Today, in a big amphitheatre of Lyon 3 University, took place the European Council committee. This Council is important because of its impact on the different Europeans decisions and was supposed to gather 28 Heads of government at 8am to debate on the chosen topics. However, it seems that the majority of the delegates are not used to wake up early because only 8 of them were present.
It was a funny surprise to see the UK, defending its positions in the case of Brexit. Despite the absence of some delegates, they have decided to debate on reforming Dublin regulation. It is a European Union law that determines which EU member State is responsible for the examination of an application for asylum. The actual Dublin regulation gives the responsibility of a refugee to the first state which welcomed him.
Notions had to be learned by the countries : Solidarity and respect of the EU regulation.
The debates did not start well. For instance, because of its geographical location, Italy was particularly involved in the matter. On the one hand, it did not seem to be ready to give up its position about reforming Dublin regulations. And on the other hand, the UK was against the reform. The debate of reforming or not was not the only issue because most of the countries had different proposals and solutions. Therefore, despite the first half of the day being animated, there was no agreement. The early wakeup call was not helpful for the delegates to communicate. Several notions were used and one of them was the fact that solidarity was a major point of the Union. Sweden agreed with Italy and added the fact that another important point was to constrain the countries which do not respect the regulations. UK defended the fact that Dublin regulations were appropriate and insisted on the restrictive aspect of a reform.
A needed choice, consensus or no deal?
We have all heard about « no deal » with the Brexit situation. A particularity of the European Council is the fact that every decision has to be taken by consensus. Today’s simulation with only 8 countries facilitated the opportunity to make a consensus. However, during the afternoon and after a good sandwich, our delegates finally came up with a solution. Italy clearly took the lead of the discussion and its arguments clearly convinced its opponents to finally reform the Dublin regulation. The reforms were divided in 4 points: the responsibility of countries processing the asylum seekers applications, the methods and solutions in the relocation of asylum seekers, the funding and efficiency of the European Union Agency of Asylum, and the question of quotas and sanctions for the countries which do not respect the laws.
As a conclusion, this committee debated a lot but had some difficulties to come to an agreement. It is normal because the topic treated was a delicate one.
Good job to all the delegates for staying motivated all day long. Just bear in mind that refugees are human being after all and even if politics is the game, human life is not political subject.