European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 263

On September 07 2015 22:38 Gorsameth wrote:
Good point. the EU has open borders after all. We distribute them around to spread the load, fine (not going to comment on how fair the numbers are) but what keeps them there after? What stops half of them running to country X the first chance they get?

On September 07 2015 23:06 lord_nibbler wrote:
What is stopping you from moving to Spain and applying for benefits?
Once refugees have been granted a residence permit they are bound to a country just like you are to your's.

On September 07 2015 23:15 Faust852 wrote:

You technically can, lot of people do. But people have bonds, cultures, that prevent them to leave that easily.
It might be cool to move to Luxembourg right ? But how will you do it if you don't speak at least one of the 3 languages requested, and don't have the qualification requiered to find employment ? Yeah healthcare in Luxembourg in probably the best in the world but the reason you only got 550k inhabitants is because you have to find a job in a very high technical service industry.
If you are from say Poland, nothing prevent you to leave and go in Spain, but good luck finding employment there too, especially if you don't speak the language, you have to leave your family and friends, etc...
Refugees don't have this issue at all since anyway they'll start from 0.

LUXEMBOURG — The EU is considering imposing sanctions on countries that do not want to take part in a proposed new relocation scheme for 120,000 refugees, a senior diplomat told POLITICO, though the idea is being floated mainly to put pressure on reluctant countries.

The source refused to say whether the proposal was discussed in the informal meeting of foreign affairs ministers that took place in Luxembourg Saturday morning.

According to several media reports, an option under consideration is that countries that do not want to take in refugees would be offered an opt-out clause, but they would have to pay to use it. This sanction fund would then be used to support countries that do take part in the new relocation.

But a diplomat from Slovakia, one of the countries that opposes mandatory relocation schemes, said, “We do not want any payment, nor mandatory quotas… We need to prevent people from coming.” He said that Slovakia will not oppose decisions taken by the majority of EU countries.

The Slovak diplomat stressed that his country did not see the situation in the same way as Hungary, whose prime minister Viktor Orbán has been critical of Berlin’s decision to open the door to Syrian refugees.

Germany, for its part, stressed the need to quickly find solutions.

The German Foreign Affairs minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, told reporters that the European Council scheduled for October 15 would be “too late” and that Europe should have a summit at an earlier date.

Ministers spent the informal meeting ministers “brainstorming” on possible ideas to find a solution for the humanitarian crisis, said another EU diplomat. “Ministers agree that they have to do something — the problem is what,” the source said.

Federica Mogherini, the EU foreign affairs chief, confirmed a lack of consensus.

“Discussion today was difficult, I admit that,” she said at a press conference wrapping up the summit.

One point of contention was the creation of hot-spots to identify refugees in countries outside the European Union, said Mogherini. The issue is complicated by three main factors, she added: the location, the resources and the guarantee that those who are entitled to be asylum seekers are then in fact accepted in Europe. And the funding for these hot-spots, she argued, “would require enormous resources from our side.”

The EU foreign affairs chief also stressed that “this is partially a migrant flow but it is mainly a refugee flow,” meaning the majority of those who arrive to Europe are entitled to stay. And now “we have started seeing also Palestinians in the flow” of refugees arriving.

She also repeated that the naval mission, Eunavfor Med, launched in May by Europe to cope with people smugglers, is ready to move from phase one (intelligence gathering) to the first part of phase two (operating in international waters).

For this, at least, she said: “I have found a large consensus.”

The Italian Foreign minister, Paolo Gentiloni, echoed that sentiment, when leaving the summit, telling reporters that “it is possible to launch phase two by the end of the month.”

Yet some are skeptical.

“So far I have seen no results and the evidence is that people keep on coming,” said a diplomat from Eastern Europe.

As another diplomat from Britain said a few days ago: “the fear is that we can get stuck in the international water whereas this mission will be effective only if and when it will have the chance to get into Libyan waters.”

The ministers also discussed the future of the Dublin agreement, a key element of EU migration policy that requires asylum-seekers to be identified and stay in the country where they first arrive.

Said another EU diplomat, “Anyway, after the German decision and with the relocation system in place, [Dublin] is already a dead agreement.”

On September 08 2015 00:57 maybenexttime wrote:


Poland is not going to have a far-right PM anytime soon. Law and Justice (PiS) is not a far-right party, it is rather center-right. It is milder than Hungary's Fidesz, which I wouldn't consider far-right either. Jobbik is far-right.

On September 08 2015 01:13 Gorsameth wrote:

Dont worry, his post is wrong in multiple counts. Netherlands hasn't had a far-right PM either.

On September 08 2015 01:36 LegalLord wrote:
Personally, I'd be surprised if extreme candidates actually won, because by virtue of being extreme they don't really represent the majority opinion on most issues. But the first time I heard of FN many years ago, it was a small, irrelevant party and I thought it would stay that way forever - same with the rest of the far-right EU groups. It was surprising when I found how much it has grown in recent years. But they are making a point that too many mainstream parties are ignoring, so it makes sense.