The European Parliament: Can They Fill the Big Shoes?

This morning in Brussels, Belgium, the European Parliament focused its attention on reforming migration and border policies in its member nations. The focus on debate rested on distinguishing between short-term and long-term solutions for the large influx of migrants in a disproportionately few nations.

Suggestions ranged from the classic “checkpoint system” to the innovative idea of installing joint screening and training programs for migrants to develop relevant skills. Belgian politician Guy Verhofstadt discussed the fact that “most illegal refugees come from northern Africa, so establishing monitoring systems would work well in the short-term, but a long-term solution would require a more peripheral idea like curbing climate change.”

Given the radically differing views on migrants between citizens and the members of parliament who represent their parties, rather than the whole country, it’s no surprise that entirely different viewpoints are being addressed. As an example, English political analyst Nigel Farage suggested that the most important issue is security because of the increasing risk of terrorism from unchecked immigrants. In contrast, Irish representative Martina Anderson prioritizes, “the safety of refugees crossing the Mediterranean Sea; after all, over 100 died crossing in the year so far, so dispatching EU border patrol to rescue them is good idea.”

During private discussions, several working proposals were being crafted. One paper focused primarily on the “Distribution and Assimilation of Immigrants.” Socialist party member Hugues Bayet mentioned that, “by assimilating migrants into proper [suitable] cultures, an economic balance can be created and infrastructure improved in poorer countries.

Another group sharpens its attention on the safety of refugees and balancing distribution. European People’s Party member Paulo Rangel said “we need to set up camps with medical camps midway to protect refugees, so they don’t have to resort to unsafe smuggling.” Against protests that it sounds too generous, the representative clarified that, “it needs to be us transporting them, for safety but also to decide their destination. We would we be able to keep the Schengen Area of unrestricted border travel open” and leader of Italian Socialist and Democratic Party Gianni Pittella added that the measure would “achieve a more even distribution of immigrants by incentivizing poorer nations to support them.”

As stated by Rangel, “integration into society is incredibly important, one only has to look at the condition of Syrian refugees into the recipient nation’s unsafe ghettos.” Though the paper headed by Rangel, Pitella, and Belgian Claude Rolin combines numerous directives, the latter pointed out that this law would “focus on price effectiveness and administrative coordination, because the other ideas floating around are too expensive.”

In this state of provision and restriction for refugees, the European Parliament has to find a solid balance between the two reactions before it can achieve an equitable distribution.