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck and the possible positive and negative consequences their presence might have. Figure 11 below provides an overview of the amount of news items that have been published online in Cranendonck in the period between the 1st of May 2014 and the 1st of March 2016. The Y axis indicates the amount of published articles and the X axis shows the time frame. Within this figure four peaks can be identified at moments where high amounts of news items were published online.

Figure 11: Local news items on the asylum seekers in Cranendonck from May 1st 2014 until March 1st 2016

The first peak on the 14th of May 2014 shows a total of 72 published news items. On this day the first asylum seekers arrived at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne in Budel (GemeenteCranendonck, 2014b). In an article published that day, Omroep Brabant writes how the mayor and councillors granted official permission to the opening of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck on the 13th of May 2014 (Juda, 2014). Due to the short term in which this decision was made and permission was granted, local residents of Cranendonck were officially informed on the day the first asylum seekers arrived. This first arrival was publicly shared by various local and provincial newspapers. Omroep Brabant for example, published an article on this date titles “The first 17 asylum seekers will arrive on Wednesday evening at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne in Budel”184 (Verschuren, 2014). Regional newspaper Eindhovens Dagblad published an item called: “Action against the arrival of asylum seekers Budel”185. This article also touches upon the response of some local residents to the news that asylum seekers were immediately housed at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne without them being previously informed (EindhovensDagblad, 2014b). When comparing the headlines of the article published in Eindhovens Dagblad en the article by Omroep Brabant, it can be concluded that various frames are applied while presenting the news. Where Omroep Brabant is sharing the news in a neutral way, Eindhovens Dagblad applies a frame that highlights the negative responses of the local residents regarding the news. This is further elaborated upon in the article itself that mainly focusses on the negative response and the appeal to a nonviolent revolt.

A second publication peak visible in Figure 11 is dating back to December 6th 2014. This peak can be explained by an incident that happened at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Two asylum seekers were involved in a fight. This incident led to the publication of various news items. In the fight a 17 year old boy was abused and permanently handicapped (EindhovensDagblad, 2014a, 2015b). In response to this, and other fights that happened previously at asylum centres in the Netherlands, local broadcasters in Cranendonck

184 “Eerste 17 asielzoekers arriveren woensdagavond in Nassau-Dietzkazerne Budel” 185 “Actie tegen komst asielzoekers Budel” 112 started speculating on the cause of these situations. Omroep Brabant, for example, published an article on the 6th of December in which the circumstances at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck were indicated as a possible cause for conflicts: “asylum seekers in asylum centre Budel share their bedroom with five others: ‘this is asking for trouble” 186 (Elzendoorn, 2014a). Within the approach of this article, as well as in the applied headline, the fighting asylum seekers are not negatively framed. Instead, an explanation is searched for the behaviour of asylum seekers at various centres in the Netherlands. By explaining the cause of their behaviour, Omroep Brabant could aim to increase the understanding of their readers towards the situation and the behaviour of the asylum seekers. By doing so, Omroep Brabant might also aim to indirectly influence the characterization frame applied by its readers towards asylum seekers. The headline used by Eindhovens Dagblad is providing information on the fight by applying a neutral framework “17-years old resident of asylum centre Nassau-Dietzkazerne in Budel is seriously injured after a brawl”187 (EindhovensDagblad, 2014a).

From the 6th of December 2014 onwards the amount of publication regarding the asylum centre and the asylum seekers in Cranendonck decreased. However, a smaller peak of 23 publications can be identified on the 8th of October 2015. One day earlier, on the 7th of October 2015, the municipality of Cranendonck honoured a request, sent to them by the Dutch ministry of internal affairs and COA, in which they were asked to temporarily host an additional amount of 200 asylum seekers at the asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck (GemeenteCranendonck, 2015b). One of the articles published in response to this event used the headline: “200 extra asylum seekers come to Budel: local residents not informed”188 (Quekel, 2015a). The second part of this headline highlights how this decision was made without previously informing the local residents of Cranendonck. Likewise, the initial decision to host asylum seekers at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne was also made without informing the local residents (Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016).

The last peak displayed in Figure 11 is dated at the 30th of November 2015 and concerns the publishing of 21 news items. These items were all published after 8 PM, when COA officially requested to purchase the former army base in Budel to host asylum seekers for a longer period of time (Quekel, 2015b). The news of this request was spread by both local and national newspapers. NOS, for example, shared an article of Omroep Brabant stating “COA wants to purchase the army barracks in Budel [the Nassau-Dietzkazerne] for protracted shelter”189(NOS, 2015b; OmroepBrabant, 2015) and the provincial newspaper De Gelderlander published “COA wants permanent asylum shelter [in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne] in Budel, Brabant”190(Gelderlander, 2015). Both articles apply neutral frameworks within their headlines and they both explained how the inhabitants of Cranendonck were ‘the first to know’ about this decision (Gelderlander, 2015; NOS, 2015b; OmroepBrabant, 2015). Since the previous decisions concerning the asylum centre were made without informing the local residents, as indicated above (Quekel,

186 “Asielzoekers in AZC Budel delen met vijven een slaapkamer: ‘Dat gaat niet samen’” 187 “17-jarige bewoner azc Nassau-Dietzkazerne Budel zwaargewond na vechtpartij” 188 “200 extra asielzoekers naar Budel: omwonenden niet geïnformeerd” 189 “COA wil legerkazerne Budel kopen voor langdurige opvang” 190 “COA wil vaste asielopvang in het Brabantse Budel” 113

2015a)(Küsters, Kloppers & Kamps, 2016), this final remark might be added to show the inhabitants are included in the final decision of this request.

The first, third and last peak discussed above and indicated in Figure 11 concern articles informing local residents on new developments involving the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. The information provided in these articles were mainly framed in an informative and neutral way. The second traditional news item peak described a negative event occurring at Budel-Cranendonck. Even though this event provides in an opportunity establish a negative characterization frame of asylum seekers, for example by framing them as violent, this frame was not presented in the local traditional media. Instead, the article of Omroep Brabant explained the violent behaviour at the asylum centre by describing the internal circumstances at the asylum centre itself. Furthermore, asylum seekers were quoted explaining the event while expressing their disbelieve and sadness regarding the violent situation. By presenting the perspective of the asylum seekers, Omroep Brabant is giving the readers a possibility to understand the situation at the asylum centres and the behaviour of its residents. This perspective might indirectly influence the characterization frames applied by the readers to evaluate the asylum seekers located in Budel-Cranendonck.

The publication peaks in traditional media sources concern the arrival of asylum seekers, increasing numbers of asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck and the outburst of an incident at the asylum centre. These topics appear to be items the traditional media feel obligated to publish. Additionally, it is the duty of (traditional) media sources to publish items that provide their public with transparent information on the local situation at the asylum centres. When studying the news peak in Figure 11, it appears however, there is a lack of items on positive behaviour and activities of asylum seekers. This is understandable since likewise articles are less sensational than the articles currently published. This selective publication of events concerning asylum seekers, might contribute to an image might in which asylum seekers are mainly negatively frames. 7.3 Reactions on social media COAs request to open a second asylum centre in the municipality of Cranendonck in May 2014, resulted in multiple discussions and expressions of opinions on social media. A variety of local platforms have been established, giving people the possibility to construct and share their own opinions on the current asylum situation. In the period between the 1st of May 2014 and the 1st or March 2016, 3,805 Tweets were posted regarding the situation with asylum seekers and the asylum centres in the municipality of Cranendonck (Twitter). On Facebook, both opponents and proponents of the hosting of asylum seekers in the municipality of Cranendonck created Facebook pages in line with their opinions. On May 8th 2014 opponents launched a Facebook group called “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers”191 and two days later on May 10th 2014 its Facebook counterpart “we, Cranendonckers, welcome you”192 was created by supporters of asylum seekers. At the start of this research in December 2015 the opponents Facebook page was liked 1,484 times and the supporters page 486 times. In March 2016 the amount of likes of the

191 “Cranendonck heeft genoeg asielzoekers” 192 “Wij Cranendonckers heten jullie welkom” 114 opponents page had decreased by 1.5% to 1,461 likes, while the likes of the supporters page remained the same (Facebook, 2014a, 2014b). 7.3.1 Opponents’ Facebook group “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers” When on May 8th 2014 the municipality of Cranendonck unofficially gave COA permission to use the then empty Nassau-Dietzkazerne as a temporary asylum centre (Kamp, 2014)(Zeebregts, 2016), the local residents against this possible establishment immediately created a Facebook page named “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers”. On this day, the Facebook group posted “we are against 900 asylum seekers, how about you? Like this page and invite all your friends”193. Within one day the Facebook page received over 200 likes. This amount increased to 750 (an increase of 275%) on May 10th and to 1,000 likes (a 33.3% increase) on May 11th. When the municipality of Cranendonck granted permission to COA’s request to host 1,200 asylum seekers in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, the number of likes increased again to a total amount of 1,200 (20%) (Facebook, 2014a).

In response to the one of the first posts on May 9th 2014, in which the possible arrival of 900 asylum seekers in Cranendonck was shared, a local resident responded: “Africa became an uninhabited island and what used to be a safe country [the Netherlands] is currently turning into a playroom for criminals”194 (Facebook, 2014a). This quote contains a moment in which the characteristics of asylum seekers are framed. The person creating this comment frames asylum seekers as criminals derived from Africa. Since this quote concerns an independent comment that appears not to be intended to persuade anyone or promote a party, organization or initiative this frame possibly developed unconsciously. Another resident commenting on recent development on May 9th 2014 applies a different characterization frame to describe the asylum seekers: “These people [asylum seekers] are happy to be in a safe country in which they do not have to worry about their lives being threatened or their children being raped. Of course there will be a few bad apples, but the same applies to our citizens”195(Facebook, 2014a). The characterization frame applied in this quote is describing asylum seekers as people that have to flee their country due to the dangerous circumstances for themselves and their families. Furthermore, this quote highlights that both good and bad people can find themselves in a such a situation, meaning that both good and bad people can become asylum seekers. Finally, a link is made in this quotation between asylum seekers and Dutch citizen by indicating both groups of people contain both good and bad people.

Despite this second quotation indicates a more positive description of asylum seekers, most comments and discussions on the opponents Facebook page involve opponents agreeing or emphasizing each other’s opinion. A limited amount of comments expressing deviating opinions have been shared. The few deviating comments that are posted on the opponents Facebook page result in offensive responses. One proponent made a comment on the discussion concerning the economic situation of asylum seekers: “has it ever come to mind not all asylum seekers are poor? That some of them had well-paying jobs and

193 “Wij zijn tegen 900 nieuwe asielzoekers. Jij ook? Like de pagina en nodig al je vrienden uit!” 194 “Dat Afrika is bijna een onbewoond eiland aan het worden, en wat hier een veilig landje was wordt nu de speelkamer van criminelen” 195 “Die mensen zijn blij dat ze naar een veilig land kunnen, zonder dat ze elke dag met het leven bedreigd worden en hun kinderen verkracht worden. Tuurlijk heb je er altijd een paar rotte appels bij, maar is dat anders dan bij ons?”

115 received education in their country of origin? They flee due to the situation in their country of origin, not to rob us”196(Facebook, 2014a). Despite this remark received 100 likes, comment A, B and C (Facebook, 2014a), displayed below, give an indication of the responses of other visitors of the opponents Facebook page reacting to the upper comment:

Comment A: “This is a girl dreaming in terms of the Daily Fable. Sent them back to Italy and back to Africa”197. Comment B: “So cute and silly… Girl, welcome in a world called “REALITY” … Take your time to look around and make some experiences before you find yourself making stupid comments again”198 Comment C: “hahahahahah, the naivety is all over her response. I laughed loudly because of it”199

Comment A, B and C show personal responses instead of substantial responses on the content of the original post. By means of these comments, Milou is characterized as a little, silly and naïve girl with an untrue and fairytale like perspective of the world. By sharing these frames, it might be aimed strip her comment from credibility and therefore the frames might be strategically applied by commenter A, B and C. Other commenters did however respond on the content of the original post. For example: “An asylum seeker with money!! Is a criminal or a criminal. However, it is also possible it [the asylum seeker] is a criminal”200 (Facebook, 2014a). Another response on the content on the original post stated: “If they are not poor, why do we have to pay everything for them? With money derived from budget cuts on our own society”201 (Facebook, 2014a). These latter responses visualize one of the characterization frames that is mainly applied to describe asylum seekers within the posts and comments of the opponents Facebook. Other characterization frames often applied describe asylum seekers as violent people, drugs addicts, rapists and fortune seekers.

On the day the first asylum seekers arrived in Budel, on May 14th 2014, the Facebook group created a Facebook event called “Cranendonck in Action”202 in an attempt to organize a protest during the informative sessions of the municipality of Cranendonck on the 22nd of May 2014. The description of the Facebook event explains how the informative sessions provide an ideal possibility for all opponents to show their opinion. All local residents, young, old, and derived from all the villages of the municipality of Cranendonck were summoned to bring banners, signs, anything noisy and to wear sunglasses: “From an air horn to drums, anything goes! Do you happen to have a slurry tank in your backyard? Bring it and show them shit has hit the fan… Furthermore, we ask you to wear sunglasses, since the politics never looked us

196 “Komt het ook in jullie op dat niet iedere asielzoekers arm is? Dat ze in hun thuisland een goede baan of studie hebben gehad? Ze vluchten voor de situatie, niet om hier te komen stelen” 197 “Hier droomt een meid nog hard in de fabeltjes krant. Stuur ze terug naar Italie, terug naar Afrika” 198 “Ahh wat schattig en onnozel… Welkom Milou, in een wereld die REALITEIT heet… Kijk gerust even rond en doe vooral veel ervaring op eer je weer van die domme comments maakt” 199 “Hahahahaha, de naïviteit straat af van de reactie van Milou, ik heb er hard om moeten lachen” 200 “Een asielzoekers met geld!! Is een crimineel of een crimineel. Het kan natuurlijk ook dat het een crimineel is” 201 “Als ze niet arm zijn waarom moeten wij dan alles voor ze betalen? Van geld dat ook nog eens bezuinigd wordt op onze eigen gemeenschap” 202 “Cranendonck in Actie”

116 in the eye either”203 [Free translation, (CranendonckHeeftGenoegAsielzoekers, 2014)]. As previously explained and despite the appeal on Facebook, the informative session ran quietly. In response to this event Berend Appelhof left a Facebook comment underneath the final appeal to protest posted on “Cranendonck in Action” on the 22nd of May. His post stated: “what a great protest, the protesters could be counted on a single hand, Omroep Brabant quickly saw nothing interesting would happen and left before 7.00 PM #greatprotest”204 (Facebook, 2014a). After the informative session on the 22nd of May 2014, the Facebook group “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers” was inactive for over 6 months.

On November 24 2014 a new post was uploaded concerning the communication of the municipality towards the local residents stating: “previously, the municipality of Cranendonck hardly communicated to us, currently however, we are weekly being manipulated by the articles of the municipality published in the local newspapers de Grenskoerier or HAC Weekblad”205 (Facebook, 2014a). The term ‘manipulation’ that is applied in this sentence shows the discontent of the people behind this Facebook group towards the municipality of Cranendonck. Within this post, the municipality of Cranendonck is framed as untrustworthy. Furthermore, this post was also used to share the following list of negative consequences of hosting asylum seekers and the asylum shelter itself: shoplifting, drugs use, traffic disruptions, their involvement with traffic accidents, assault, public intoxication and smuggling. It is important to note that there are no sources or examples mentioned regarding this list of negative consequences. This could indicate these negative points are based on fears and not on actual events in Cranendonck. However, by mentioning this list of accusations, the asylum seekers are framed as people who perform these negative activities and who are therefore violent and, according to a part of the population, unwanted. The Facebook post also shared an article published by PowNed on the 24th of November 2014 on a fight between asylum seekers at Budel-Dorplein that happened on the night from 11 to 12 November 2014. Facebook post received a total of 84 likes and was shared by one person (Facebook, 2014a; PowNed, 2014). Adding this article might be a strategic decision because its content shows that fights do happen at the asylum centre in Budel, and therefore it positively contributes to the accusations made at the beginning of the Facebook post on the activities of the asylum seekers. Additionally, this might indicate that risk and information frames concerning the possible consequences of hosting asylum seekers, might possibly be influencing the characterization frames used by the same audience to describe asylum seekers. To further explain, by highlighting fights happen between asylum seekers, the characterization frame describing asylum seekers as violent people might be strengthened or confirmed.

In the period between December 2014 and December 2015 the Facebook page became less active and a total amount of 4 messages have been posted, all concerning incidents involving asylum seekers in Budel and the rest of the Netherlands (Facebook, 2014a). Sharing the negative news on asylum seekers is only

203 “Van een gashoorn tot drumstel, alles mag! Heb je heel toevallig een gierton in de achtertuin staan? Neem mee en laat zien dat er stront aan de knikker is… Daarnaast vragen we jullie allen om een zonnebril op te zetten, de politiek kijkt ons immers ook niet aan” 204 “Wat een top demonstratie, demonstraten waren op 1 hand te tellen, omroep Brabant zag al snel in dat er weinig zou gaan gebeuren en was voor 7 uur alweer vertrokken #topdemonstratie” 205 “Waar de gemeente in eerste instantie vrijwel niet communiceerde, worden we nu bijna wekelijks gemanipuleerd doordat de gemeente weer een stukje heeft geplaatst in de Grenskoerier of het HAC Weekblad”

117 positively contributing to the characterization frame evaluating asylum seekers as violent and misbehaving people.

When on November 30th 2015 COA officially requested to extend their contract with the municipality of Cranendonck concerning the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, one message regarding this newest development was posted on the Facebook page. This post first highlighted some the negative news items on the asylum seekers in the Netherlands, after which it gave information on COAs latest request. The message ended by stating: “Both Cranendonck and the Netherlands have done their part. It is time to stop the influx. Like and share this message if you agree!”206(Facebook, 2014a). In total, this message was liked 18 times and shared by 14 people. Furthermore, this message let to a discussion between opponents in which they expressed their dissatisfaction to the decision making process of the municipality, COA and the asylum seekers (Facebook, 2014a).

This peak is followed by an equally high peak on December 8 2016, when an article was shared on the opponents Facebook page on the verdict of the asylum seeker causing a fight in December 2014. This article, published by Eindhovens Dagblad (EindhovensDagblad, 2015b), explains how the victim is permanently injured and the verdict of the perpetuator regards an imprisonment of 9 months of which three are conditionally. This post was liked by 19 people, and received 29 reactions mainly expressing angry responses on the verdict (Facebook, 2014a).

The most recent message posted on this Facebook page before March 2nd of 2016, was on January 7th 2016. This post was used to share an article of the Dutch news website nu.nl with the headline “Most perpetuators in Köln were asylum seekers originated from Syria”207 (Facebook, 2014a; nu.nl, 2016). This post received 21 likes and a small discussion with people expressing their thoughts. Richard Steppelenburg for example responded “this so-called tolerance will become a high price to pay when they [the Dutch government] will not tighten the current asylum policy”208. Another resident Adrienne Hensen stated “Pathetic!!!!! How much longer will girls and women remain free in this country? Our emancipation gets screwed over by idiots for whom a woman is worth less than a goat. Do not let it get this far!!!!”209 (Facebook, 2014a)

Figure 12 provides a visual indication of the activities of the opponents Facebook page from May 2014 until March 2016. The Y axis shows the amount of posts while the X axis indicates the time period (Facebook, 2014a).

206 “Cranendonck én Nederland hebben meer dan genoeg gedaan. Het is tijd dat de stroom per direct stopt. LIKE & SHARE dit bericht als je het hiermee eens bent!” 207 “Meeste daders Keulen waren asielzoekers uit Syrië” 208 “Deze zgn ‘tolerantie’ gaat een hoge tol eisen als ze het beleid niet aanscherpen!” 209 “Triets!!!!! Hoe lang zijn meisjes en vrouwen nog vrij in dit land? Heel de emancipatie naar de kloten door malloten waarvoor een vrouw nog minder waard is dan een geit. Laat het niet zo ver komen!!!!” 118

Figure 12: Posts on opponents Facebook from May 1st 2014 until March 1st 2016

Studying the activity of the opponents’ Facebook page and the topic of the shared posts and accompanying (news) items indicates a focus on items in which asylum seekers approached by means of a negative characterization frame. As indicated above, this includes for example items on the economic pressure caused by asylum seekers in which they are framed as economic refugees, and items on nuisance framing asylum seekers as criminals or violent and dangerous people. This statement is supported by the activity peaks visualized in Figure 12, that mainly concerns posts and publication on specific situations that stimulate negative characterization frames towards asylum seekers. These selective topics on the opponents Facebook page might be part of strategically framing the situation in Cranendonck with regard to the asylum seekers as dangerous and undesired. Furthermore, only sharing items on negative situations involving on asylum seekers might contribute to the risk and information frames of the readers. The activity of the opponents Facebook page might contribute to a risk and information frame in which violent, criminal and dangerous situations involving asylum seekers are likely to appear. This might indirectly also influence the specific characterization frames applied by readers to describe asylum seekers as violent, criminal and dangerous people.

Due to the unilateral target group of the Facebook page “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers”, the discussions and comments underneath the various posts mainly involve opponents, sharing similar characterization frames, agreeing and emphasizing each other’s opinions. Aside from sharing equal characterization frames to describe asylum seekers, other local actors involved in the asylum situation such as COA and, to a lesser extent, the municipality of Cranendonck and the Dutch government are also framed at the Facebook page. These actors are mainly framed as untrustworthy, dishonest and non- transparent (Facebook, 2014a). 7.3.2 Proponents’ Facebook group “We, Cranendonckers, welcome you” As previously explained, two days after the opponents Facebook page was published a proponents’ Facebook page followed. To promote this new Facebook page, the group posted a message saying “share this page and show there are tolerant and solidary people in Cranendonck as well. Try to imagine being in the position of a refugee yourself!”210(Facebook, 2014b). This message received 11 likes and was shared by one person (Facebook, 2014b).

In a radio interview with Omroep Brabant the initiator of the proponents’ Facebook, who wishes to remain anonymous, explains how he was shocked by the negative responses on Facebook to the news that asylum seekers would be sheltered in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. He desired to create a website that could be used

210 “Deel deze pagina en laat zo zien dat er ook nog tolerante en solidaire mensen zijn in Cranendonck. Probeer je eens te verplaatsen in de vluchteling zelf!” 119 by supporters of the asylum seekers to raise their voice and to share their opinions as well. Furthermore, this proponents’ page aims to increase the understanding towards asylum seeker and refugees, and to create a more positive attitude of the residents of Cranendonck towards the situation of the asylum seekers. This explanation indicates the imitator of the proponents Facebook page desires to change the opponents’ characterization frames towards asylum seekers away from the frames described in the paragraph above and towards frames including an understanding of the local situation in the country of origin of the asylum seekers. A comment on the Facebook page supports this approach by stating: “First get the know the stories behind those people [asylum seekers] before lumping them together”211 (Facebook, 2014b). The initiator’s wish to remain anonymous derived from his fear for the reactions he might get from opponents of the asylum seekers and the new asylum centre. Furthermore, he explained the lack of gains from connecting his name to the proponents’ Facebook page (OmroepBrabant, 2014).

The supportive Facebook page received a total amount of 151 likes in the first day. This amount increased to 200 likes (32.5%) on the second day and to 300 (50%) on the fourth. On May 12th 2014 a post was shared in which the total amount of likes of the proponents’ and the opponents Facebook page were compared. On the day this post was share their own Facebook page had received 151 likes, and the opponents’ page 1,008 likes (6.7 times more). Even though the proponents’ page had received less likes, the supporters stated this comparison was giving the wrong impression of the opinion of the average resident living in Cranendonck (Facebook, 2014b). To support this claim they added a news item of Oproep Brabant aired on the 11th of May 2014 in which a reporter went to Cranendonck to talk to the local residents about their opinion of the development of a second asylum centre in the municipality. According to the reporter of Omroep Brabant the opinions are divided, but not equally to the division shown on Facebook. This can also be seen in the results of the online questionnaire where 28.8% of the respondents indicated they are either against or very much against the hosting of asylum seekers by the municipality; whereas 56.2% of respondents said they are in favour of or very much in favour of the hosting of asylum seekers. However, 50.6% of respondents said they are against or very much against the realization of a permanent AZC in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, whereas 31.5% of respondents was in favour of or very much in favour of a permanent AZC in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Respondents were divided over the amount of asylum seekers that should be hosted by the municipality but a majority of 34.8% responded that 1-500 asylum seekers should be hosted, and only 4.5% responded that over 2,000 asylum seekers should be hosted. These percentages show that despite more than half of the respondents are either in favour or very much in favour of hosting residents, over 50% of the respondents indicated to be against the permanent hosting asylum seekers at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne.

Aside from that, the initiator of the proponents Facebook page explains their lower amount of likes by saying the proponents’ Facebook page had only been online for a few days and he expects the amount of likes to increase in the future. As an additional note, he highlights the difficulty of drawing proper conclusions on the actual opinions of the residents of Cranendonck based on the amount of likes on Facebook. He explains “This, of course, is Facebook which is publicly available. People from other municipalities and even from other countries are also able to share their opinions or their likes”212

211 “Leer het verhaal achter de mensen eerst maar eens kennen voordat je ze over een kam scheert” 212 “Je hebt natuurlijk te maken met Facebook wat publiek toegankelijk is. Mensen van andere gemeentes en zelfs andere landen kunnen ook zomaar hun stem of like toevoegen” 120

(OmroepBrabant, 2014). By means of this statement, Facebook is framed as an untrustworthy source to generate local opinions from. It might be that the initiator of the proponents Facebook is strategically applying this frame because, they received less likes than the opponents Facebook and this frame makes those numbers seem unreliable. Even though he explains their minority of likes by stating the proponents page has only been online for a few days, the opponents Facebook page received more likes after being online for a similar number of days.

In the morning of May 13th 2014, before the official announcement stating COAs request to host 1,200 asylum seekers was approved, the proponents’ Facebook page uploaded a post saying: “Good news: reliable sources informed us there is a “go” on the housing of asylum seekers at the army base Nassau- Dietz. More information will follow as soon as possible”213 (Facebook, 2014b). This post resulted in mostly positive reactions and one negative reaction. This negative response was posted directly after the original story was uploaded on the proponents’ Facebook page and stated: “African traffickers would like to thank you for taking such good care of them. Also, because all expenses for these near thousand asylum seekers will be completely covered by means of community money, their [asylum seekers’] family members and friend will soon come to join them”214 (Facebook, 2014b).

This statement let to responsive comments of proponents of the establishment of asylum centre Budel- Cranendonck (Facebook, 2014b):

Comment A: “People worry so much about the POSSIBILITY they might fall short themselves”215. Comment B: “Regrettable indeed, they might not be able to pay for a second iPad or a third holiday”216.

Both comment A and B are made by proponents of the opening of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. Within these comments, opponents of the asylum centre framed as self-centred people fearing the influence the arrival of the asylum seekers might have on their own financial situation. Where comment A appears to be directed towards all opponents fearing their financial situation, comment B aims more towards the wealthy residence within the society who are, according to the applied frame, unwilling to indirectly share small parts of their income with asylum seekers in need. The characterization frames applied by proponents to describe opponents indicate residents are, aside from framing asylum seekers, also framing each other.

Later that day (May 3, 2014), the news of the establishment of Budel-Cranendonck was spread on the proponents Facebook by sharing an article of Eindhovens Dagblad in which further explanation was given about the granted permission and the future of the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. This post received 29 likes and, as an additional explanation to their support, the site responded to its own post by saying this decision concerns the temporarily hosting of 1,200 asylum seekers. According to them, this will not lead to financial

213 “Goed nieuws: Van betrouwbare bronnen gehoord dat er een "go" is voor de huisvesting van asielzoekers op de legerplaats Nassau-Dietz. Meer info volgt zo snel mogelijk” 214 “Afrikaanse mensensmokkelaars willen jullie graag bedanken voor de goede zorgen. En omdat alle kosten voor deze bijna duizend asielzoekers volledig vergoed gaan worden uit gemeenschapsgeldkomen al hun familie leden en kennissen binnenkort ook deze kant op!” 215 “Wat maken mensen zich toch veel zorgen dat ze zelf iets te kort zouden KUNNEN komen!” 216 “Dat is inderdaad spijtig he Corry, dat ze geen tweede iPad of derde vakantie in een jaar meer kunnen betalen!”

121 disadvantage for the local residents of Cranendonck: “This decision concerns a TEMPORARY shelter, no resident of Cranendonck will financially suffer from that”217 [free translation] (Facebook, 2014b). This additional remark led to some discussion between supporters and opponents regarding the possible financial consequences for the local residents of Cranendonck caused by hosting asylum seekers in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Furthermore, opponents shared their disbelieve in the temporary nature of the asylum shelter: “it being TEMPOARY is a big LIE… no chance these people will afterwards return to a cabin in the wilderness “218 (Facebook, 2014b). This quote visualizes an assumption and a, probably unconscious, characterization frame of asylum seekers as people living in cabins in the wilderness. However, this characterization of all current asylum seekers is untrue since Syria, for example, was a prosperous and developed country before the current instability (van Wijk, 2015)219.

In the period prior to the opening of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, the number of likes for the proponents Facebook page reached 400 one day after the opening of the asylum centre. From the 15th of May until the 22nd of May 2014 the Facebook page was mainly used to share positive national and local news items on the asylum seekers, their origin and the local decision making process of the municipality of Cranendonck on the opening of an asylum centre at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Nothing was mentioned on the informative meeting prior to the 22nd of May 2014. However, when the meeting was finished a single post was dedicated to this event saying “do you know that joke on the people from Cranendonck that went protesting? They didn’t go”220 (Facebook, 2014b). This post, responding to the opponents’ attempt to organize a protest received 129 likes and was shared once.

In the following months the supportive Facebook paged continued sharing (local) news dedicated to the local situation regarding asylum seekers in Cranendonck. For example, a post of Margriet Daems was shared saying “our friend from Eritrea found Margriet’s shop, what a lovely people they are and I am glad I can mean something to them”221 (Facebook, 2014b). Within this post, the Eritrean asylum seekers are framed as friends, and lovely people. This characterization frame is constructed based on the personal experience of Mrs. Daems with some of the Eritrean asylum seekers. By sharing this post, the proponents Facebook highlights the positive characteristics of Eritrean asylum seekers that is experiences during personal integration. By sharing this experience other local residents might be stimulated to take over this positive characterization frame describing asylum seekers originated from Eritrea.

In another post published in the months following May, an article was shared that discussed the journey of an Eritrean asylum seeker who fled to the Netherlands. As an additional message to this article, the Facebook group advised all people who thought of asylum seekers as fortune seekers to read this article. By adding this message an opposing characterization frame of asylum seekers as fortune seekers is highlighted. Furthermore, it is aimed to shift this characterization frame of asylum seekers as fortune

217 “Het gaat om TIJDELIJKE huisvesting, dat gaat niemand hier in Cranendonck in zijn portemonnee voelen” 218 “Dat TIJDELIJKE is een grote LEUGEN… deze mensen gaan echt niet meer terug naar hun hutje in de woestijn straks hoor” 219 Interview COA employee Mrs. van Wijk, Budel-Dorplein, December 21 2015 220 “Kennen jullie die mop van die Cranendonckers die ging demonstreren? Ze gingen niet” 221 “Onze vrienden uit Eritrea hebben Margriet's winkel ook al gevonden wat een heerlijke mensen ben blij dat ik op deze manier ook iets kan betekenen” 122 seekers towards the frame that is applied by the proponents Facebook group which is more positive, supportive and understanding towards asylum seekers. (Facebook, 2014b).

When on November 24th 2014 various articles were published concerning a fight at the asylum centre Budel-Dorplein in the night from November 11 to November 12, 2014 (Pennings, 2014; PowNed, 2014), the proponents Facebook responded with an article published on the 25th of November summoning the facts of the situation at the asylum centre in Budel. Within this post the proponents explained how the local situation was distorted by the media. To support this message, they added article of rtv Horizon that describes how the information shared by other news items is, according to them, incorrect (Horizon, 2014b). Furthermore, the article explains the gradient of a misunderstanding that did happen on the night from the 11th to the 12th November 2014 at Budel-Dorplein and another misunderstanding at Budel- Cranendonck during the previous weekend was illustrated. According to this article those two events have been mashed up into the one event that was shared by the (social) media (Horizon, 2014b). The post of the proponents’ Facebook group received 59 likes, was shared twice and received 4 positive comments (Facebook, 2014b).

After this post in November 2014, more general items were posted on volunteers at the asylum centre, stories of asylum seekers, the national policy and the activities of the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck. These post all highlight positive attitudes of Dutch residents towards asylum seekers or concern the activities of asylum seekers that contribute to the society of Cranendonck. Sharing these articles might be a strategical move to support a positive characterization frame of asylum seekers describing them as people who actively contribute to the local society. The most recent post on the proponents Facebook, was uploaded on the 7th of January 2015 and shared a picture in which asylum seekers clean the roads to and from the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. By visualizing a situation in which asylum seekers contribute to the society a positive characterization frame towards asylum seekers as people taking care of the society is stimulated again. This might also influence risk and information frames of spectators, since people who provide for their society might be less likely to harm that same society. This post was liked 68 times (Facebook, 2014b).

To provide a visual overview of the activities and posts of the proponents’ Facebook page Figure 13 is added below. Within this figure the Y axis indicates the amount of posts and the x axis represents the timeframe (Facebook, 2014b).

Figure 13: Posts on supportive Facebook from May 1st 2014 until March 1, 2016

The posts and reactions shared on the proponents’ Facebook page mainly aim to increase the overall understanding of local residents towards the asylum seekers. By highlighting the positive activities of asylum seekers they stimulate a shift in the characterization frames applied by opponents to describe 123 asylum seekers. This is done by strategically sharing positive messages concerning the asylum seekers and positive experiences of (local) residents with the asylum seekers. Furthermore, the specific posts of on the proponents Facebook page highlight situations in which the involvement an of asylum seekers with the municipality of Cranendonck is shown. An example is the post on asylum seekers cleaning the roads to and from the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. To further stimulate the positive framing of asylum seekers and the asylum situation, the news items on the fights at the asylum centre in Budel-Dorplein in November 2014 has been rectified and downgraded on the proponents Facebook page (Facebook, 2014b).

By only publishing positive posts and news items, the proponents Facebook page applies a similar strategy as the opponents Facebook page. By sharing positive information and personal stories of asylum seekers, it is aimed to characterize asylum seekers in a positive way as well as to increase local understanding towards the asylum seekers. This might indirectly influence the risk and information frames, since a positive characterization frame regarding asylum seekers, might decrease people’s fear for negative situations caused by asylum seekers. Furthermore, and as previously indicated, highlighting the involvement of asylum seekers with the local municipality might also be a strategic framing method influencing both risk and information frames, as well as characterization frames concerning (the arrival of) asylum seekers.

When comparing the discussions on the opponents and proponents Facebook pages it appears opponents more often comment on the proponents Facebook than revers. The negative comments of opponents on posts on the proponents Facebook sometimes cause discussions in which not only the asylum seekers are framed, but the opponents and proponents also frame each other in a way that makes them appear less reliable sources.

The proponents Facebook page has been active from May 2014 until January 2015, after which no more posts have been shared. This means nothing was mentioned about COAs request to establish a permanent asylum centre at Budel-Cranendonck. 7.3.3 Reactions on Twitter Figure 14 at the end of this paragraph provides an overview of the amount of Tweets send in the period between May 1st 2014 and March 1st 2016 regarding the local situation in Cranendonck in relation to asylum seekers and the two asylum centres. Where the opponent and proponents Facebook pages were mainly highlighting messages that contributed to their frames, Twitter is a social media source without separate domains. Tweets of both opponents and proponents are similarly shared and therefore varying perspectives are mixed. Furthermore, people are able to re-tweet messages of others to increase their reach and impact.

The peaks displayed in Figure 14 indicate high amounts of tweets and show some similarities to the peaks shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12 as well as some notable exceptions. Where the first news peak (Figure 11) was shown on the May 14th 2014, the first Twitter peak is dated one day earlier on the 13th of May. On this day news spread that the municipality Cranendonck agreed with the temporarily hosting of 1,200 asylum seekers in the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. The agreement was shared on twitter by various sources, mostly without adding extra positive or negative responses. Eindhovens Dagblad for example Tweeted:

124

“#Cranendonck agrees with the temporary shelter of a maximum of 1,200 asylum seekers in the abandoned barrack in #Budel. More on ed.nl”222(@ED_Regio, 2014).

Nine days after this announcement another Twitter peak occurred on the 22nd of May 2014. This peak is, to a lesser extent, also visible in Figure 11 and Figure 12. Some of those Tweets posted on this day were regarding the informative session organized by the municipality of Cranendonck and the organized protests. However most of them are a response to a video published by PowNed that same day. This video shows how Rutger Castricum visited Budel and spoke to some local residents about the asylum seekers hosted in their village. This video applies a negative characterization frame to describe asylum seekers, which can be identified by Rutger Castricums statement: “the predictable negative sound on the influx of asylum seekers in Budel is not insignificant”223 (OmroepPowNed, 2014a). This statement indicates that negative sounds concerning the influx of asylum seekers are predictable. Furthermore, Rutger Castricum suggests there are many opponents of asylum seekers in Budel. These statements strategically contribute to a frame which describes asylum seekers as an unwanted addition to a local society. This frame is strategically supported in the video of PowNed that discusses how asylum seekers’ possession of mobile phones is experienced as an eyesore by some residents of Cranendonck. One inhabitant of Budel explains this possession of mobile phones by stating asylum seekers receive 500 euro’s when arriving in the Netherlands which is, according to him, spent on buying the newest iPhones (OmroepPowNed, 2014a). Even though asylum seekers do not receive this amount of money on arrival (Zeebregts, 2016), the news spread and resulted in multiple angry Tweets such as “1,200 asylum seekers stand in line in Budel and RECEIVE a SMARTPHONE! I can barely pay for food! FUCK OFF! Therefore #PPVon1 [PVVon1, spelling mistake in source]”224 (@Sylvana0902, 2014). This and other Tweets indicate the influence media sources have on the opinions and frames of (local residents). In an attempt to invalidate the words of the local resident in the video of PowNed, Jelle Krekels, reporter of Eindhovens Dagblad Tweeted: “Just called Startel #Budel. Mostly sell phone credit and start cards to asylum seekers. Few smartphones. #Cranendonck”225 (@JelleKrekels, 2014).

For a period of 6 months a few Tweets were shared concerning asylum seekers and asylum centres in Cranendonck. However, in between these 6 months, the amount of Tweets did slightly increased on the 23rd of September 2014 when COA was given the permission to arrange an additional 300 places for asylum seekers (ANP, 2014). This peak is not seen in Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13, which implies that the news what not (extensively) shared through traditional media and/or published by news agencies on their website or Facebook. It is unclear how, despite not being published widely, this news led to one of the bigger peaks in tweets in the time period in scope for this study.

222 “#Cranendonck gaat akkoord met de tijdelijke opvang van maximaal 1200 asielzoekers in de leegstaande kazerne in #Budel. Zo meer op ed.nl” 223 “De voorspelbare negatieve geluiden over de stroom van asielzoekers zijn in Budel niet gering” 224 “1200 asielzoekers in de rij in Budel KRIJGEN een SMARTPHONE! Ik heb amper te vreten! ROT OP ZEG! Daarom #PPVop1” 225 “Net even Startel #Budel gebeld. Verkopen voornamelijk beltegoed en startkaartjes aan asielzoekers. Weinig smartphones. #Cranendonck” 125

The third peak displayed in Figure 14 is identified on November 24 in 2014 when news spread on a fight in asylum centre Budel-Dorplein that happened on the night from 11 to 12 November 2014 (Pennings, 2014). This news was also spread through various Tweets by both official news publishers and local residents (@Elsevier, 2014; @TjerkLangman, 2014). In response to this news, PowNed created a new video in which the same negative characterization frame concerning asylum seekers was applied as in the previous video of PowNed on Cranendonck. Within this video, unsatisfied and angry residents of Budel were interviewed about their opinion of asylum seekers and the local situation in Cranendonck and the presence of the asylum seekers was framed as negative only. Interviewing negative residents only is strategically framing the opinion of the residents of Cranendonck on asylum seekers as negative and unwanted. Furthermore, this negative frame towards asylum seekers that is applied in the videos of PowNed might be strategically used to provoke discussion among its viewers and therefor increase the publicity of the video. This indeed happened with this latter video of PowNed in which one resident proposed: “perhaps if they [the asylum seekers] behead one of them [the asylum seekers] someday, all this misery [the fights in the asylum centre] will pass. Then they know, they should not cause any issues […] [beheading] with a knife so to speak. That is possible right?”226(OmroepPowNed, 2014b). This, and other statements made in the video resulted in various responding Tweets. The core message of these Tweets vary. Some agree with statements of the local residents shown in the video such as @Blondemevrouw1 who Tweeted “haha! Those elderly people in #Budel great! #pownews. Too bad such a village is destroyed by the state and the #AZC”227 (@Blondemevrouw1, 2014). Within this tweet, @Blondemevrouw is applying a risk and information frame that states that the likelihood of a village being destroyed due to the arrival of asylum seekers is very high. Other Tweets express disbelief and shock in response to the video of PowNed: “Shocking comments about asylum seekers are provoked by #Pownews in #Budel”228(@RietWartenbergh, 2014). Within this statement, the strategy of PowNed appears to be evaluated, since @RietWartenbergh states the comments on asylum seekers made in the video are provoked. This evaluation might indicate that PowNed is indeed strategically highlighting and stimulating negative frames towards asylum seekers applied by local residents. The Tweets shared on the 24th of November 2014 either react to the video published by PowNed and the statements that are made within that video by local residents, or respond to the news of the fights in Budel-Dorplein.

Less than two weeks after the Twitter peak of November 24, 2014, another peak is displayed in Figure 14. This peak is dated on the 6th of December 2014 and most of the Tweets published that day again concern stories of unrest at one of the asylum centres in Cranendonck (EindhovensDagblad, 2014a). When Bart Elzendoorn, publisher of Omroep Brabant, made an attempt to give a possible explanation on the occurrence of the fights at the asylum centres in Cranendonck by stating asylum seekers have to share their room with too many other companions (Elzendoorn, 2014a), this led to some Twitter responses as well. Some tweets only re-tweeted the article of Elzendoorn (2014) and are therefore likely to follow the risk and information frame and the characterization frame Elzendoorn (2014) established in which asylum

226 “Misschien als ze er eentje eens een keer zijn kop eraf hakken, dat het dan over is al die ellende. Dan weten ze van, dat moeten wij dus niet doen […] Ja bij wijze van spreken, met zo’n mes. Dat kan toch?” 227 “Haha! Die oudere mensen in #Budel geweldig! #pownews Sneu dat zo'n dorp de vernieling in wordt geholpen door staat en #AZC” 228 “Wat een schokkende opmerkingen over asielzoekers lokt #Pownews uit #Budel” 126 seekers themselves are not the only cause of the unrest at asylum centres. These frames include the possibility of various (external) factors causing unrest at asylum centres, which is therefore not due to the asylum seekers, their culture, norms and values only. This means that Elzendoorn (2014) is not framing asylum seekers as violent people, but as human being responding to mix of distressing circumstance. By including external factors, it could be Elzendoorns intention to look at the bigger picture. However, this frame is not generally accepted and his article results in various Tweets opposing his idea. Those opposing Tweets state the violence is caused by the asylum seekers themselves, who should be satisfied with the shelter they receive in the Netherlands (@blikopener333, 2014; @houtje0611, 2014). The characterization frames applied in these opposing Tweets describe asylum seekers as violent and ungrateful people.

Nine months after the Twitter peak of December 6th 2014 another peak can be seen in Figure 14. This peak dates on September 11th 2015 when the municipality of Cranendonck decided to add an extra function to the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. Mayor Vermue published a Tweet in which she shared that Budel would receive an application centre at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. Furthermore, she added a link to a video published by NOS where more information was given on this new development (@MargaVermue, 2015). This news was shared by more national, provincial and local publishers, which caused multiple responding Tweets. @TjerkLangman Tweeted “and did they ask the local residents about their opinion? @azc_alert: Budel will establish an application centre for asylum seekers”229 (@TjerkLangman, 2015). This Tweet indicates the dissatisfaction of @TjerkLangman on the involvement of the local residents by the municipal decision making process. Positive reactions on this news were also shared on Twitter: “Good that there are municipalities in the Netherlands dealing with this! Compliments to @Gem_Cranendonck #aanmeldcentrum #asielzoekers #budel230 (@D66DeKempen, 2015).

When on October 8, 2015 it became publicly known that 200 extra places were added at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck the number of Tweets increased again. Most of those Tweets concerned the increase of asylum seekers hosted at Budel-Cranendonck and highlighted that the local residents of Cranendonck were not informed about this new development (@ADnl, 2015; @Blikopenerteam, 2015). Some of those Tweets added an extra negative note such as @AntiLinks who assumes the Budel-Cranendonck will become a mess (@AntiLinks, 2015) and @Lunamber who tweeted “200 extra asylum seeker coming to Budel. In case of a shortage [of places in asylum centres], the boarders should be closed, it is that simple, full is full”231(@Lunamber, 2015). @ AntiLinks applies a risk and information frame in his Tweet that describes a high likelihood of asylum seekers cause a messy local situation.

The most recent peak of tweets developed in the evening of November 30th 2015 when COA filed their request to purchase the former army base to create a possible permanent asylum centre at the Nassau-

229“En is de burger wat gevraagd? @azc_alert : Budel krijgt aanmeldcentrum asielzoekers http://t.co/MAIaH6EF4A“ 230 “Fijn dat er gemeentes in NL zijn die dit oppakken! Compliment @Gem_Cranendonck #aanmeldcentrum #asielzoekers #budel” 231 “200 extra asielzoekers naar Budel. Als er een tekort is moeten de grenzen gewoon dicht zo simpel is, het vol is vol” 127

Dietzkazerne. Most of the Tweets published this day were sharing the news without adding any positive or negative responses (@AZCAlertAlmere, 2015; @benadeelt, 2015; @R_de_Collier, 2015).

When studying Figure 14 below, it can be noticed that since September 2015 the average amount of Tweets regarding asylum seekers or the asylum centres in Cranendonck increased. The same conclusion can be drawn when studying Figure 11, in which the amount of news items on this topic are displayed. This increased activity might be caused by the (inter)national publicity on the photograph of the drowned Syrian boy on September 2, 2015 (NOS, 2015c). Even though, no direct links can be identified between the local traditional and social media publications, it might be possible this international news influenced local levelled interest on asylum seekers as well.

Figure 14: Twitter feeds from May 1st 2014 until March 1st 2016

The various tweets that have been published since the opening of asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck show different opinions and highlight different aspects of the asylum seekers and the asylum centres. Twitter is a source in which all responses are piled up and no division is made between opponents and proponents, something that did happen on Facebook. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the published Tweets are mainly expressing or promoting a particular frame. However, studying the varying tweets does provide a possibility to identify the characterization- and risk and information frames applied by the people sending the Tweets.

Studying the asylum seeker-related Twitter activity also visualized controversial media publications and sources. PowNed, for example, appeared to be a broadly extended source that, by means of its publications, results into many discussions. 7.4 AZC Alert In 2014, the Eindhoven’s citizens’ committee decided to launch a national platform where all similar committees of the Netherlands could join their forces against the arrival of asylum seekers. The idea of such a platform arose when in December 2014 de municipality of Eindhoven decided to host 700 asylum seekers. The overarching goal of this platform is to provide a forum to share information and juridical tips, and to keep each other informed on the plans for new asylum centres (Elzendoorn, 2014b). Furthermore, they aim to channel the resistance and militancy of the unsatisfied inhabitants to influence the decision making process and the local information provision concerning the arrival of an asylum centre and preferably to obstruct the establishment of more asylum centres in the Netherlands (AZC-Alert, n.d.).

The platform developed by the citizens’ committee of Eindhoven, is called AZC alert and was launched on December 19th 2014. The citizens‘ committees of Enschede, Middelburg, Leerdam, Oranje and

128

Cranendonck (Cranendonck in Revolt232) immediately joined the citizens’ committee of Eindhoven in their initiative (Elzendoorn, 2014b). On the official website of AZC Alert a map is displayed in which all the asylum centres are marked and the expected new locations are shown as well. Furthermore, they developed a new hotline where residents can file their complaints (Smit, 2015).

Despite of the matching vision of “Cranendonck in Revolt” and AZC Alert, their collaboration lasted less than a month. On January 9th 2015 the citizens’ committee of Cranendonck published a letter in HAC Weekblad, another local newspaper of Cranendonck, in which they announced the termination of their cooperation with AZC Alert (CranendonckInOpstand, 2015). The cause of this termination was the response of member committees of AZC Alert to the attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris on the 7th of January 2015. In response to this event, some committees part of the AZC Alert platform published cartoons of the prophet Mohammed on the webpage of AZC Alert. This was not communicated to the other committees involved. In order to distance themselves from the cartoons posted on the website of AZC Alert, Cranendonck in Revolt decided to terminate their cooperation with the entire platform. In their explanation they state: “our opinion aims towards the influx of asylum seekers, the methods of COA, the government and the municipality. Our opinion is not against the people that have no influence in this, like the refugees themselves, and it is neither against the extremist, Islamic and barbarian organisations, and terrorists […] Furthermore, we will not express any racism, since we are fiercely against racism, extremism, radicalization, disrespect and injustice”233 (CranendonckInOpstand, 2015). In this statement a distinction is made between the people arriving in the Netherlands, referred to as the asylum seekers, and the people who have no influence in this, referred to as refugees. Furthermore, it is stated Cranendonck in Revolt is concerns the influx of asylum seekers, not the refugees themselves. This might indicate that Cranendonck in Revolt is concerns asylum seekers until some of their asylum request are confirmed. Another possibility however, is that Cranendonck in Revolt is interchangeably using the terms asylum seekers and refugees, which have a different definition, as shown in the introduction of this research on page 5.

In addition to explanation on the decision to break ties with AZC Alert, Cranendonck in Revolt explains how the joined committees of AZC Alert do not strive towards the same goals and there is little collaboration and communication between the various committees (CranendonckInOpstand, 2015).

Cranendonck in Revolt explained in their letter they will continue as a single protest- and action group against the arrival of asylum seekers, the policy and methods of COA and against “the disgusting methods” of the government (CranendonckInOpstand, 2015). Despite of this final note, the Facebook page of Cranendonck in Revolt was deleted a few months later. A local resident explains how proponents and opponents of the asylum centre used the Facebook page “Cranendonck in Revolt” to discuss their opinions in an improper way. Also, the Facebook page “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers” had received

232 “Cranendonck in Opstand” 233 “Het is onze mening die zich richt op de toestroom van asielzoekers, de werkwijze van het COA, Overheid en Gemeenten. Niet tegen personen die hierin geen invloed hebben zoals de vluchtelingen zelf, en ook niet tegen extremistische, islamitische en barbaarse organisaties en terroristen […] Ook willen wij geen enkele blijk van racisme laten zien, daar wij fel tegen racisme, extremisme, radicaliteit, respectloosheid en onrecht zijn”

129 more likes than “Cranendonck in Revolt” and for those combined reasons Cranendonck in Revolt decided to quit their efforts (Smit, 2015). 7.5 Petition In response to the news published on the November 30th 2015 regarding COAs request to purchase the Nassau-Dietzkazerne army base, local resident Mr. Hoofs decided to start a petition called “no permanent residence of the COA in Budel”234, to stop this development.

The reason for Mr. Hoofs to create a petition was the dissatisfaction of residents regarding the lack of transparency in the municipal decision making process when it comes to the establishment of the asylum centres and its further development. This dissatisfaction cannot be seen in the results of the online questionnaire, although a trend towards a negative opinion is visible. The questions on the communication by the municipality show 51.7% of respondents disagrees or disagrees completely with the statement that the municipality communicates open and honest with residents. The same amount of respondents, 51.7% disagrees or disagrees completely with the statement that the municipality responds to opinions and remarks by residents. Part of this group has the same opinion on both statements. According to the founder of the petition, local residents feel abandoned by the municipality who do not take their opinions and arguments into consideration during the municipal decision making process.

By signing this petition, a request is filed to the municipality of Cranendonck to stand up for the desires and necessities of their own citizen in a transparent way and to stop the plans developed by COA concerning the Nassau-Dietzkazerne. According to the people signing the petition, the establishment of a permanent asylum centre in Budel will disturb the social order and decrease the overall local security in town (Hoofs, 2015a).

The request of signing this petition is mainly expressed on the opponents Facebook page “Cranendonck has enough asylum seekers”(Facebook, 2014a). There Mr. Hoofs explained: “I think this should be proposed by the residents by means of a referendum. But instead they [the municipality] is making decisions behind our back, which is scandalous […] Today it starts, I have been to de Grenskoerier […] they showed me 76 ambulances and one trauma helicopter have been called to the Nassau-Dietz so far… this remains concealed [...] I wonder why this is not publicly shared by media sources and from now on I want transparency on the current situation […] It is time to be honest if they want to keep some of their good will … therefore, sign the petition … and let us go to the informative meetings to ensure our critics will be heard”235 (Facebook, 2014a). By means of this statement Mr. Hoofs expresses his dissatisfaction towards the municipality of Cranendonck that is framed as transparent. Furthermore, the numbers of ambulance and trauma helicopters that have been called to the Budel-Cranendonck are shared. This information might influence the risk and information frames of the readers since it suggests many disturbances happen

234 “Geen permanente vestiging COA in Budel” 235 “Ik vind dat dit ff de bewoners met een referendum moet worden voor gelegd, ze beslissen wel ff over onze rug, schandalig […] Vandaag begint het te lopen… ben ook al bij de Grenskoerier langs geweest […] ze hebben inmiddels laten zien dat er tot nu toe 76x ambulance en 1x trauma heli allen al bij de Nassau-Dietz geweest is… en dit toch in de doofpot blijft… ik vraag me af waarom dit niet in de media komt en wat er speelt… en ik wil graag openheid van zaken […] het wordt tijd om open kaart te spelen willen ze nog enige good will behouden … daarom tekenen … en op naar de informatie avonden zodat ook de kritiek een keer hoorbaar gemaakt word” 130 at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. Figure 15 below, shows the amount of signatures from the 2nd of December 2015 until the 2nd of March 2016. Within the first two weeks in which the petition was online it received 21 signatures in total (Hoofs, 2015a).

To increase the promotion and to gain more signatures of local residents, Mr. Hoofs published a small article about the petition in the local newspaper ‘de Grenskoerier’. This article describes the underlying fear inhabitants experience for the future of Cranendonck, and how the changing identity of Cranendonck is caused by the arrival of asylum seekers. To invigorate this statement Mr. Hoofs explains “Sometimes the village identity has changed so much people can imagine themselves being in district a of Ankara of Mogadishu”236(Hoofs, 2015b). This statements shows the risk and information frame of Mr. Hoofs on the impact asylum seekers have on the local situation in Cranendonck. This risk and information frame appears to be strategically used by Mr. Hoofs to highlight the negative impact asylum seekers have on the local situation and to stress the importance of signing his petition against the development of a permanent asylum centre in Budel.

The remaining part of the article is focussing on the incidents that have happened at the asylum centre. Similar to the statement of Mr. Hoofs on Facebook, the article claims that since the beginning of January 2015 a total of 78 ambulances were summoned to the Nassau-Dietzkazerne, as well as one trauma helicopter. According to Mr. Hoofs, these numbers show that the people involved in the situation at the asylum centres are dishonest in their communication towards the local residents on the situation within the fences of the former army base terrain. By making this assumption the municipality of Cranendonck as well as COA are framed as dishonest and non-transparent organizations. Furthermore, Mr. Hoofs worries that the costs of summoning those ambulances and the trauma helicopter is at the expense of home assistance for elderly living in Cranendonck. In the final note, Mr. Hoofs asks the readers of his article to support the worried residents of Cranendonck and to give them a voice by signing the petition (Hoofs, 2015b).

This article was published in de Grenskoerier on the 16th of December 2015 and it appears that, in response to this article, the amount of signatures increased. Figure 15 shows this increase in signatures from 21 on December 16th 2015 until a total amount of 180 (757%, 8.57 times increase) signatures by December 23rd 2015. From Christmas 2015 onwards the petition was signed sporadically and on the 2nd

236 “Soms is het dorpsbeeld zo veranderd dat men zich want in een wijk van Ankara of Mogadishu” 131 of March 2016 a total of 219 signatures were given to the petition, over 10 times more than the initial 21 (Hoofs, 2015a).

Figure 15: Petition signatures from December 2nd 2015 until March 2nd 2016. Source: (Hoofs, 2015a) 7.6 “Pass the warmth”237 Another local initiative was organized by Mrs. Neijnens and her colleague Mrs. Vondenhoff. Together they decided to start a fundraiser for the asylum seekers hosted in Cranendonck, which was at that time the asylum centre closest to their home town Weert. The idea of this fundraiser occurred when Mrs. Neijnens saw the picture of a drowned Syrian boy on September 2, 2015. “When the picture of that [drowned] boy was published, I thought to myself: I have to do something now, and that is it!”238 [free translation] (Neijnens, 2015). This explanation indicated the influence media and the press have on individuals at the local level.

In an article published by “de Grenskoerier” in September 2015 prior to the start of the fundraiser, Mrs. Neijnens and Mrs. Vondenhoff explain “we cannot solve the (political) situation with our actions nor our wisdom. Neither will we decide whether or not these refugees are able to stay in the Netherlands. However, when they here await the decision whether or not they are allowed to stay in the Netherlands, we want their residence to be dignified” 239 (Grenskoerier, 2015). To contribute to the situation of the asylum seekers during their residence in the asylum centres, Mrs. Neijnens and Vondenhoff launched their fundraiser called “Pass the warmth” in which they aimed to collect as many warm winter cloths as possible to give those to the asylum seekers staying in Cranendonck (Neijnens, 2015).

“I have contacts. Despite me not being commercially set at all, I just started calling”240, Mrs. Neijnens (2015) explains. After contacting the interim location manager of the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck the idea of the fundraiser was accepted and it was decided which items were needed at that centre. This

237 “Geef de Warmte door” 238 “Toen kwam die foto van dat jongetje langs en toen dacht ik echt: Nu ga ik iets doen. Klaar!” 239 “We kunnen de (politieke) situatie in die landen niet met eigen kracht of wijsheid oplossen. We gaan ook niet over de beslissing of de vluchtelingen hier mogen blijven of niet. Zolang ze hier zitten te wachten of ze mogen blijven of terug moeten, willen we dat het wel menswaardig is” 240 “Ik heb de contacten, ben totaal niet commercieel maar ik ben iedereen gaan afbellen”

132 varied from winter jackets, scarfs and heads to baby clothing and sportive outfits, preferably in small sizes. “we clearly tuned our requests with the asylum centre in Budel. We asked them about their necessities to prevent us arranging all sorts of unnecessary stuff”241 (Neijnens, 2015).

This fundraiser was further promoted through their own Facebook page named “Pass the Warmth”. Within the explanation of this Facebook page, the asylum seekers are, possibly strategically, framed in a sentimental way as people who have to leave everything behind due to miserable and dangerous circumstances: “there is no further explanation necessary about the current misery that is ongoing in multiple places in the world. Groups of people have to leave everything behind to find a place where they can be safe”242 (Facebook, 2015). This characterization frame indirectly supports the fundraiser by engaging peoples’ sympathy. This might stimulate peoples’ willingness to help the asylum seekers by donating to the fundraiser.

To organize the donated items, Gamma and Praxis agreed to deliver boxes in which they could be divided. In advance of the fundraiser, people were informed to sort the cloths before donating them so they only had to be divided over the various labelled boxes (Neijnens, 2015). This and other information was provided to the inhabitants of Cranendonck and Weert through the fundraiser’s Facebook page (Facebook, 2015).

The actual fundraising was spread over 4 days, from September 14th until September 17th. The items collected during the first two days were delivered at the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. However, two days after the fundraiser started, the municipality of Weert granted COA permission to open an asylum centre at a former army base in Weert. Since Mrs. Neijnens and Mrs. Vondenhoff both are citizen of Weert, they decided to adjust their fundraiser and to donate the items collected during the last two days to the asylum centre in Weert (Neijnens, 2015).

At the end of every day of the fundraiser a van full of collected items drove to the asylum centre to deliver the donations of that day. Those donations were not composed of clothes only. Mrs. Neijnens (2015) explains: “another nice thing we experienced is that without us asking, people created packages with shampoo and brought it to us. They went to the shops to buy shampoo and they came by to bring those packages along”243 (Neijnens, 2015).

At the asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck, the donated items were divided over those in need of new clothing. Mr. Schippers, COA employee at the Nassau-Dietzkazerne explains how the asylum seekers at Budel-Cranendonck can make so called clothing appointments. Every asylum seeker located at this asylum centre is allowed to make one clothing appointment in the duration of their residence in Budel. During these appointments, the asylum seekers are allowed to choose four items each. The policy of dividing

241 “We hebben heel duidelijk met het azc in Budel afgestemd. We hebben gevraagd waar behoefte aan was om te voorkomen dat wij allerlei dingen zouden gaan regelen die helemaal niet nodig waren” 242 “Het behoeft geen verdere uitleg dat er op dit moment een hoop ellende is op veel plekken in de wereld. Stromen mensen laten alles achter op zoek naar een plek waar ze veilig zijn” 243 “Wat ook leuk was, is dat zonder dat je het mensen vroeg ze shampoo pakketjes gingen samenstellen en kwamen brengen. Die gingen dan naar de winkels om shampoo te kopen en kwamen dat langs brengen”

133 cloths over the asylum seekers is arranged differently at all asylum centres (Schippers, 2016). At the asylum centre in Weert for example, people are allowed to take five items each (Neijnens, 2015). 7.7 Conclusion In this chapter I indicated how the stories, assumptions and experiences shared on traditional and social media publications are strategically as well as unconsciously used to influence the risk and information-, and characterization frames applied by local actors. The activities on traditional and social media are visualised, some of which appeared to have a more unilateral approach than others. The traditional news sources share items presenting recent development in Cranendonck with regard to the asylum seekers in a, mainly, neutral way. The occurrence of traditional news items shows resemblances with the occurrence of Tweets, which mainly appear to be responding on or sharing the news presented by traditional media sources. This is done in both a neutral way as well as by applying varying characterization and risk- an information frames.

The opponents and proponents Facebook pages appear to use a similar strategy of only sharing items supporting their view on asylum seekers. The items and posts of the opponents Facebook page concern the misbehaviour of asylum seekers, the municipality and COA as well as the negative influence the hosting of asylum seekers has on the local society. Within these posts clear frames are, possibly strategically, applied to describe the asylum seekers and to elaborate on recent developments concerning this topic. As stated above, the proponents Facebook page applies an equal strategy by only sharing posts in which the asylum seekers, their activities and their contribution to the municipality are positively presented. This framing might also be strategically applied.

Aside from social and traditional media activities, the influx of asylum seekers in Cranendonck also led to the establishment of multiple local initiatives against their arrival and supporting the asylum seekers. The promotion of these initiatives, especially the petition “no permanent residence of the COA in Budel” and fundraiser “Pass the Warmth”, indicates strategic framing processes in which the asylum seekers and their activities are described in a way that concurs with the purpose of the initiatives. This way, the local initiatives aim to influence the frames applied by local residents to describe and evaluate asylum seekers, their behaviour and their presence.

Furthermore, this chapter shows that the interaction between characterization frames and risk- and information frames, indicated in the previous chapter, is a two-way interaction. When (media) sources, for example, only share negative situations concerning asylum seekers, risk- and information frames are likely to adjust to this information. This might therefore cause an increase of the experienced likelihood of dangerous situations occurring in the municipality due to the arrival of asylum seekers. This risk and information frame supports a specific and well fitted characterization frame that described asylum seekers as, for example, violent and dangerous people. In the next chapter, I will discuss how media is being used by different actors involved and how they can make use of the influence media have on the different frames to further promote their frame.

134

8 Discussion, conclusion and recommendations In this research, I studied the way in which local actors in the municipality of Cranendonck frame each other, as well as the local asylum situation. Furthermore, I tried to gain an understanding on how the applied frames are established, since the framing processes are influenced by various external factors. In this chapter, the results of the literature study, quantitative and qualitative fieldwork will be combined and further discussed. I will answer the research questions and I will also elaborate on my conclusions and share some recommendations.

First, I will discuss some aspects of the research done, including the used concepts and analysis. Within this discussion, some of my experiences during the research are highlighted and interesting findings are further elaborated upon. Thereafter, I will answer the research questions and draw conclusions upon my research findings. In the final section of this chapter I use the knowledge gained during this research to formulate some recommendations on the organization of hosting asylum seekers on the local level in a municipality in the Netherlands. In this recommendation section I will stress the importance of true and fair information provision and communication flows on the local situation with regard to the asylum centre and its inhabitants, as well as the provision of general information on the asylum procedure. 8.1 Discussion In this research, I used the concept of framing to investigate the local asylum situation in the municipality of Cranendonck. The different types of framing, described in the theory section of this research, were also found in field research on the case study of this research. By studying the narratives of local actors, the types of framing were identified and used to gain an understanding on the local perceptions on the asylum situation. All involved local actors use framing (unconsciously) to evaluate and to describe the local situation as well as to influence and convince other local actors involved of the applied frames.

By analysing the narratives of the local actors, I aimed to indicate the different types of framing those actors were using as well as the content of the applied frames. Studying the narratives of local actors appeared to be a useful tool to designate the frames, since it enabled me to elaborate upon the frames applied and to link the different types of framing. Because the influx of asylum seekers can be considered as a delicate subject, I experienced being an outsider of the municipality of my case study as an advantage. I had no interest in the development of the asylum centre in Cranendonck, therefore I could neutrally position myself during the interviews. This neutral position and lack of personal interest gave me the possibility to create a trusted environment during the interviews, in which the interviewees were able to speak their minds and share their experiences without feeling judged. In addition to this, being an outsider gave me the advantage of being curious and open to all the experiences and narratives of the local inhabitants without them knowing my own opinion on the influx and hosting of asylum seekers. Therefore, I was able to move myself into the situation of the interviewed local actors, which stimulated the open and trusting atmosphere during the interviews.

Another benefit I experienced as an outsider of the municipality of my case study was that I could present myself as unaware of the details of the local situation with regard to the asylum centres, its establishment and developments over time. As a result, all the interviewees had the possibility to introduce me with the current local situation, the development of this situation, as well as the previous activities and (recent)

135 developments in the way in which they personally experienced them. The information provided to me during these introductions gave me clear insights in the position and opinion of the local actors I interviewed and therefore also in the frames they applied to describe the local situation and the other local actors involved, as well as how these frames emerged.

During the interviews and while analysing the narratives, I found that when two different actors frame a similar situation in a different way, the actor applying a frame that concerns a negative perspective is often more descriptive when stressing his or her argument. In other words, I found that actors applying frames in which the local asylum situation or the other actors involved are negatively described, more extensively describe their experiences and thoughts than positive actors. The narratives of negative actors therefore contain more examples that help indicating their frames. The positive actors, on the other hand, are more concise and they do not give many examples on positive situations and experiences. This makes it more difficult to indicate the frames they apply and to understand the establishment of these frames. In this study, it was therefore easier for me to visualize the frames and framing processes of negative actors than those of positive actors. In order to understand the frames applied by positive actors, I had to ask more, and more detailed questions during the interviews. When describing the framing processes of negative actors, I had a broad collection of examples and quotes of different negative local actors to choose from. The lesser extent to which I was able to collect examples and quotes of positive actors made it more difficult for me to indicate their framing processes and the final frames applied. This difference in descriptiveness could possibly be explained by stating that positive actors experience more difficulties in expressing their opinions. However, the cause of this difference is not researched in this study and therefore no conclusions should be drawn on this. Despite its exclusion from this study, the difference in descriptiveness can be an interesting topic for further research on the use of narratives to indicate different types of framing. In addition to this, it could be discussed whether an extra analysis is necessary to complement to the narrative analysis in indicating the frames and framing processes of positive actors as fully as the those of negative actors.

Aside from this difference in details of description and used examples in the different narratives, it appeared that the narratives of all local actors, both positive, negative and neutral, were useful in indicating the applied characterization frames as well as the applied risk- and information frames. Analysing the narratives also made it possible to indicate and study the link between those different types of framing. This link concerns the influence risk- and information frames have on the characterization frames as described by Lewicki et all (2003), but also the influence characterization frames have on the applied risk- and information frames. In this study, I showed how both frames appear to strengthen the other in a cyclical way. I also found that the characterization frame on one topic not just influences the risk- and information frame on that topic, but also influences the characterization frame on other subjects, often in a similar direction. For example, if the characterization frame with regard to asylum seekers is influenced in a positive way, this often coincides with a positive characterization frame on COA or the municipality. These findings add to the link described by Lewicki et al (2003). A reason for the links found in this case study could be the close interaction between the different local actors involved. On the local level of a municipality, local actors such as the municipality and COA work closely together. The local residents appear to be unaware of or confused about division in responsibility and tasks between the municipality and COA. As a result, it might be that local actors such as COA and the municipality are not

136 independently framed by the residents of the municipality. It can therefore be discussed whether the results on the levels satisfaction of local residents and entrepreneurs on the activities of COA and the municipality are fully accurate. To research this, the levels of satisfaction should also be researched by applying another analysis, strategy or theory. An example of an alternative research strategy could be to organize a test panel in which two groups of local residents have to answer questions by means of a questionnaire on their satisfaction with regard to activities and communication of COA and the municipality as well as questions on the division of tasks and responsibilities between these two actors. Thereafter, one group receives an explanation on the tasks division between COA and the municipalities and their individual and shared responsibilities, while the other group receives no explanation. In the final stage of the study with the test panel, both groups have to answer questions equal to those asked in the first questionnaire, on their satisfaction with regard to the activities of COA and the municipality. It can thereafter be studied whether or not the opinion and level of satisfaction of local residents changed after they received extra information on the division of responsibilities and tasks between COA and the municipality. Before organizing such a test panel however, the specifics need to be further elaborated upon.

Despite the narrative analysis indicated that COA and the municipality might not be independently framed, the analysis of narratives and the concept of framing do contribute to gain an understanding of the local situation, evaluations of local actors on the local processes and the activities organized by other local actors, as well as on the conflicts that have occurred and might occur in the future. Studying the frames applied by the different local actors gives an insight in the motives behind their activities and might therefore help to elaborate on possible activities and processes happening in future situations. To do so however, future research should include the types of framing that were left out in this study, such as social identity frames and the conflict management frames. Researching these frames, and combining the findings of that research to the conclusions drawn in this thesis can provide a fuller understanding of the local asylum situation and the descriptions of evaluations and (future) activities of the local actors involved.

Aside from the different types of framing that influence each other, I also found that external factors have influence on the frames applied by local actors. One of those external factor is the media. I found that the information provided in media publications influences the way in which local actors evaluate situations and the way in which these local actors describe other local actors. During the media analysis I found that publications by traditional, but also some social media sources mainly concern items in which the local asylum situation is negatively described. Furthermore, most publications concern articles that involved asylum seekers in a negative way, for example by elaborating upon possible fights that happened at the asylum centres. Even though the asylum seekers are not necessarily negatively characterized and framed in the articles themselves, the described situation stimulates a risk- and information frame in which the presence of asylum seekers is likely to result in undesired situations. This stimulated risk- and information frames is, in turn, likely to result in a characterization frame negatively describing the asylum seekers. Another result of the negative publications of traditional and sometimes also social media sources, is that they result into feelings of suspicion by the local residents of Cranendonck on the internal situation at the asylum centres. When the media is elaborating upon the issues, escalations and negative situation at asylum centres, while local actors such as COA and the municipality aim to highlight positive stories only,

137 a discrepancy occurs in the information provided to the local residents in Cranendonck on the internal situation at the asylum centres. This discrepancy is likely to result in distrust and might be another reason for the mainly negative frames applied by local residents to describe COA and the municipality as well as their activities. In this study, I have not researched the reasons behind the negative approach in media publications. However, it might be that positive stories on the asylum seekers or local development with regards to the asylum situation are perceived as less sensational and therefore receive less attention and publicity. Further research on the reason behind the media publications in which the asylum situation is mainly framed in a negative way might be desired. In addition to this, it should also be researched whether media sources can also positively influence the frames applied by local actors by changing the frames applied by official media sources when publishing their stories and by publishing more stories in which the asylum seekers are positively contributing to a local society.

Finally, I like to discuss that during this study on the media publications I found that items mainly concerned the shelter of asylum seekers, and no attention was given to the housing of refugees in the municipality of Cranendonck. Also during the interviews with local actors and while studying their narratives, it appeared that the topic of housing refugees was not broadly elaborated upon. In addition to this, I found that local actors that framed the asylum seekers in a negative way and also negatively evaluated the situation in which they were involved, had less thoughts on the refugees that are permanently hosted in Cranendonck. It also appeared that local residents are less concerned with the refugees hosted at the local level, than the asylum seekers sheltered there. Another explanation might be that the majority of media attention given to the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers and the lack of media attention towards the housing of refugees. As a result, local actors might be unaware of the refugees that are housed within their municipality. It could also be that local actors accept the asylum seekers once it is proven they fled for legitimate reasons. Another possibility is that the local actors in Cranendonck are mainly unaware of the difference between asylum seekers and refugees and instead of making a distinction between the two, they consider them to be the same. However, no conclusions can be drawn on this topic, since it was excluded from my research. This can be an interesting topic for further research. In addition to this future research topic, it can also be interesting to study whether the frames applied by local residents to describe asylum seekers in the municipality and the situations in which they are involved, apply similar frames to describe the refugees that are housed in their municipality. These future studies can provide in a fuller insight on the frames applied by local residents to describe asylum seekers and refugees. 8.2 Conclusion This study concerned the way in which local actors in the municipality of Cranendonck frame the local asylum situation as well as the other local actors involved in the translation and implementation processes of the EU and national asylum policies on the arrival and hosting of asylum seekers on the local level in Cranendonck. In this section the research questions will be answered and conclusions will be drawn.

To answer the proposed research questions, I first studied the European asylum procedure, its formulation on the EU level, and its implementation on the national level in the Netherlands. The European asylum procedure equalizes the asylum application and examination procedure in all member states by nationally implementing three directives and two regulations. Frictions in translation processes

138 and translation gaps might influence the frames applied by actors on the local level with regard to the asylum centres and its inhabitants. In this situation, however, it can be concluded that no frictions occurred during the translation process of those directives and regulations to the national level in the Netherlands. Therefore, it can be concluded that the EU asylum directives and regulations are implemented without the occurrence of any translation gaps.

Frictions in the translation process did however occur during the translation of the EU and national asylum policies to the local level. These fictions are a result of the pressure on the implementation of the EU and national asylum policies caused by the high influx of asylum seekers. It can be concluded that, with regard to the management of the current asylum influx, the Dublin regulation is an inadequate approach putting too much pressure on the EU border countries. To anticipate on this issue, the EU performed a trial and error of different policies and agreements to lower the pressure on the EU border countries and to ensure a more equal division of asylum seekers over its member states. In the Netherlands, this increased influx of asylum seekers causes pressure on the law ‘Central Organ shelter Asylum seekers’ that states that every asylum seeker in the Netherlands should be offered a place to stay by COA. To continue ensuring the local implementation of this law under the pressure of increasing numbers of asylum seekers entering the Netherlands, more asylum centres and emergency shelter locations had to be stablished by COA on a short term. In the short term this resulted in frictions in the translation processes by the establishment of asylum centres on the local level. It can be concluded from this thesis that in Cranendonck those frictions resulted in local practices whereby the local residents and councillors were excluded from the decision making process on the establishment of an asylum centre Budel-Cranendonck. This exclusion and even the lack of prior notification of a decision already taken resulted in dissatisfied citizens in Cranendonck and stimulated frames in which the local actors involved in this decision making process, COA and the municipality, are described as untrustworthy. Following this reasoning, it can be concluded that, in this situation, frictions in policy translation processes influence the framing processes of actors on the local level. In addition to this, it appeared that most local residents were unaware of the fact that the accelerated decision making process on the establishment and development of Budel-Cranendonck resulted from the pressure on the EU and the national government to manage the influx of asylum seekers.

Aside from frictions in the translation processes and their consequences, the establishment of frames and the framing processes are influenced by more external factors such as personal experiences, personal assumptions, prior knowledge, experienced personal advantages or disadvantages and media publications. These external factors can differ between different local actors, which results in the use of different frames to evaluate the asylum situation as well as the other local actors involved in these processes. Following this reasoning, it can be concluded that the frames of local actors to describe asylum seekers, COA and the municipally depend on their personal knowledge on the descent of the asylum seekers and the asylum system, personal experiences with asylum seekers and assumptions concerning them, as well as stories and experiences of others and publications shared in traditional and social media.

Furthermore, I can conclude that communication and information flows are an important factor in the establishment of the frames applied by local actors. These flows influence the levels of trust and the openness to listen to the stories and arguments of others. I can also conclude that the division of tasks and responsibilities between the local organizational actors, COA and the municipality, with regard to the 139 provision of information and the stimulation of communication flows, is unclear. In correspondence with this, I can conclude that the lack of communication and information towards local residents, partly as a result of the frictions in the local transition process, stimulated characterization frames in which both COA and the municipality of Cranendonck are described as untrustworthy and non-transparent organizations.

Communication and information flows towards local residents do not only originate from COA and the municipality. When the information provided by COA or the municipality does not align with the information shared by traditional and social media sources, the trustworthiness or local residents towards COA and the municipality decreases. As a result, this influences the characterization frames applied by local residents to describe COA and the municipality as well as the risk- and information frames applied by the same actors to evaluate the activities of COA and the municipality. Furthermore, national and local media publications also influence the characterization, and risk- and information frames applied by local residents to describe and evaluate asylum seekers and their activities. Therefore, it can be concluded that local and national publications in traditional and social media are highly influential on the frames applied by local residents to describe the asylum seekers, COA and the municipality, as well as to evaluate the activities established by COA and the municipality.

To understand the local level of support with regard to the establishment, developments and management of the asylum centres in Cranendonck and its inhabitants, it is necessary to understand the characterization frames, as well as the risk- and information frames applied by local residents. Therefore, it can be concluded that understanding the applied characterization frame as well as the risk- and information frames is required to describe how local actors frame the overall asylum situation in Cranendonck and the local actors involved in this. Even though there are differences in the specific frames applied on the local level, it can be concluded that actors either use a frame in which the involved local actor is positively described and their actions are explained and understood, or frames in which this local actor is negatively described, as well as their actions and the influence they have on the local society.

With regard to the asylum seekers, the characterization frames applied by local residents are mainly unconsciously used and concern their descent, sex, wealth, as well as their reason for travelling to Europe. The behavioural problems of asylum seekers as experienced by local residents in Cranendonck are mainly caused by cultural differences and a lack of knowledge of the Dutch culture, customs, norms and values. The characterization frame applied by a local resident to describe asylum seekers, is likely to determine whether he or she is bothered by the asylum seekers’ behaviour or not. Furthermore, it can be concluded that the characterization frames applied by actors to describe asylum seekers influence the risk- and information frames applied by the same actors to evaluate situation in which asylum seekers are involved.

Furthermore, the risk- and information frames are also influenced by stories, assumptions and experiences that are strategically as well as unconsciously shared in traditional and social media publications. In addition, the risk- and information frame applied by local residents, also influences the characterization frame applied by the same resident. Therefore, it can be concluded that both frames are mutually influencing each other, and the external effects result in the balanced frames applied by local residents.

This mutual influential pattern is also found with regard to the frames applied by local residents to describe COA and the municipality of Cranendonck. As stressed above, those frames are also influenced 140 by external factors. Due to the limited communication and information flows of those actors towards the residents of Cranendonck trust issues occur. This results in the current frames that are applied by local residents that describe COA and the municipality, as well as their activities, in a negative way. In addition to this, it can be concluded that the characterization frames as well as the risk- and information frames applied to describe COA and their actions, are more negative that those applied to describe the municipality and their actions. This is caused by the local believe that COA is more influential in the local situation with regard to the establishment, development and management of the asylum centre and its residents. 8.3 Recommendations The importance of true and fair information has been highlighted in this thesis. Local actors such as COA and the municipality are recommended to keep other local actors, such as the local residents, informed on the situation at the asylum centres and its inhabitants. More specifically, this information should be provided on the asylum seekers, the internal situation at the asylum centres as well as the activities and decision making processes of the municipality and COA. When information provision and communication by COA and the municipality to local residents is lacking, this results in a lack of trust and support, and a feeling of overall suspicion by the residents of the municipality towards the internal situation at the asylum centre and the activities of COA and the municipality.

Currently, the residents in Cranendonck feel COA forces the establishment of the asylum centre, falsely claims the internal situation at the asylum centres is well organized and safe, and makes empty promises. Due to this characterization frame, the information that is provided by COA to the local residents of Cranendonck, is mistrusted and therefore not listened to. This results in a downward spiral in which COA is continuously and increasingly characterized as the malefactor and an untrustworthy and lying organization. The communication flows by the municipality are equally important as the communication flows of COA, since they can contribute to the understanding by local residents of the tasks of COA and the municipality, the division of labour between them, the municipal decision making process, and the link between the national asylum laws and policies and the local implementation of those. Clear, open and honest communication by the municipality and COA results into more local support with regard to the asylum centre and its inhabitants. Furthermore, communication and information contributes to the understanding of the behaviour of asylum seekers, which in turn positively influences the experience of nuisance by local residents with regard to the behaviour of asylum seekers.

Due to the publications in traditional and new social media on misunderstandings and unrest at asylum centres, many local residents do not believe that nothing bad ever happens at the asylum centres in Cranendonck. The items covered by national and local media stations currently often differ from the information shared by COA and the municipality on the local level in Cranendonck. Where official media sources mainly publish items in which asylum seekers are negatively involved, both COA and the municipality of Cranendonck consciously avoid the publication of stories in which asylum seekers are negatively framed. The discrepancy between the stories that are covered and highlighted by official media sources and biased actors such as the municipality and COA, strengthens the impression of local residents that the COA and, to a lesser extent, the municipality are hiding the truth and share dishonest information. Local residents often find local and national newspapers more trustworthy to cover asylum centre related

141 issues since they are an independent source who have nothing to gain from publishing dishonest items. As a result, the selective communication of COA and the municipality seems to decrease their credibility and trustworthiness.

Following this reason, both COA and the municipality are recommended to publish negative as well as positive items on the asylum seekers and the internal situation at the asylum centre. Residents want COA and the municipality to be transparent on the internal situation at the asylum centre. Their local trustworthiness might increase if they would also cover stories on misunderstandings and incidents at the asylum centre by presenting a balanced and unbiased account of developments concerning asylum seekers and the asylum centre, and not sensationalizing it. To summarize, open and honest communication by COA and the municipality is recommended to improve their local reputation and to change the characterization frames applied by local residents to describe them as well as their activities.

Aside from the necessity of communicating information that is more in line with the publications of traditional and social media sources, I like to recommend to COA and the municipality to also inform local residents on differences between asylum seekers and refugees, the overall asylum situation, shelter circumstances and the financial support provided to asylum seekers hosted in the Netherlands. In this research I have indeed indicated that the lack of knowledge of local residents on these topics makes the residents vulnerable for speculations and sensational stories. To decrease this vulnerability, it is recommended that both COA and the municipality to take responsibility in filling current knowledge gaps by informing the local residents on the financial costs and influence of asylum seekers, how this relates to the national financial situation and the amounts spent on, for example, health care, elderly care and the unemployed.

Furthermore, local knowledge on the asylum procedure is lacking. It is broadly believed that the asylum procedure is an easy process in which almost everyone applying for asylum can receive a residence permit. This leads to a dissatisfaction among citizens with the national government and the local situation as well. The local knowledge gap on the European and national asylum procedure results in local-level dissatisfaction on the asylum situation, prejudices on the asylum seekers and, hence, to limited levels of support. This knowledge gap should be filled and if governmental information is not reaching enough residents, it is my recommendation that the municipalities in which asylum centres are established, as well as COA, should make an attempt to fill these knowledge gaps on the local level. Most local residents, especially those negatively framing asylum seekers and the situation in which they are involved, are not making an effort to gain this knowledge themselves. As a result, the knowledge gap remains intact and the dissatisfaction increases. To turn this process around, I would like to recommend to both COA and the municipality to offer handles to local residents whereby the threshold to gain knowledge on the asylum procedure and the shelter situation is decreased. Since I indicated in this research that residents applying a characterization frame to describe asylum seekers in a negative way, are less likely to collect information on the asylum procedure and the sheltering circumstances, information should be shared to them without any activity of local residents is required. This could for example be doing by spreading posters, pamphlets and informative folders, however more research is necessary on this topic. The reason why I believe this is a task for the municipality and COA is because this also gives them an opportunity to create a more supportive atmosphere among local residents, which in the end, is mainly beneficial for the municipality and COA. 142

9 References Scientific literature Benda-Beckmann, F. v. (2001). Legal Pluralism and Social Justice in Economic and Political Development. IDS Bulletin, 32(1), 46-56. doi:10.1111/j.1759-5436.2001.mp32001006.x Birkland, T. A. (2014). An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making: Taylor & Francis. Croce, M. (2011). Does Legal Institutionalism Rule out Legal Pluralism-Schmitt's Institutional Theory and the Problem of the Concrete Order. Utrecht L. Rev., 7, 42. Ferguson, J., & Lohmann, L. (1994). The anti-politics machine: "development' and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Ecologist, 24(5), 176-181. Isendahl, N., Pahl-Wostl, C., & Dewulf, A. (2010). Using framing parameters to improve handling of uncertainties in water management practice. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(2), 107- 122. doi:10.1002/eet.533 Jasny, B. R. (2011). Framing the Climate Debate. Science, 332(6026), 151. doi:10.1126/science.332.6026.151-a Kaufman, S., Elliott, M., & Shmueli, D. (2003). Frames, framing and reframing. Beyond intractability. Lewicki, R., Gray, B., & Elliott, M. (2003). Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: Concepts and cases: Island Press. Lewis, D., & Mosse, D. (2006). Encountering order and disjuncture: contemporary anthropological perspectives on the organization of development. Oxford development studies, 34(1), 1-13. Mannell, J. (2014). Adopting, manipulating, transforming: Tactics used by gender practitioners in South African NGOs to translate international gender policies into local practice. Health & Place, 30, 4- 12. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.07.010 Matthes, J. (2012). Framing Politics: An Integrative Approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 247- 259. doi:10.1177/0002764211426324 Merry, S. E. (2013). Legal Pluralism and Legal Culture Mapping the Terrain. In C. S. Brian Z. Tamanaha, Michael Woolcock (Ed.), Legal Pluralism and Development Scholars and Practitioners in Dialogue: Cambridge University Press. Mosse, D. (2004). Is good policy unimplementable? Reflections on the ethnography of aid policy and practice. Development and change, 35(4), 639-671. Mukhtarov, F. (2014). Rethinking the travel of ideas: policy translation in the water sector. Policy & Politics, 42(1), 71-88. Powell, R. (2011). Frames and Narratives as Tools for Recruiting and Sustaining Group Members: The Soulforce Equality Ride as a Social Movement Organization*. Sociological Inquiry, 81(4), 454-476. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2011.00386.x Sautkina, E., Goodwin, D., Jones, A., Ogilvie, D., Petticrew, M., White, M., & Cummins, S. (2014). Lost in translation? Theory, policy and practice in systems-based environmental approaches to obesity prevention in the Healthy Towns programme in England. Health & Place, 29, 60-66. Trauner, F. (2016). Asylum policy: the EU’s ‘crises’ and the looming policy regime failure. Journal of European Integration, 38(3), 311-325. doi:10.1080/07036337.2016.1140756 Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458.

143 van Hulst, M., & Yanow, D. (2014). From Policy “Frames” to “Framing”: Theorizing a More Dynamic, Political Approach. The American Review of Public Administration. doi:10.1177/0275074014533142 Wallace, H., Pollack, M. A., & Young, A. R. (2015). Policy-making in the European Union: Oxford University Press, USA. News items ANP. (2014, 23-09-2014). Meer asielzoekers naar kazerne Budel. Retrieved from http://www.nu.nl/binnenland/3885493/meer-asielzoekers-kazerne-budel.html AZC-Alert. (n.d., n.d.). Missie AZC-Alert. Visie. BBC. (2016, 04-03-2016). Migrant crisis: Migration to Europe explained in seven charts. News Europe. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911 Blikopnieuws. (2015). Snellere doorstroming asielproces door tweede aanmeldcentrum in Budel. Retrieved from http://www.blikopnieuws.nl/2015/232341/snellere-doorstroming-asielproces- door-tweede-aanmeldcentrum-in-budel Brekke, J.-P., & Brochmann, G. (2015). Stuck in Transit: Secondary Migration of Asylum Seekers in Europe, National Differences, and the Dublin Regulation. Journal of Refugee Studies, 28(2), 145-162. doi:10.1093/jrs/feu028 CranendonckInOpstand. (2015, 9-01-2015). Ontbinding Samenwerink comités AZC-Alert. Retrieved from http://www.hacweekblad.eu/brieven/ontbinding-samenwerking-comits-azcalert/14 deVolkskrant. (2015, 11-09-2015). Extra aanmeldcentrum asielzoekers in Budel. de Volkskrant. Retrieved from http://www.volkskrant.nl/buitenland/extra-aanmeldcentrum-asielzoekers-in- budel~a4140079/ Dool, E. d. V. P. v. d. (2015, 4-09-2015). Oost-Europese landen blijven tegen EU-verdeelsleutel vluchtelingen. NRC. Retrieved from http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/09/04/oost-europese- landen-blijven-tegen-eu-verdeelsleutel-vluchtelingen duPré, R. (2015, 28-10-215). Fractievoorzitters Tweede Kamer in open brief aan kiezers 'Stop verharding van het asieldebat". de Volkskrant. EenVandaag (Producer). (2015, September 25). Mensen iets positiever over toelaten vluchtelingen. Een Vandaag Opiniepanel. EindhovensDagblad. (2014a, 8-12-2014). 17-jarige bewoner azc Nassau-Dietzkazerne Budel zwaargewond na vechtpartij. EindhovensDagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e- o/cranendonck/17-jarige-bewoner-azc-nassau-dietzkazerne-budel-zwaargewond-na-vechtpartij- 1.4660670 EindhovensDagblad. (2014b, 14-05-2014). Actie tegen komst asielzoekers Budel. Eindhovens Dagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e-o/cranendonck/actie-tegen-komst- asielzoekers-budel-1.4360578 EindhovensDagblad (Producer). (2014c, 22-02-2016). Asielzoekerscentrum Budel-Dorplein wordt heropend. Eindhovens Dagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e- o/cranendonck/asielzoekerscentrum-budel-dorplein-wordt-heropend-1.4273330 EindhovensDagblad. (2014d, 27-03-2014). CA, CDA en VVD vormen beoogde coalitie Cranendonck. EindhovensDagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e-o/cranendonck/ca- cda-en-vvd-vormen-beoogde-coalitie-cranendonck-1.4287782 EindhovensDagblad. (2014e, 10-05-2014). Cranendonck klaar voor komst asielzoekers. Eindhovens Dagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e-o/cranendonck/cranendonck- klaar-voor-komst-asielzoekers-1.4353432 144

EindhovensDagblad. (2014f, 25-06-2014). Gemeente Cranendonck: Geen 800 extra asielzoekers. EindhovensDagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e- o/cranendonck/gemeente-cranendonck-geen-800-extra-asielzoekers-1.4420332 EindhovensDagblad. (2015a, 17-12-2015). Azc-markt Budel zonder enige problemen. EindhovensDagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e-o/cranendonck/azc-markt-budel-zonder- enige-problemen-1.5553950 EindhovensDagblad. (2015b, 8-12-2015). Blijvend invalide na mishandeling azc Budel. Eindhovens Dagblad. Retrieved from http://www.ed.nl/regio/cranendonck-e-o/cranendonck/blijvend- invalide-na-mishandeling-azc-budel-1.5522046 EindhovensDagblad. (2015c). Handjevol bezoekers eerste bijeenkomst azc Budel. EindhovensDagblad. Elzendoorn, B. (2014a, 6-12-2014). Asielzoekers in AZC Budel delen met vijven een slaapkamer: ‘Dat gaat niet samen’. Nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/221125532/Asielzoekers+in+AZC+Budel+delen+met+vijv en+een+slaapkamer+%E2%80%98Dat+gaat+niet+samen%E2%80%99.aspx Elzendoorn, B. (2014b, 20-12-2014). Burgercomité Eindhoven zoekt landelijke samenwerking met andere comités tegen komst van asielzoekers. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/2219741043/Burgercomit%C3%A9+Eindhoven+zoekt+lan delijke+samenwerking+met+andere+comit%C3%A9s+tegen+komst+van+asielzoekers.aspx Engelbart, T. (2015, 27-10-2015). Samsom: “We kunnen 60 duizend vluchtelingen aan.” Wilders: “Samsom is de plunderaar van Nederland”. De Dagelijkse Standaard. Gelderlander, D. (2015, 01-12-2015). COA wil vaste asielopvang in het Brabantse Budel. de Gelderlander. Retrieved from http://www.gelderlander.nl/algemeen/binnenland/coa-wil-vaste-asielopvang-in- het-brabantse-budel-1.5495202 Graaf, P. d. (2015). Budel schrikt niet van asielzoeker. de Volkskrant. Grenskoerier, d. (2015, 17-09-2015). Geef de warmte door, lever goederen in voor de vluchtelingen. de Grenskoerier. Retrieved from http://www.grenskoerier.nl/algemeen/geef-de-warmte-door- lever-goederen-in-voor-de-vluchtelingen Hoofs, R. (2015b, 16-12-2015). Permanent AZC. de Grenskoerier, p. 1. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/grenskoerier/docs/2015-51?e=1186318/32009465 Horizon. (2014a, 27-03-2014). CA!, CDA en VVD willen coalitie in Cranendonck. Nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.rtvhorizon.nl/SITE/?p=5866 Horizon. (2014b, 24-11-2014). Feiten omtrent situatie asielzoekerscentra in Cranendonck. Retrieved from http://www.rtvhorizon.nl/SITE/?p=17369 Juda, P. (2014, 13-05-2014). 1200 asielzoekers definitief naar Nassau-Dietzkazerne: woensdag eerste bewoners in Budel. Omroep Brabant. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/211047692/1200+asielzoekers+definitief+naar+Nassau- Dietzkazerne+woensdag+eerste+bewoners+in+Budel.aspx Kamp, G. v. d. (2014, 8-05-2014). AZC Budel krijgt negenhonderd bewoners, Nassau-Dietzkazerne in beeld. Omroep Brabant. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/210806722/AZC+Budel+krijgt+negenhonderd+bewoners, +Nassau-Dietzkazerne+in+beeld.aspx Mansvelt, J. (2014). Gemeente overvallen door urgentie; 1200 asielzoekers is wel maximum. EindhovensDagblad. NOS. (2015a, 07-01-2015). Bloedige terreuraanslag op satirisch blad in Parijs. NOS. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2012108-bloedige-terreuraanslag-op-satirisch-blad-in-parijs.html

145

NOS. (2015b, 30-11-2015). COA wil legerkazerne Budel kopen voor langdurige opvang. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2072348-coa-wil-legerkazerne-budel-kopen-voor-langdurige-opvang.html NOS. (2015c, 02-09-2015). Geschokte reacties op foto aangespoeld jongetje voor Turkse kust. Buitenland. NOS (Producer). (2015d, 28-08-2015). In cijfers: de vluchtelingenstroom naar Europa. NOS. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2035508-in-cijfers-de-vluchtelingenstroom-naar-europa.html NOS (Producer). (2015e, 21-08-2015). Scheve verdeling asielzoekers is geen kwade opzet. NOS.nl. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2058879-scheve-verdeling-asielzoekers-is-geen-kwade- opzet.html NOS. (2016a, 5-01-2016). 90 aangiftes in Keulen, daders nog niet gepakt. NOS. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2078706-90-aangiftes-in-keulen-daders-nog-niet-gepakt.html NOS. (2016b, 14-11-2016). Golf van terreur in Parijs: zeker 127 doden; 99 mensen kritiek. NOS. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/artikel/2069002-golf-van-terreur-in-parijs-zeker-127-doden-99-mensen- kritiek.html nu.nl. (2016, 07-01-2016). Meeste daders Keulen waren asielzoekers uit SyriË. Buitenland. Retrieved from http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/4194173/meeste-daders-keulen-waren-asielzoekers-syrie.html OmroepBrabant. (2014, 11-05-2014). Cranendonck verdeeld op Facebook over komst asielzoekers: 'Voor" 150+ likes, 'Tegen' 1000+ likes. Nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/210950652/Cranendonck+verdeeld+op+Facebook+over+ komst+asielzoekers+Voor+150++likes,+Tegen+1000++likes.aspx OmroepBrabant. (2015, http://nos.nl/artikel/2072348-coa-wil-legerkazerne-budel-kopen-voor- langdurige-opvang.html). COA wil legerkazerne Budel kopen voor langdurige opvang. OmroepPowNed (Writer) & R. Castricum (Director). (2014a). Asielzoekers zijn het gesprek van de dag in Budel [YouTube], PowNews: PowNed. OmroepPowNed (Writer) & PowNed (Director). (2014b). Budel verwelkomt asielzoekende medemens: YouTube. Pennings, M. (2014, 24-11-2014). Ook in AZC Budel-Dorplein grote vechtpartij met asielzoekers: weer spanningen Eritreeërs en Syriërs. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/220400222/Ook+in+AZC+Budel- Dorplein+grote+vechtpartij+met+asielzoekers+weer+spanningen+Eritreeers+en+Syriers+.aspx PowNed. (2014, 24-11-2014). Ook vechtpartij in AZC Budel. Binnenland. Retrieved from http://www.powned.tv/nieuws/binnenland/2014/11/ook_vechtpartij_in_azc_budel.html Quekel, S. (2015a, 8-10-2015). 200 extra asielzoekers naar Budel: omwonenden niet geïnformeerd. Omroep Brabant. Retrieved from http://www.headlines24.nl/headlines_iframe.php?url=http://brabantn.ws/K9T Quekel, S. (2015b, 1-12-2015). Legerbasis Budel wordt mogelijk permanent azc: 'Minimaal 15 jaar opvanglocatie voor vluchtelingen'. Omroep Brabant. Retrieved from http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/240426722/Legerbasis+Budel+wordt+mogelijk+permane nt+azc+Minimaal+15+jaar+opvanglocatie+voor+vluchtelingen.aspx rtlnieuws. (2015a, 12-09-2015). Gemiddeld acht jaar wachten op huurwoning. Langer wachten op huurwoning. Retrieved from http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/gemiddeld-acht-jaar- wachten-op-huurwoning rtlnieuws. (2015b, 17-09-2015). Harde confrontatie Rutte en Wilders over vluchtelingen. Retrieved from http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/politiek/harde-confrontatie-rutte-en-wilders-over- vluchtelingen Verschuren, C. (2014, 14-05-2014). Eerste 17 asielzoekers arriveren woensdagavond in Nassau- Dietzkazerne Budel. Omroep Brabant. Retrieved from 146

http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?news/211092642/Eerste+17+asielzoekers+arriveren+woensda gavond+in+Nassau-Dietzkazerne+Budel.aspx Volkskrant, d. (2015, 14-10-2015). Oranje krijgt niet meer dan 700 asielzoekers. de Volkskrant. Retrieved from http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/oranje-krijgt-niet-meer-dan-700- asielzoekers~a4162949/ Voogt, S. d. (2015, October 6). Staatssecretaris Dijkhoff belaagd door boze bewoners van Oranje. NRC. Social Media @ADnl. (2015, 8-10-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/ADnl/status/652053832168554496 @AntiLinks. (2015, 8-10-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/AntiLinks/status/652083500468826112 @AZCAlertAlmere. (2015, 30-11-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/AZCAlertAlmere/status/671437372245045254 @benadeelt. (2015, 30-11-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/benadeelt/status/671458476657418240 @blikopener333. (2014, 6-12-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/BLIKOPENER333/status/541327763831939072 @Blikopenerteam. (2015, 8-10-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/BLIKOPENERteam/status/652091481440800768 @Blondemevrouw1. (2014, 24-11-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Blondemevrouw1/status/537003418049871872 @D66DeKempen. (2015, 11-09-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/D66DeKempen/status/642234327015796736 @ED_Regio. (2014, 13-05-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Cranendonck%20gaat%20akkoord%20met%20de%20tijdelijk e%20opvang%20van%20maximaal%201200%20asielzoekers%20in%20de%20leegstaande%20ka zerne%20in%20%23Budel.%20Zo%20meer%20op%20ed.nl&src=typd @Elsevier. (2014, 24-11-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Elsevier @geertwilderspvv. (2016, 09-03-2016). Twitter Account. Twitter. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv @houtje0611. (2014, 6-12-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/houtje0611/status/541302757446389761 @JelleKrekels. (2014, 22-05-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Jellekrekels/status/469408273276620800 @Lunamber. (2015, 8-10-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Lunamber/status/652084070042763264 @MargaVermue. (2015, 10-09-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/MargaVermue/status/642215653307494400 @R_de_Collier. (2015, 30-11-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/R_de_Collier/status/671455897873473537 @RietWartenbergh. (2014, 25-11-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/RietWartenbergh @Sylvana0902. (2014, 22-05-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Sylvana0902 @TjerkLangman. (2014, 23-11-2014). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/TjerkLangman/status/536780097748213760

147

@TjerkLangman. (2015, 11-09-2015). Tweet. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/TjerkLangman/status/642285367857672192 CranendonckHeeftGenoegAsielzoekers. (2014). Cranendonck in Actie! Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/events/1406000646348691/ Facebook. (2014a, 1-12-2015). Cranendonck heeft genoeg asielzoekers. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/cranendonckheeftgenoegasielzoekers/timeline?ref=page_internal Facebook. (2014b, 7-01-2015). Wij Cranendonckers heten jullie welkom. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/Wij-Cranendonckers-heten-jullie-welkom- 690484951012265/?ref=ts&fref=ts Facebook. (2015, 9-12-2015). Geef de warmte door. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/geefdewarmtedoor/?fref=ts Twitter. Others 9292. (2016a, 8-3-2016). Reisadvies Randweg-Oost 43, Budel --> Budel. 9292ov. Retrieved from http://9292.nl/reisadvies/budel_randweg-oost-43/budel/vertrek/2016-03-08T0934 9292. (2016b, 8-03-2016). Reisadvies Randweg-Oost 43, Budel --> Maarheeze. 9292ov. Retrieved from http://9292.nl/reisadvies/budel_randweg-oost-43/maarheeze/vertrek/2016-03-08T0953 Actief!, C. (2014). Verkiezingsprogramma 2014-2018. Samen Kiezen voor Kwaliteit! Retrieved from http://www.cranendonckactief.nl/assets/verkiezingsprogramma-kort.pdf Actizjeugd. (2015, 29-10-2015). Tijdelijke uitbreiding JGZ (pre)POL locaties in de COA opvang. Bedrijsvoering. Retrieved from https://www.actiz.nl/nieuws/jeugd/tijdelijke-uitbreiding-jgz-in- coa-opvang Banulescu-Bogdan;, N., & Fratzke, S. (2015). Europe’s Migration Crisis in Context: Why Now and What Next? Migration information source. Retrieved from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/europe-migration-crisis-context-why-now-and-what- next# Boere, J. (2015). Survey results [questionnaire]. questionnaire. CBS. (2016a). Asielverzoeken; nationaliteit, vanaf 1975. Den Haag/Heerlen: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. CBS. (2016b, 04-02-2016). Bevolkingsontwikkeling; regio per maand. StatLine. COA. (2012). De opvang: stap voor stap vanaf 1 juli 2010. In COA (Ed.): COA. COA (Producer). (2015, September 25). Feiten en Cijfers. Centraal Orgaan opvang Asielzoekers. COA. (n.d.-a). Budel-Cranendonck. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/opvanglocaties/budel- cranendonck COA. (n.d.-b, n.d.). Budel-Dorplein. Opvanglocaties. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/opvanglocaties/budel-dorplein COA (Producer). (n.d.-c, 4-4-2016). COA: de opvangorganisatie van Nederland. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/sites/www.coa.nl/files/paginas/media/bestanden/voortgezet_onderwijs_c oa.pdf COA. (n.d.-d). Gemeentelijk versnellingsarrangement (gva). Aankomst bij opvanglocatie. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/gemeentelijk-versnellingsarrangement-gva COA. (n.d.-e). Internationaal. Keten- en samenwerkingspartners. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/over-coa/keten-en-samenwerkingspartners/internationaal COA. (n.d.-f). Ketenpartners. Keten- en Samenwerkingspartners. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/over-coa/keten-en-samenwerkingspartners/ketenpartners-0 148

COA. (n.d.-g). Locaties voor jongeren. Opvanglocaties. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/opvanglocaties/locaties-voor-jongeren COA. (n.d.-h). Soorten opvang. Opvanglocaties. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/over- coa/opvanglocaties/soorten-opvanglocaties#Typen locatie COA. (n.d.-i, n.d.). Taken: Wet COA. COA. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/over-coa/taken COA. (n.d.-j). Typen locaties. Opvanglocaties. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/opvanglocaties/typen-locaties COA. (n.d.-k). Zelfzorgarrangement en logeerregeling. Huisvesting vergunninghouders. Retrieved from https://www.coa.nl/nl/asielzoekers/huisvesting-vergunninghouders/zelfzorgarrangement-en- logeerregeling CONVENTION determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the European Communities (97/C 254/01), (1997). ELAN. (n.d.). Echte Lokale Aandacht Nu. Home. Retrieved from http://www.elan- cranendonck.nl/index.htm Europa-nu. (n.d. ). Schengen onder druk. Onafhankelijk & actueel Retrieved from https://www.europa- nu.nl/id/vjxejzh2cepg/schengen_onder_druk EuropeanCommission. (2012, 07-06-2012). Glossary. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/immigration/glossary_en#glosI EuropeanCommission. (2014). A Common European Asylum System. Home Affairs. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/docs/ceas-fact-sheets/ceas_factsheet_en.pdf COUNCIL DECISION establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece, COM(2015) 286 final 2015/125 (NLE) C.F.R. (2015a). EuropeanCommission. (2015b, 27-08-2015). EMN Glossary & Thesaurus. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we- do/networks/european_migration_network/glossary/index_a_en.htm EuropeanCommission. (2015c, 22-10-2015). EU-Turkey joint action plan European Commission - Fact Sheet. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-5860_en.htm EuropeanCommission. (2015d, 04-09-2015). EU actions to make integration work. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/the-eu-and-integration/eu-actions-to-make- integration-work A European Agenda on Migration, COM (2015) 240 final C.F.R. (2015e). EuropeanCommission. (2015f, 23-06-2015). International Affairs. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/international-affairs/index_en.htm EuropeanCommission. (2016a, 19-03-2016). EU and Turkey agree Eurpean response to refugee crisis. News. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/news/2016/03/20160319_en.htm EuropeanCommission. (2016b, 08-04-2016). Temporary Reintroduction of Border Control. Migration and Home Affairs Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we- do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/reintroduction-border-control/index_en.htm EuropeanCommission. (2016c, 22-01-2016). Turkey. European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/countries/detailed-country- information/turkey/index_en.htm

149

Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted OJ L 304 C.F.R. (2004). EuropeanUnion. (2015, 08-07-2015). Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e- library/multimedia/infographics/index_en.htm#0801262489daa027/c_ eurostat. (2016a, 2-03-2016). Asylum statistics. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics#Asylum_applicants Eurostat. (2016b). First time asylum applicants, EU-28, January 2014 – December 2015. In E.-. First time asylum applicants, January 2014 – December 2015.png (Ed.), (Vol. 800X589): Eurostat. GemeenteCranendonck. (2014a, 04-02-2016). Asielzoekerscentrum (azc) Cranendonck. Nieuws en actualiteiten. Retrieved from http://www.cranendonck.nl/inwoners/asielzoekerscentrum-azc- cranendonck_44132/ GemeenteCranendonck. (2014b, 13-05-2015). College gemeente Cranendonck besluit positief over tijdelijke opvang asielzoekers. Asielzoekerscentrum (azc) Cranendonck. Retrieved from http://www.cranendonck.nl/inwoners/asielzoekerscentrum-azc- cranendonck_44132/item/college-gemeente-cranendonck-besluit-positief-over-tijdelijke- opvang-asielzoekers_34459.html GemeenteCranendonck. (2015a, 1-12-2015). COA vraagt gemeente Cranendonck verlenging overeenkomst. Retrieved from http://www.cranendonck.nl/actueel/laatste- nieuws_285/item/coa-vraagt-gemeente-cranendonck-verlenging-overeenkomst_34006.html GemeenteCranendonck. (2015b, n.d.). Tijdelijke noodopvang 200 vluchtelingen in Nassau Dietz kazerne Budel. Laatste Nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.cranendonck.nl/actueel/laatste- nieuws_285/item/tijdelijke-noodopvang-200-vluchtelingen-in-nassau-dietz-kazerne- budel_32318.html GemeenteCranendonck. (2015c, 1-12-2015). Veelgestelde vragen tijdelijk asielzoekerscentrum Cranendonck. Laatste nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.cranendonck.nl/actueel/laatste- nieuws_285/item/veelgestelde-vragen-tijdelijk-asielzoekerscentrum-cranendonck-update-7- oktober_23767.html GemeenteCranendonck. (2016). Commissievergadering 19-01-2016. Paper presented at the Town council, Cranendonck. Googlemaps. (2016a, 8-3-2016). maps Randweg-Oost 43, Budel. Google Maps. Retrieved from https://www.google.nl/maps/dir/51.2905025,5.6301543/Budel/@51.2881353,5.566859,14z/da ta=!4m9!4m8!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x47c72bbe1f2fee61:0xbc67678d64ba686e!2m2!1d5.5763506! 2d51.2741027!3e3 Googlemaps. (2016b, 8-03-2016). maps Randweg-Oost 43, Maarheeze. Google Maps. Retrieved from https://www.google.nl/maps/dir/51.2905025,5.6301543/Maarheeze/@51.299982,5.6230176,1 4z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m9!4m8!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x47c72ec226404589:0xeb27ff7cb2a80f2!2m2! 1d5.6148653!2d51.3103841!3e3 Hoofs, R. (2015a, 02-03-2016). Geen permante AZC vestiging COA Budel Retrieved from https://petities.nl/petitions/geen-permante-azc-vestiging-coa-budel?locale=nl Hurwitz, A. (1999). The 1990 Dublin Convention: A Comprehensive Assessment. International Journal of Refugee Law, 11(4), 646-677. doi:10.1093/ijrl/11.4.646

150

Ivanov, D. (2015). Legislation on emergency relocation of asylum-seekers in the EU [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/nl/document.html?reference=EPRS_BRI(2015)56901 8 Justitie, M. v. V. e. (2014). Gesloten Gezinsvoorziening Zeist. Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen. Retrieved from https://www.dji.nl/Organisatie/Locaties/Detentiecentra/GGV-Zeist/index.aspx Justitie, M. v. V. e. (n.d.-a). Terugkeer en Vertrek. Retrieved from https://www.dienstterugkeerenvertrek.nl/Terugkeer_en_vertrek/ Justitie, M. v. V. e. (n.d.-b). Wat is asiel? Informatie voor jongeren. Retrieved from https://ind.nl/organisatie/informatie-jongeren/wat-is-asiel Justitie, M. v. V. e. (n.d.-c). Zelfstandig vertrek. Dienst Terugkeer en Vertrek. Retrieved from https://www.dienstterugkeerenvertrek.nl/Terugkeer_en_vertrek/zelfstandig_vertrek/ Lowan. (2016). COL, POL ... HUH? Nieuws. Retrieved from http://www.lowan.nl/primair- onderwijs/nieuws/col-pol-huh/ Meijers, J. (2015, 23-10-2015). Lokale ondernemers morren: opvangorgaan asielzoekers kiest voor grote bedrijven bij bouw opvangcentra. Zakelijk nieuws & Ondernemerstools. Retrieved from http://www.z24.nl/ondernemen/lokale-ondernemers-morren-coa-kiest-voor-grote-bedrijven- bij-bouw-opvangcentra-594899 MinisterieVWS. (2014). Inspectie positief over medische zorg in vier nieuwe opvanglocaties voor asielzoekers, maar snelle uitbreiding van de opvang van asielzoekers leidt tot risico’s in de medische zorg. Utrecht Retrieved from http://www.ggdghorkennisnet.nl/?file=20222&m=1414750683&action=file.download. Mouzourakis, M. (2014). 'We Need to Talk About Dublin' Responsibility under the Dublin System as a blockage to asylum burden-sharing in the European Union. (Working Paper Series No. 105). Nancheva, N. (2015). The Common European Asylum System and the failure to protect: Bulgaria’s Syrian refugee crisis. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 15(4), 439-455. doi:10.1080/14683857.2015.1093372 Overheid. (2014). Huisvestingswet 2014. (BWBR0035303). Wassenaar: Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie Overheid. (2015). Wet Centraal Orgaan opvang asielzoekers. Pauw, J. (Writer). (2015). De Grens Bereikt. Perovic, N. D. M. (2015). European Commission makes progress on Agenda on Migration [Press release] Popp, G. C. J. v. M. P. M. M. (2016, 09-02-2016). Closing the Balkan Route: Will Greece Become a Refugee Bottleneck? Retrieved from http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/closing-balkan-route- means-migrant-crisis-for-greece-a-1076232.html PVVpers (Producer). (2015, 12-11-2015). Inbreng Geert Wilders bij vluchtelingendebat (14-10-2015). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xP9twIbLrw Rijksmonumenten. (2014, 09-12-2014). Hotel St. Joseph in Budel Dorplein. Retrieved from http://rijksmonumenten.nl/monument/518879/hotel-st-joseph/budel-dorplein/ Rijksoverheid. (2015, n.d.). Asielbeleid. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/inhoud/procedure-behandeling- asielzoekers Rijksoverheid. (2016, 14-03-2016). Samenstelling asielinstroom verandert. Nieuws. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/nieuws/2016/03/14/samenstelling- asielinstroom-verandert

151

Rijksoverheid. (n.d.-a). Hebben asielzoekers met een verblijfsvergunning voorrang op een sociale huurwoning? Vraag en antwoord. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/vraag-en-antwoord/hebben- vergunninghouders-voorrang-bij-het-toewijzen-van-een-sociale-huurwoning Rijksoverheid. (n.d.-b). Hoeveel geld krijgen asielzoekers in Nederland. Vraag en antwoord. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/vraag-en-antwoord/hoeveel-geld- krijgen-asielzoekers-in-nederland Rijksoverheid. (n.d.-c). Huisvesting asielzoekers met verblijfsvergunning. Inhoud. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/inhoud/huisvesting-asielzoekers-met- verblijfsvergunning Rijksoverheid. (n.d.-d). Opvang vluchtelingen. Asielbeleid inhoud. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/asielbeleid/inhoud/opvang-vluchtelingen Roosen, J. (2014, 18-01-2015). Historie Budel-Dorplein. De website voor Budel-Dorplein. Retrieved from http://www.dorpleinuniek.nl/historie-budel-dorlein/5/ Thielemann, E., Williams, R., & Boswell, C. (2010). ‘What System of BurdenSharing between Member States for the Reception of Asylum Seekers?’. Brussels European Parliament, Directorate-General Internal Policies, Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2010/419620/IPOL- LIBE_ET(2010)419620_EN.pdf. UNHCR. (1951). Convention and Protocol relating to the status of refugees. Retrieved from Geneva: http://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b66c2aa10.pdf VluchtelingenWerkNederland. (2013, 18-07-2013). De asielprocedure in beeld. Retrieved from http://www.vluchtelingenwerk.nl/feiten-cijfers/procedures-wetten-beleid/asielprocedure VluchtelingenWerkNederland. (n.d.). Werken tijdens de asielprocedure: de voorwaarde. Werk & Inkomen. Retrieved from http://www.vluchtelingenwerk.nl/feiten-cijfers/procedures-wetten-beleid/werk- inkomen/werken-tijdens-de-asielprocedure-de-voorwaarden VNG. (2015, 15-12-2015). De asielprocedure van begin tot eind in beeld. Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten. Retrieved from https://vng.nl/onderwerpenindex/asiel/asielbeleid-en- integratie/nieuws/de-asielprocedure-van-begin-tot-eind-in-beeld

152

10 Appendix 10.1 Online questionnaire

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

10.2 Statistical analyses 10.2.1 Descriptives Notes Output Created 06-MAR-2016 14:03:50 Comments Input C:\Users\hansf\Desktop\160228- Data ResultsEnquete.sav DataSet1 Active Dataset Filter Weight Split File 99 N of Rows in Working Data File User defined missing values are Missing Value Handling Definition of Missing treated as missing. All non-missing data are used. Cases Used

161

Syntax DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Hoelangwoontualindeg emeenteCranendonck Watisuwhoogstafgerondeopleiding

DegemeenteCranendonckmoetasiel zoekersopvangen

HetrealiserenvaneenpermanentAZCi ndevoormaligNassauDietzkazerneis

Grootschaligeopvangvanasielzoeker sheeftmeervoordelendankleinscha

Hoeveelasielzoekersmoetdegemeen teCranendoncknaaruwmeningopvan gen

Ikbentevredenoverhethandelenvand egemeentemetbetrekkingtotdeopvan

Degemeentecommuniceertopenene erlijknaardeinwonersvanCranendonc ko

Degemeentegeeftgehooraandemeni ngenenopmerkingenvandeinwonersv and

IkbentevredenoverhethandelenvanC OAmetbetrekkingtotdelokaleopvang

COAcommuniceertopeneneerlijknaar deinwonersvanCranendonckoverdel o

COAgeeftgevolgaandemeningeneno pmerkingenvandeinwonersvanCrane ndo

Asielzoekersverdienenonzeonvoorw aardelijkesteunomdatzejuistvluch

Deasielzoekerszorgenvoorweinigove rlastindegemeenteCranendonck

Deopvangvanasielzoekersheefteenp ositiefeffectoplokaleonderneming

162

Notes Nederlandmoetasielzoekersopvangb iedentothetlandvanherkomstveilig

DevoormaligNassauDietzkazerneise enidealelocatievooreenAZC

DoordeervaringdieinwonersvanCran

163

endonckmetmigrantenvreemdelinge Notes Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.03 Elapsed Time 00:00:00.02 Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Hoe lang woont u al in de 98 0 6 5.23 1.484 gemeente Cranendonck? Wat is uw hoogst afgeronde 98 1 6 3.53 .864 opleiding? De gemeente Cranendonck 89 1 5 3.40 1.231 moet asielzoekers opvangen Het realiseren van een permanent AZC in de voormalig Nassau- 89 1 5 2.55 1.374 Dietzkazerne is wenselijk Grootschalige opvang van asielzoekers heeft meer voordelen dan kleinschalige 89 1 5 2.30 1.265 opvang Hoeveel asielzoekers moet de gemeente Cranendonck naar uw mening opvangen? 89 1 7 2.92 1.597

Ik ben tevreden over het handelen van de gemeente met betrekking tot de opvang 89 1 5 2.79 1.257 van asielzoekers

De gemeente communiceert open en eerlijk naar de inwoners van Cranendonck 89 1 5 2.61 1.267 over de opvang van asielzoekers De gemeente geeft gehoor aan de meningen en opmerkingen van de 89 1 5 2.54 1.188 inwoners van de gemeente Cranendonck

164

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Ik ben tevreden over het 89 1 5 2.47 1.149 handelen van COA met betrekking tot de lokale opvang van asielzoekers COA communiceert open en eerlijk naar de inwoners van 89 1 5 2.36 1.090 Cranendonck over de lokale opvang van asielzoekers

COA geeft gevolg aan de meningen en opmerkingen 89 1 5 2.26 1.028 van de inwoners van Cranendonck

Asielzoekers verdienen onze onvoorwaardelijke steun, 83 1 5 3.23 1.310 omdat ze juist vluchten voor het geweld in hun land De asielzoekers zorgen voor weinig overlast in de 83 1 5 3.46 1.192 gemeente Cranendonck De opvang van asielzoekers heeft een positief effect op lokale ondernemingen en 83 1 5 2.90 1.175 winkels

Nederland moet asielzoekers opvang bieden tot het land van herkomst 83 1 5 3.80 1.217 veilig verklaard is, waarna zij moeten terugkeren

De voormalig NassauDietzkazerne is een 83 1 5 3.47 1.310 ideale locatie voor een AZC

Door de ervaring die inwoners van Cranendonck met migranten/vreemdelingen 83 1 5 3.28 1.086 hebben, worden ook asielzoekers geaccepteerd

Page 165 Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Asielzoekers nemen hun politieke problemen uit het land van afkomst mee naar Nederland 80 2 5 3.61 .893 De komst van asielzoekers in de gemeente Cranendonck is gesprek van de dag 80 1 5 2.88 1.060 Asielzoekers concurreren met Nederlanders om werk, woningen, uitkeringen en andere voorzieningen 80 1 5 3.33 1.281 Door hun andere cultuur en religie zullen asielzoekers zich nooit kunnen aanpassen aan de Nederlandse maatschappij 80 1 5 3.43 1.290

Asielzoekers zijn vaak jonge, ongehuwde mannen die respectloos met vrouwen omgaan 80 1 5 3.16 1.307 Door de lokale opvang van asielzoekers maak ik me zorgen over de toekomst van de gemeente 80 1 5 3.21 1.375 De komst van asielzoekers heeft een negatief effect op het lokale toerisme 80 1 5 2.83 1.145 De asielzoekers hebben een negatieve invloed op het straatbeeld van de gemeente Cranendonck 80 1 5 2.90 1.269 Sinds de komst van de asielzoekers is het aantal incidenten in de gemeente toegenomen 80 1 5 3.03 1.222 Sinds de komst van de asielzoekers voel ik mij minder veilig 80 1 5 2.80 1.277 N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Page 166 Descriptive Statistics Het betrekken van lokale 1 5 3.74 1.044 ondernemers bij ontwikkelingen in en om het 77 AZC 1 5 4.06 1.092 Het garanderen van de veiligheid binnen het AZC 77 1 5 4.40 .907 Het garanderen van de veiligheid buiten het AZC 77 Het stimuleren van de 1 5 3.51 1.047 integratie met de huidige inwoners van de gemeente 77 Cranendonck Het invoeren van meerdere evaluatie momenten tussen de gemeente, COA en de 1 5 3.96 1.057 inwoners van Cranendonck met betrekking tot het AZC 77 en haar bewoners

Het garanderen van een 1 5 3.56 1.082 multifunctioneel gebruik van de voormalig 77 NassauDietzkazerne Het openen van een 1 5 2.62 1.181 aanmeldcentrum in de Voormalig Nassau- 77 Dietzkazerne Valid N (listwise) 77 10.2.2 Frequencies

Page 167 Notes

Output Created 06-MAR-2016 14:04:57 Comments Input C:\Users\hansf\Desktop\160228- ResultsEnquete.sav Data DataSet1 Active Dataset Filter Weight Split File 99 N of Rows in Working Data User-defined missing values are Missing Value Handling File treated as missing. Definition of Missing Statistics are based on all cases with valid data. Cases Used

Page 168 Notes

Syntax FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=Watisuwleeftijd Watisuwwoonplaats HoelangwoontualindegemeenteCran endonck Watisuwhoogstafgerondeopleiding DegemeenteCranendonckmoetasiel zoekersopvangen