19.05.2013 Views

Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Border Controls 59<br />

detention centres for migrants and introduced visa requirements. Spain<br />

passed an Aliens Act in 1985, with a labour permit scheme. Both Spain and<br />

Portugal have regularised large numbers of foreign workers and granted<br />

amnesties.<br />

Pressure on these countries to enforce their border controls, and other<br />

attempts to coordinate the policing of immigration policies, took place under<br />

what was called ‘ad hoc’ intergovernmental cooperation. This meant that<br />

discussions were secret and outside the political arena, not open to<br />

questioning by the European Parliament. States were unwilling to hand over<br />

any control of their national borders, which they considered a sensitive<br />

matter of national sovereignty, to European institutions, believing the latter<br />

were too favourably disposed towards migration and the human rights of<br />

migrants. But France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxemburg<br />

signed an agreement at Schengen in 1985 under which border controls<br />

between themselves were to be abolished by 1 January 1990. A further<br />

agreement on procedures for people crossing the external frontiers of the<br />

Schengen group, and a procedure for determining the country responsible for<br />

considering asylum applications, was signed in June 1990, when the<br />

agreement became the Schengen Convention. Subsequently all other EU<br />

states except Ireland and Britain have joined or stated their intention to ratify<br />

the Schengen Convention. The British objection to Schengen was based on<br />

its unwillingness to abandon immigration controls on people travelling from<br />

the rest of the EU. But the British Home Office was keen to participate in other<br />

Schengen activities, such as the exchange of information between<br />

immigration authorities and sanctions against airlines and shipping<br />

companies carrying undocumented refugees. The British had also been<br />

enthusiastic participants and founder members in the earlier Trevi Group,<br />

set up in 1975 to formulate policies on terrorism, drugs and illegal<br />

immigration.<br />

In 1986 an Ad Hoc Group on Immigration was set up, following a<br />

proposal from the British government. It was concerned with the harmonisation<br />

of asylum policies, to examine ‘the measures to be taken to reach a<br />

common policy to put an end to the abusive use of the right to asylum’, and<br />

also with the harmonisation of visa requirements. In 1987 a list of 50<br />

countries, whose nationals would require visas to enter the EU, was agreed.<br />

By 1993 the list had expanded to 73 countries, with a further 92 countries<br />

from which visas were required by only some European states. The list now<br />

contains virtually all Third World countries, and all the ‘refugee-producing’<br />

countries. In 1990 the Dublin Convention was signed, following closely an<br />

arrangement already agreed by the Schengen countries. This stated that<br />

asylum seekers had the right to make only one application in the territory<br />

of the European Community. Rather than giving asylum seekers a choice in<br />

the matter, the convention laid down that the state responsible for<br />

considering an application should be either the one in which the refugee first<br />

arrived, or the state which had issued a visa or otherwise facilitated entry. If

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!