Collaborative document:
https://docs.piratpartiet.se/products/files/doceditor.aspx?fileid=6088&doc=bjhuQ01uakJCaDg1N0h4Rm9DSm5zMlRQTDlQdmdLZUl1L0hEdjRyTHVkcz0_IjYwODgi0
Hi, the section on migration is already updated. Please see the comments here Solidarity and Fairness Overhauling European Refugee and Asylum Policy - #4 by zbynek
1 Like
Hello, Strasbourg Meeting! This (the long text in this Discourse thread to which I reply with this message) is the current final text of our working Group. We did not manage to find enough time to thoroughly discuss the last version of Migration and Asylum part, however it has been prediscussed and what you are reading is a compromise of our positions. Please do read comments in the document Zbynek attached above this message for further explanations.
I hope your meeting goes well and our text is found sufficient!
2 Likes
Hello Marketa! As you might know, me and Veronika are scheduling and finalizing the CEEP. We need to present the chapters for the PPEU- Board-Meeting June 5. Please let us know, if there is a finalized version of Chapter International Affairs, we could rely on to be presented. Thanks and best best, Mia
1 Like
Hello, I would like to recommend the following changes:
- the text on immigration is too much targeted on immigrants, not the voters and their thinking of the problem, I think the text should be more balanced,
- I disagree with the requirement for the countries to have the same conditions for people coming from different countries of origin; it does not take into account the specific situations that may arise such as with Ukraine - this is an anonymouse change in the collaborative document,
- it is unecessary to force the states to accept any number of immigrants based on giving them the right to settle anywhere in the union; this would completely take away any means of the state to have a say as far as who exactly and how many people are on its premises.
Thank you for reading this.
Jakub MichĂĄlek
1 Like
Dear all,
Please take a look at the latest version of our chapter on migration. We found common grounds for most of the text, but in the section on asylum, some points still need to be discussed.
As pointed out by Jakub Michalek above, it is a question of the sovereignty of member states over the regulation of the intake of refugees. Jakub also mentioned to me that he consulted this point with Jan Lipavsky, our minister of Foreign affairs, who is in favour of the proposed changes.
Jakub suggests deleting mainly these two sentences:
⢠We must work on non-discriminatory reform of the asylum system all Member States will respect.
⢠ensures freedom of establishment of refugeesâ lives in Europe for those whose application was approved;
The reasons for removing/rewording these points are to avoid controversy in the eyes of more conservative countries such as Czechia, their media and the likely criticism (to put it mild terms) that would follow if we are too progressive. If I understand Jakub right, it is thus a pragmatic move rather than something he would be necessarily against. At the same time, the second point would probably be valid for refugees but not so much for voters.
I am suggesting replacing the second point with this one. It can, hopefully, work for all parties:
⢠reconsider the first safe country of asylum principle as decisive in determining where the asylum procedure takes place and where the asylum-seeker must stay,
The suggestions on employment of mutual processing of asylum applications open up a similar set of questions as the two lines above. I edited it this way:
⢠employs a system of mutual processing of asylum applications, allowing each application to be made directly to the EU while leaving discretion to the Member States to decide whether to admit asylum-seekers onto their territory,
Please take a look at the whole document if it all works out for you.
I hope the meeting tomorrow will be successful!
Cheers.
PS: Please raise your voice if anything important to you is missing or if there is any shortcoming!
Hi everyone, and thanks for all your work and cooperation, we will now look at the text in Board. If there are any MAJOR problems, please raise your concerns now, as we will proceed with language checks and ratification process. Thank you!
I had a quick chat with @MarketaG, and for the chapter on International Affairs the version in this thread is indeed the finalized version. The subpart on Migration and Asylum can still do with some work, as you can see from the other comments in this thread.
1 Like
When will there be a jitsi meeting about the Migration & Asylum?
Hi Mark! Thursday would be good. Is there any chance, to have this meeting not too late/earlier on the day? Or would you rather choose weekend? Please make a suggestion. Best, Mia
Look here, everybody who has been into this subject! The Germans have done a text here and there are comments Solidarity and Fairness Overhauling European Refugee and Asylum Policy - #2 by MarketaG . So everybody, interested in immigration and asylum politics, we do it this week, just communicate the âwhenwhenâ please! Best Mia!
It is finalisation time. Come on. letâs create a quick round, please
Hi, I donât understand. We already have a position on Migration and Asylum, what kind of German version and meeting are you talking about? I as a coordinator of this chapter have not been informed of this. I consider this chapter done. 
@Mia This is the last version, including ZbynÄkâs and Jakubâs agreement on moresensitive migration language: International Affairs - #2 by MarketaG
Can you explain why is there need to re-open it?
Sorry Marketa. Of course you should have been involved. I just learned, that this migration and Asylum Chapter should go more into internal politics, and yes, it also has a huge international, global aspect, sure. But we have not scheduled anything and you will be informed, naturally. Best, best, with all the respect and no offense intended, Mia
And can you plese tell me who decided this big change on the last possible moment, without a common agreement? This is quite unacceptable for PPCZ, I have to say. Migration is very sensitive topic and needs a lot of work - which we already did and this is the compromise. I am against changing anything at this point, or weâll lose this fragile compromise.
1 Like
Hi, I donât understand why this is being reopened again?
There has been a tremendous amount of work done and the latest text is the best possible compromise, including positions from several member parties, e.g. bits from Danielâs PP-DE proposal (which Mia mentioned above) and from PP-SE as well (from the same linked thread).
I would suggest that we put the text compiled by ZbynÄk and Marketa up for Board approval so that we can move on with the process.
Of course, there will be time to discuss later, and most importantly, come to a final agreement during the Council meeting.
Again thank you all for all your hard work.
I will inform all, who were hoping for a last-last jitsi meeting, that we are ready here. Actually there has been enough time, to bring opinions into the process.
Sorry everybody ⌠it is obviously too late 
You can still write to me âŚ
Best best Mia
Alright, let me rephrase my slight discontent in a more dilpomatic way.
I am very pleased with the written text that is produced. In Strasburg we discussed 2 things I have a problem finding back in the tekst.
- The option of the EU desiding to which country refugees go in Europe when they arrive in a EU country.
- The discriminating fact of only allowing high functioning and skilled workers from outside the EU (Expats) to live and work in EU countries. The so called âtalent lootingâ of developing countries.
I dont see these things back in the text. I would have really liked to discuss this in a jitsi to see if this can be explained based on the existing text without having to change it. I think it can but I am not sure and would like some assistence from the people that did a lot of the writing work. I would also be open te hear why these points would not be a good idea or why it would not be possible to make this happen.
These 2 ideas could solve some problems:
- Refugees get located according to the member states capacity.
- Refugees get the help that fits their needs.
- Takes away tention between member states about who will help undocumented people.
- No more pushing refugees over boarderlines (like the dutch do on the german boarder)
- Overview of the capacity of specific help a member state can give the refugees.
- Takes away the selling points of human trafficers to certain countries. Because you dont get to choose to which safe country you go for shelter and help.
- This strengthens the intermediary role of the EU and I think it would help voters with a different political view to vote for us.
- Fair, non discriminating workers from outside the EU imigration policy so nations keep part of their talented work force to build up their home country.
I would love to hear when we can plan a jitsi to talk about this.
Kind regards, Mark 
1 Like