[ad_1]
meIt was to be Horst Seehofer’s masterpiece the year before the general election. An exclamation point from the man who, like almost no other union politician, opposed the course of Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) during the migration crisis of 2015. At that time he was head of the CSU and Prime Minister of Bavaria.
Today he works as a Federal Minister of the Interior in the cabinet and can play a decisive role in determining fate. But despite all his efforts, he was unable to realize the great project, a comprehensive reform of the Common European Asylum System (SECA). That became clear in the last meters of the German Council Presidency.
There may be many reasons for failure: The reaction to Corona immobilizes a lot of energy across Europe; therefore, the Commission’s reform proposal was only available at the end of September. The pandemic also complicates the personal exchange that is necessary in the fight for compromises.
Above all, however, the substantive differences between the member states of the European Union (EU) have solidified in the years after the great crisis. There is no longer any talk of possible laws, not even an agreement has been reached on the design of a future SECA. What’s up: A progress report documenting the status quo. Seehofer calls this a “solid foundation.” This is what a soccer coach sounds like who wants to find nice words despite his team’s 5-0 defeat.
Secondary migration routes in 2019
Source: Die Welt Infographic
According to information from WELT, the Federal Ministry of the Interior did not expect the big asylum reform for a long time. In the role of the Council Presidency, however, he swallows anger. In internal discussions, one repeatedly emphasized one’s own “role of the intermediary” for a joint solution, as the documents show. Therefore, the “German positions” would explicitly only be increasingly represented after the Presidency of the Council, that is, from January.
EU countries basically only agree that rejected asylum seekers should be returned quickly. However, the decisive factor in controlling irregular migration is the processes that begin with entry into the EU. There is no progress here: To what extent can the first asylum procedures already take place at the external borders? How then are those seeking protection distributed within the EU? And how do you make sure these wheels lock?
For Germany, “prevention of secondary migration” plays an important role, as explained by an Interior Ministry spokeswoman when asked, but how this can be successful in her own opinion is something the Seehofer Chamber is not aggressively addressing in these months.
After camping in continental Europe?
The migrants are held in camps on Gran Canaria for a maximum of 72 hours. After its premiere, many of them plan to continue their trip to countries such as France, Spain or Germany. Our video reporter is on site.
Source: WELT / Matthis Kattnig, Tim Röhn
In reality, the Home Office is of the opinion that not enough is being done in Europe to prevent asylum seekers from continuing their journey without control, and Germany is one of the main destination countries. The aim is to increase pressure on asylum seekers to stay in the country responsible for processing the application. There should be no change in this responsibility. Anyone who continues to travel should no longer receive any social benefits.
The immigration policy spokesperson for the FDP parliamentary group accuses the government of downplaying a central issue during the Council’s presidency. “As correct as it is to assume the role of an honest broker in Europe, it is equally incorrect to define the core issue of secondary migration as a specifically German interest and exclude it during his own Council Presidency,” Teuteberg told WELT.
The “problem of secondary migration” is the “Achilles heel of a common European asylum system”. In practice, distribution quotas remain obsolete, “if it is not possible to guarantee that asylum seekers remain in the Member State responsible for their asylum procedure according to common European standards”.
Unlike the Interior Ministry, the Union’s parliamentary group is already openly addressing disappointment at the compromise reached. Regarding secondary migration, Mathias Middelberg (CDU), the parliamentary group’s internal political spokesperson, says: “The EU Commission proposal currently on the table has, unfortunately, very little effect here as it is still plans a transfer of responsibility after the term expires. ” “Instead, member states that have once held themselves responsible for asylum seekers must remain permanently responsible.” Furthermore, “reception services for asylum seekers should, in principle, be provided only by the permanently responsible member state”.
Alexander Throm (CDU), chairman of the parliamentary group in the interior commission, speaks of “exceptional importance, as we are the main target country” with a view to curbing secondary migration. Germany’s efforts should “contrary to the Commission’s proposal, aim for an EU country to bear perpetual responsibility for an asylum seeker.” Otherwise, all distribution mechanisms can be bypassed.
Looking back at the Council Presidency, the SPD coalition partner primarily discusses the unanswered question of distribution. In general, they remained “below expectations,” says Lars Castellucci, immigration policy spokesman for the SPD parliamentary group. Now it is even more important to achieve “concrete improvements”. “An example is the coalition of European countries that are supporting Greece in the relocation of refugees. This is how humanity and solidarity are combined with regulated procedures, ”explained the SPD politician.
While Castellucci retracts on the issue of secondary migration, opposition politician Luise Amtsberg, refugee policy spokesperson for the Green parliamentary group, expresses her criticism: “With the prevention of secondary migration, the federal government refocuses completely wrong, “Amtsberg said. “If all the asylum seekers were distributed directly to the member states and the reception conditions were harmonized, the problem would solve itself.” It is disappointing that the government has failed “to reach at least a basic consensus on the fundamental issues of European asylum policy,” Amtsberg said. “The locking bearings are the same, the reasons are the same.”
The Portuguese Presidency will start in a few weeks. In government circles, the issue of migration is not assumed to be of great importance to Portugal. Officially, however, positive messages are still being sent.
Internal Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johannsson said she expected “clear results.” He also praised the “constructive approach” of all EU states so far. Why are you speaking so cautiously? Unlike Germany, the EU continues to play the “broker role”.
