European commission proposes ‘solidarity contributions’ by states that do not take in refugees, to support those that do
European countries that refuse to give shelter to refugees could be forced to pay into the coffers of states that do, under plans to be unveiled by the
on Wednesday.
The idea is part of a long-awaited proposal to reform the EU’s asylum rules, which were stretched to breaking point by the arrival of more than one million refugees and migrants last year.
A copy of the draft regulation
to centralise European asylum policy by allocating refugees around the bloc according to a quota system determined by a country’s wealth and size.
The commission will also
. Granting Turks visa-free access to the EU’s Schengen zone was a crucial part of the deal the EU struck with Ankara to reduce migrant flows
The UK can choose whether or not to take part in the new EU asylum system.
EU countries would still be responsible for housing refugees who arrive on their territory, preserving a key principle of existing asylum rules known as the Dublin regulation.
Unlike under Dublin, refugees could be dispersed around the EU via a “corrective fairness mechanism” in the event that countries that are the first arrival point are unable to cope. Commission officials are anxious to ease the pressure on frontline states, notably Greece and Italy, which have been struggling to handle the large numbers of refugees and migrants arriving on their shores.
Countries that refuse to take in refugees would be required to pay EU states that are doing more. Although the sum has not yet been finalised, the draft law suggests “a solidarity contribution” of €250,000 (£198,000) per asylum applicant.
The idea chimes with the thinking of Italy’s prime minister, Matteo Renzi, who has long argued that eastern and central European countries should be denied EU funds for refusing to help with the EU migration crisis.
Hungary and Slovakia refused to take part in a one-off scheme to redistribute 160,000 refugees from Greece and Italy to other EU countries, but there was nothing in existing EU law to levy any financial penalty on them.
The corrective fairness mechanism would be modelled on that redistribution scheme, which has seen painfully slow progress. Out of the 160,000 refugees, only 937 were resettled in first six months of its operation.
Although the European court of justice routinely issues fines to countries that flout EU law, introducing fines for not taking refugees is likely to be controversial.
Guy Verhofstadt, leader of the Liberal group in the European parliament, said reform of “the outdated Dublin regulation” was essential. “Tough times require bold decisions, which is why I call on EU governments to give these proposals a fair hearing,” he said.
The plans represent something of a victory for David Cameron, who had strenuously campaigned to preserve the principle that countries that are the first port of arrival for asylum seekers should be responsible them.
A government source said the proposals showed that “the best way to get a good deal for the UK in
is to stay at the table and stand up for British interests”, adding: “It shows that Britain can work with the European commission to come up with pragmatic solutions.
“These new plans give Britain the best of both worlds by retaining the right to remove asylum seekers to EU countries – but without opting in to the Schengen area’s burden-sharing scheme. We now know that taking a leap into the dark by voting to leave the EU would leave the UK powerless to return thousands of asylum seekers to other European countries.”
Successive British governments have chosen to opt into EU asylum policy so they can send back asylum seekers to other countries. But Downing Street is likely to be concerned that a debate on the EU’s asylum rules could boost the Brexit campaign.
While European leaders have been scrambling to come up with a plan to stop migrants getting on boats bound for Greece, a parallel debate has been raging about reforming the EU’s defunct asylum rules.
In another boost for the British government, the commission states that any mandatory redistribution of refugees will take into account government efforts to resettle refugees from third countries.
The UK
but has refused to take refugees currently in Greece, arguing that this would encourage more people to make perilous journeys across the sea. This stance has now gained tacit approval from the commission.
It's all just a proposal right now, I doubt it would fly (get passed by Brussels).