Will it be farewell Roma?

The European Parliament last week adopted a resolution condemning the French government for expelling, in recent weeks, hundreds of Roma people – commonly, if somewhat disparagingly, known as gypsies – back to their countries of origin, Romania and Bulgaria.

The expulsions caused an uproar in France and in Europe because the people concerned are citizens of EU countries and should, therefore, benefit from the EU right to free movement. Moreover, critics pointed out that the expulsions were discriminatory because they targeted one particular group and stigmatised them.

The French authorities retorted that the people concerned were staying illegally in France and that they were, therefore, acting within the law.

Along with my political group, I voted against this resolution because we do not think that the European Parliament should be used as a weapon against individual national governments. I would not like it if my country had to be condemned and, therefore, I have always been reluctant to use my vote to condemn others.

But, more importantly, last week’s cacophony of accusations risked alienating us from the real issue, namely how to get Roma people, mostly fellow EU citizens, out of the poverty trap and give them a real chance to integrate and succeed in society.

A counter-resolution that I drafted sought to address this central issue. But it was narrowly rejected by about 40 votes because it was clear that a majority in Parliament was thirsty for Nicolas Sarkozy’s blood.

Our group is the only one in the European Parliament that counts a Roma MEP – Livia Jaroka – among its members and, thanks to her, we have long been pushing for a Roma strategy to be pursued at European level. We want a concrete action plan based on cooperation among EU institutions and member states and fully involving the Roma community in all aspects of planning, implementation and supervision. It must also be accompanied by sufficient financial resources allocated by the EU.

To be sure, the European Commission has already devised various funding initiatives to address these pressing needs, such as housing and education. But member states have been slow in taking them up and, consequently, little money has trickled down to the benefit of Roma communities across the EU.

So, although most initiatives must necessarily be implemented at national, regional or local level, we want the European Union to give an impetus to this strategy and see it through. Unfortunately, last week’s majority put all this aside and focused instead on censoring the French government.

Now, although the French may be known for their style, their returns policy over recent months was somewhat clumsy because it was accompanied by an unnecessary fanfare from the establishment and by populist rhetoric that did sound like stigmatisation.

Nevertheless, I have to say I did not recognise France in the harsh charges of xenophobia and racism levelled against it last week in Parliament. More so, since, here in Malta, we know very well that France has been the most exemplary among EU countries in helping us out by hosting some 200 immigrants from Malta who qualified for international protection.

This leaves one important point, namely whether, by expelling EU citizens, France has violated EU law on free movement.

The European Commission was asked to investigate and, so far, it has been careful not to condemn France, even reminding us that EU law on free movement is not unconditional.

There is no question that all EU member states must implement EU law and do so in full respect of human rights. But EU law comprises both rights and obligations.

EU Directive 2004/38/EC grants EU citizens the right to move to and settle in any EU country. But it also sets out clear obligations. For instance, for stays longer than three months, one must be employed or self-employed or otherwise have sufficient resources so as not to become a financial burden. Likewise, free movement can be restricted on grounds of public security. And expulsions are also possible, provided they are justified on a case-by-case basis.

These are common-sense safeguards and it would be ridiculous to ignore them or to dismiss them as discriminatory. If EU citizens were staying illegally in Malta, it would be perfectly legal to expel them. So, like other EU countries, France is within its rights to exercise these safeguards.

True, it is not easy to find the right balance between the right to free movement and the problems that may be caused by those who overstay and become a burden on their host country and its society. And heavy-handed approaches and populist rhetoric do not help.

But the law must be applied. And if mainstream governments do not do it, voters will elect extremists to do it for them. And we all know what the consequences would be.

www.simonbusuttil.eu

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.