Sunday, 18 September 2011

It's often difficult to take the institutions of the EU seriously, but someone really ought to make the effort. Many of the decisions made there will shape our lives in significant ways. In particular, it's no exaggeration to say that Frontex, the agency responsible for controlling the EU's external borders, is shaping the future of European civilisation.

This week, the European parliament hosted a debate on Frontex to go along with new proposals that have been made to strengthen it. Simon Busuttil, the person responsible for the new proposals (known as the rapporteur), acknowledged that the agency had been a miserable failure in the first six years of its existence, having struggled to stem the tide of Asian and African hordes making their way towards Europe (of course he didn't say the last bit). You would think, this acknowledgement of failure having been made, that the subsequent debate would focus on the need for more ruthless control of our external borders. Not a bit of it. Instead, the debate revolved around the concept of human rights; and Busuttil's proposals include new measures to incorporate concern about human rights into Frontex's day-to-day operations.

The EU is introducing a new concept called non-defoulement, which basically means you can't send back illegal immigrants if human rights are not respected in the country they came from. As one of the speakers points out, this would mean that the entire populations of some countries would have the right to reside in the EU.

This video shows Busuttil presenting the new human rights proposals, followed by the only three speeches in the one-and-a-half-hour-long debate that were worth listening to. The rest was utopian blather about human rights.

The speakers are:

Simon Busuttil
Gerard Batten (UKIP)
Andrew Brons (BNP)
Barry Madlener (PVV) [Geert Wilders' party]




Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews