MEPs quiz and criticise Tusk on EU summit migration conclusions
Recent EU Council conclusions came under fire during a European Parliament session yesterday, as MEPs took aim at the lack concrete decisions taken.
On 28-29 June, the European Council reached an agreement to set up “controlled centres,” within the EU, where newly-arrived migrants and asylum-seekers can stay while their status is clarified. The centres will be used to process asylum applications and differentiate between genuine refugees and irregular economic migrants. All migrants found during search and rescue (SAR) operations will be taken to the disembarkation centres. Decisions on resettlement locations will continue to be taken on a voluntary basis. While many topics were discussed, including the economy and Brexit, migration was at the centre of debate.
EU Council President Donald Tusk, in his opening speech, appealed to EU leaders to get their act together by increasing military co-operation, preparing for worst-case scenarios in terms of trade, and increasing EU co-operation, including on migration. He said that progress had been made on all issues, but added that the road ahead was long and fraught with difficulty.
He said that the EU leaders agreed that the EU had to take greater responsibility for its own security. In order to bolster common defence, the EU would enhance investment, capability development and operational readiness, he added.
He spoke of external threats to democracy, saying that the EU Council called on the Commission to present proposals for a coordinated EU response to this challenge – including Russia’s disinformation campaign – by December. “This is particular important in light of the signs of Russia’s role in Brexit.”
As regards migration, he said that three proposals had been made: a dedicated budgetary tool to combat illegal migration; boosting support for the Libyan coast guard; and disembarkation platforms outside Europe. These, he said, were supported by the leaders.
Tusk said that they agreed to support the Maltese authorities by sending a message to all vessels operating in the Mediterranean – including NGOs – to respect the law and not obstruct the operations of the Libyan coast guard.
Commission President JeanClaude Juncker said they had been waiting for months for the Brexit White Paper, adding that the EU Council would not allow the Irish issue to be the only unresolved issue by the end of discussions.
He said that important decisions had been taken on migration, and that by 2020 there would be 10,000 forces on the external borders. He said that the mandate for border protection forces needed to be expanded, and they should be able to act in member states as well, always with the agreement of the relevant country. We need to ensure that we do not give the impression that the reception camps in North Africa are a return to neocolonial attitudes. We need to work together with African countries to reach decisions.”
EPP president Manfred Webber said that progress had been made during the last Council meeting, such as the centres in Africa and Europe, and the idea of Turkey and Africa being given some funds was positive. He said there was a good defence of the borders, along with a programme to help in areas of the world from where refugees could come to Europe.
He spoke of the need to combat human trafficking in the Mediterranean.
On Brexit, he said that that people in Europe, in March 2019, needed to know what it meant to leave the EU. If there was just a transitional period, he said, it could be damaging politically as nothing would be happening. He said that long-standing partnership had to be defined.
S&D president Udo Bullmann slammed the Council conclusions, and expressed concern over the results. He said that the EU permanently sold victory where no sufficient progress was achieved. “This was one of the results of the last council.”
“On migration, we lose lives. Each life lost is one life too many. It’s a scandal that we do not get our act together.”
“We, the leaders of three parties in this House have written to you Tusk to place Dublin reform on the top of the agenda and we have not seen any political response. What Europe needs is progressive leadership, and I could not detect that in the Council. I could see that some Heads of State tried to add additional value, but it is not enough. We need a complete Dublin reform.”
“If I ask myself, ‘what was the outcome of the final statement from the Council?’ it was that everyone has a point where they can claim victory, but nothing is going to happen. This is not enough for Europe and its citizens, nor for the challenges we have to face,” Bullmann said.
Raffaele Fitto, vice-chair of the ECR party, said that when he read the full document, he understood nothing was going to change.
He said that all of what was said on migration was generic.
ALDE chair Guy Verhofstadt said that there was a clear failure to act by the Council, especially on Dublin regulation.
On reception centres, the conclusions read that the Council would examine the idea. “This means it will take a while. You will examine it while you have different points of views.”
“France has a centre in Chad, which is working very well. Why do you need to examine it? Why not take a decision?”
He recommended forcing the EU leaders to meet in a room for days on end till agreement was found on a number of issues.
Greens president Ska Keller highlighted that hundreds of lives had been lost over the past days because some member states wanted to keep the rescue boats out of the Mediterranean. “This is an active engagement against rescue at sea, against any sort of humanity and against international law.”
“I wonder if anyone remembers Lampedusa in 2013, when we were sorry that so many people had drowned. Now this is happening again and we are turning a blind eye,” she said.
She said that voluntary resettlement in the conclusions meant that not one member state would accept the people requesting asylum through centres in Africa. “This is the end of the right to asylum.” This right was invented in Europe through the Geneva Convention, with the aim of not allowing people to suffer, she said. “We should not give up on that so easily.”
“We should not extinguish the very human rights the EU stands for. We should stand up for human rights.”
Curzio Maltese from the Confederal Group of the European United Left said nothing had been decided. He said that while Tusk said the EU had not abandoned Africa, “we already have.”
He spoke of the importance of NGOs not becoming scapegoats when member states should be upholding their responsibility
Another MEP said that the EU was not being effective in handling migratory flows, while another spoke of threats to democracy and an open society. “The summit was an example of egos,” another said, highlighting the abandonment of Dublin regulations and the political crisis in Europe.
Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos said that the EU did not leave anyone alone, and that the EU remained committed to upholding its agreement with Turkey. He said more than 600,000 lives had been saved thanks to the support of the EU coast guard, and said that the Libyan coast guard was rescuing an increasing number of migrants.
He spoke of the need to further engage with countries in Africa. He said that an effective migration policy could not be just about borders, and reform of the Common EU Asylum Policy was essential to ensure solidarity among member states and to reduce secondary movement within the EU. He said they were so close to agreement that there was no reason for delay.
He said that Europe was no longer in a migration crisis and that the crisis Europe was faced with was purely political.
EU Council President Tusk, in his conclusions, said that he was sure the European people expected determination in “our action to rebuild the sense of security and order. They want this not due to xenophobia or to live in isolation, but because they want a political authority able to enforce the law, protect our territory and our borders. Many claim the EU is unable to efficiently protect the external border. This is a favourite argument of some new political movements, offering simple radical answers to the most complicated questions. They want to convince people that only strong men, anti-European, and with a tendency to authoritarianism are able to stop illegal migration. We have to prove that they are wrong and fulfil our political obligation.”