SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

France accepts migrant ship as row with Italy escalates

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Friday slammed what she called the "aggressive reaction" of the French government to taking in a migrant rescue vessel rejected by Rome.

France accepts migrant ship as row with Italy escalates
The Ocean Viking rescue ship arrives at Toulon, southern France, escorted by a military boat on November 11, 2022 after being turned away by Italy. (Photo by CHRISTOPHE SIMON / AFP)

France accepted the Ocean Viking and the 234 migrants onboard, but in return said it would suspend a previous plan to take in 3,500 refugees currently in Italy, and urged other EU nations to do the same. 

“I was very struck by the aggressive reaction of the French government, which is incomprehensible and unjustified,” Meloni told a press conference in Rome.

READ ALSO: Why are France and Italy rowing over migrants and what are the consequences?

The ship docked at the French port of Toulon on Friday morning, as relations between the two countries soured further.

The Ocean Viking, operated by a French NGO, had picked up the migrants at sea near the Libyan coast before spending weeks seeking a port to accept them.

France had never before allowed a rescue vessel carrying migrants from the Mediterranean to land on its coast, but did so this time because Italy had refused access.

French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin said on Thursday that the migrants were Italy’s responsibility under EU rules, and that the French move was an “exceptional” measure.

He said Italy’s refusal to accept the migrants was “incomprehensible” and that there would be “severe consequences” for Italy’s bilateral relations with France, and with the European Union as a whole.

French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin said on Thursday the Ocean Viking could dock at the port of Toulon and a third of the migrant passengers will be “relocated” to France. (Photo by Ludovic MARIN / AFP)

He said France had acted according to its “humanitarian duty”, while Italy had “lacked humanity”.

The Ocean Viking ship had initially sought access to Italy’s coast, which is closest to where the migrants were picked up, saying health and sanitary conditions onboard were rapidly worsening. 

Italy refused, saying other nations needed to take in more of the  migrants trying to reach Europe from North Africa every year.

The migrants, more than 50 of whom are children, were taken to an “international waiting zone” pending the processing of requests for asylum.

READ ALSO: Anger as Italy accused of illegally rejecting migrants rescued at sea

They would not be allowed to leave the zone until the process was completed in about three weeks, the government said. Asylum interviews were to start on Saturday.

The shelter, a short drive from the port, was heavily guarded, an AFP photographer said.

Some 600 police were deployed for the ship’s arrival, with the Red Cross in charge of humanitarian aid.

Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni oo Friday condemned what she called the “aggressive reaction” of the French government to taking in the rescue ship rejected by Rome. (Photo by Alberto PIZZOLI / AFP)

Nine European nations have committed to hosting two-thirds of the migrants, Darmanin said Thursday, with the remaining third staying in France.

Germany will take “more than 80”, while Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Luxembourg and Ireland will also contribute in the name of “European solidarity”, he said.

So far this year, 164 asylum seekers have been moved from Italy to other nations in the bloc that volunteered to accept them.

That is a fraction of the more than 88,000 that have reached its shores so far this year, of which 14 percent arrived after being rescued by NGO vessels, according to Italian authorities.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

JOHN LICHFIELD

OPINION: There is no chance of a sensible debate on the French government’s immigration bill

Immigration - like pensions - is a subject which in France anaesthetises balance and common-sense, writes John Lichfield, which explains why the government's new immigration bill is becoming virtually the new definition of a mountain out of a molehill.

OPINION: There is no chance of a sensible debate on the French government's immigration bill

France has changed its migration law 29 times in the last 40 years. There has been no significant change since 2018. A spasm of tinkering is evidently overdue.

The government thinks so – or at least some of the time. It proposed a new migration law last year. Since then, the draft law has frequently been delayed.

It was sawn in half and then sown back together again. There have been seven changes of direction in nine months.

Language tests and easier expulsion: The latest on France’s new immigration law

President Emmanuel Macron, against the wishes of his Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne, has now decided to push forward rapidly with the new legislation. He wants to prove that, despite the national nervous breakdown over pension reform, despite the loss of his parliamentary majority, his government can still advance its domestic agenda.

Hear John and the team at The Local discussing the immigration bill, and its political fallout, in the latest episode of Talking France. Listen here or on the link below

Is there an urgent need for change? Yes and no. Mostly no.

Despite the nonsense spouted by the Far Right and the Right, France is not being “swamped” by migrants. Net migration is under 200,000 people a year. That figures has increased only slightly over the last decade.

Just over one in ten French residents were born in other countries – 30 percent of them within the European Union – compared to one in 20 in 1947. When asked which problems concern them the most, French people put migration 12th on their list – long after inflation, security, education, housing and health.

On the other hand, France does have a problem enforcing its migration rules.

A Paris schoolgirl was murdered last October by a woman who had been ordered to leave the country but was never removed. Most of the 234 African and middle eastern boat people delivered to Toulon in November by the Ocean Viking humanitarian vessel vanished before they could be processed by the French system.

Few of the illegal migrants or failed asylum seekers expelled from France actually leave the country. The government has little way of knowing whether the 120,000 people each year who are served with expulsion orders or OQTF’s (obligations de quitter le territoire français) have left or not.

READ ALSO OQTF: What is the notice to quit and can you appeal?

The proposed new migration law tries to address this issue. It would reduce from 12 to four the number of legal arguments that can be put forward to delay or cancel an expulsion order.

Everyone served with an OQRF would be inscribed on a computer file. It would create a new network of regional centres to process asylum requests.

The original bill was framed to appeal to both Right and Left – which made it sensibly balanced or wishy-washy Macronist, depending on your political persuasion. It would allow some illegal migrants and unprocessed asylum-seekers to contribute to the French economy by taking jobs.

Those eligible would include illegal migrants and asylum seekers who have been present in France for three years. They would be permitted to seek work permits in trades where labour is scarce – especially the restaurant and construction industries.

Originally, Macron and his interior minister Gérald Darmanin hoped that the bill would attract support from both the moderate left and the centre-right. The ill-feeling generated by the pension dispute now means that no left-wing support is conceivable.

All therefore depends on the 62 centre-right Les Républicains deputies who hold the balance of power in the National Assembly. They split on pension reform. Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne warned Macron last month that they were equally divided and unreliable on the migration bill.

The President agreed to delay the debate until the autumn and then changed his mind. He needed – or wanted – an early parliamentary success on a contentious issue to prove that he was still able to govern, and reform, the country.

That was a mistake.

The leaders of Les Républicains (LR) have rejected the Macron migration bill. They have ruled out all possibility of voting to give some illegal migrants work-permits.

They have announced – but not yet published – an immigration bill of their own which steals the ideas of, inter alia, Marine Le Pen, Eric Zemmour, Donald Trump and the British Conservative government.

Amongst other things, they want to abolish the 25-years-old rights rights of illegal migrants to seek free health care in France (which takes just 0.5 percent of health spending). And they want to stop the “deep state” (ie French and European officials and judges) from protecting migrant rights.

The once pro-European centre-right party says that it wants a referendum on constitutional change to allow France to “take back control” and disobey EU laws when its national interests are threatened. This is a photocopy of Marine Le Pen’s idea which amounts to an unworkable Frexit-in-all-but-name.

None of this has a remote chance of being agreed while Macron is President. It is a) declaration that the failing LR intends to lurch to the hard right before the next presidential election b) a suicide note by what remains of the once broad Gaullist movement.

After nailing their colours to this illiberal mast, there is no chance that Les Républicains will provide the 40 or so votes needed for the Macron migration bill to pass in its present form. Darmanin, the interior minister, is looking for some form of compromise but cannot go too far without alienating parts of Macron’s own centrist alliance.

The sensible idea of jobs-for-deserving-migrants may be split from the bill (again) and carried out regionally by administrative order. The government may offer some small restrictions on health care for illegal migrants and asylum seekers.

Will that bring the LR aboard? I doubt it.

Will the government risk another explosion by using its special powers to impose the law under Article 49.3 of the Constitution? I doubt it.

Will Macron back down and withdraw the bill (again)? I doubt it.

Will immigration replace pensions as the dominant political psycho-drama? I doubt it.

There may have been case for more tinkering with migration law but this was not the time to insist on it. Macron should have concentrated his efforts on more consensual reforms like his seven-year increase in defence spending and the proposed “green” industry law.

Immigration, like pensions, is a subject which anaesthetises balance and practical common-sense.

SHOW COMMENTS