Migration fears led to Brexit: so why is so little being done still?
THE so-called Brexit ‘make or break’ EU summit in June came and went without any appreciable progress even though Government spokesmen, in the previous months, had been stressing that major decisions had to be made in mid-year – rather than allowing everything run up to the wire towards the end of the year.
Now it seems that is exactly what’s going to happen, unless an extension is agreed between the UK and the European Union.
But the Brexit issue had been way down the agenda of the meeting in Brussels, with leaders expressing concern that no progress had been achieved on resolving the border issue.
The fears expressed by many in Ireland that our issues will only be dealt with in the final hours of negotiations seem to be well founded.
Apparently, the EU had other more pressing matters on their mind: namely migration.
The Austrians, who hold the EU presidency until the end of the year, have decided their main priority will be how to deal with conflicting interests of member states on this very divisive issue.
Moreover the political travails of German Chancellor Angela Merkel have made this issue even more acute.
For years, we have heard the mantra Fortress Europe. This is EU speak for efforts to ensure that hordes of migrants don’t descend on European member states.
Despite huge resources being put into this area, the EU’s attempts to stem the tide of desperate people coming to its shores have been unsuccessful.
We now see, across Europe, very differing views as to how to proceed. For the last number of years, most member states, particularly away from the Mediterranean, have left some of their colleagues, notably Italy, Malta, and Greece, to bear the brunt of the problem.
A number of other countries have been implacably against the idea of ‘burden sharing’ whereby they would be expected to take a share of these unfortunate people in proportion to their population.
WHICH brings me to our near neighbours, the UK, which has decided to leave the EU for a number of reasons – but particularly because of their desire to have ‘full and unfettered control’ over their migration policy.
For decades, senior political figures in the UK have decried one of the key principles of the EU, the right to free movement of people across member states.
So by leaving the EU, they are laying down a marker that they only want, for instance, Polish plumbers or Latvian waiters on the UK’s own terms.
But by agreeing to continuing the time-honoured Common Travel Area regime between Britain, Northern Ireland and the Republic, they are potentially leaving an Achilles heel in place, from a people movement point of view.
Under the CTA Agreement, Irish and UK citizens have the right to enter and reside in each other’s state without being subject to a requirement to obtain permission to do so, together with the right to work, and access social security and other public services.
While the CTA only refers to citizens of both states, the regime does potentially allow a ‘backdoor’ for non-Irish citizens to enter the UK from the Republic in a post-Brexit situation. The immigration services in Dublin and in London have always worked hand-in-hand because of the need to preserve the CTA and to ensure that it is not abused. The British leaving the EU will be yet another practical complication which will have to be dealt with.
People wishing to gain entry to the ‘promised land’ of the EU will, as we have witnessed, go to great lengths to do so.
Recently, I read a report which stated that more than 1,000 marriages in the Republic had been confirmed as shams by the Garda Síochána. Most of them were between Asian men and Eastern European women, and were arranged for a fee, so the men could live and work in Ireland based on the women’s EU rights.
Reading this report reminded me of my time as Justice Minister between 2008 and 2011 when I got detailed information from the gardaí and my officials on this phenomenon.
At the time, I was told that up to 400 Pakistani men had married Latvian women, all living legitimately here in Ireland under the EU free movement rules.
INDEED, I was shown a number of newspaper advertisements in the Latvian language whereby women were actually advertising their availability to marry in this regard. At the time I endeavoured to raise this issue at EU level. I was astounded that I got little or no support around the table in Brussels. The only country to support me on this was Denmark. I thought that all the other member states would see that this device could potentially drive a ‘coach and four’ through legitimate migration rules.
I felt that if these sham marriages were occurring in Ireland they must also have been happening in other member states.
I was particularly surprised that all efforts by me to get our British counterparts exercised about this fell flat. I thought British ministers would support my efforts to have EU-wide regulations made in order to curtail this possibility, particularly due to the potential implications for the Common Travel regime.
And yet, all entreaties to the British fell on deaf ears.
For some of my time going to Brussels as Justice Minister my British counterpart was Theresa May, who was then Home Secretary. My recollection is that during the time when we both overlapped as ministers responsible for immigration she did not attend any of the monthly Brussels meetings, sending a junior minister instead.
As I wished to raise this at the highest level I travelled to see her in Westminster in order to press the case directly to her.
Despite this, the British continued to be quite disinterested in this scam.
It would appear the sham marriage route is still used to get around immigration rules. Coordination among neighbouring states in the wider European continent is required more than ever.
In my view, dealing with mass migration can only be done in a multifaceted and unified way. And nearer to home, European states should deal with this into the future by all working together and not leaving it up to a few.
The rise of ultra right-wing sentiment in this regard is extremely worrying. Voters in some countries are clearly taking their lead from political leaders espousing ‘go it alone’ sentiments.
The attitude of ‘every man for himself’ in regard to dealing with the problem of mass migration will come back to haunt the better off nations of the world.