CHANGE IMMIGRATION POLICY

IN FRANCE

BUT WITH MORE POLITICAL COURAGE

After the pension reform, the bill on asylum and immigration is currently giving rise to lively debates, the most controversial text of the start of the five-year term. Postponed twice, it resurfaced three weeks after the Arras attack, in a context of conflict in the Middle East. An Odoxa poll for Public Senate reveals that more than two thirds of French people support this bill, considering that it will allow better control of immigration, while 74% of French people believe that there is an overpopulation of immigrants , according to an Odoxa survey published in May 2023. Indeed, the proportion of immigrants in the population has continued to increase, with a major transformation in the origin of immigrants, mainly of non-European origin and of Muslim faith. These cultural and religious differences often make assimilation difficult.

This bill, which will be examined by senators from November 6 and by deputies in December, has been the subject of intensive negotiations for more than a year. The executive, having a relative majority in Parliament, must seek allies for its adoption.

Surprising figures among LFI voters

An Opinion Way poll for Le Parisien provided remarkable figures that reflect general sentiment. 77% of French people believe that society has difficulty integrating foreigners. 80% think that France does not manage expulsions effectively. 81% criticize the shortcomings in the fight against illegal immigration. 78% favor a referendum on immigration, although this is currently impossible due to constitutional rules, which President Emmanuel Macron may be considering changing. 91% want a strengthening of expulsion measures for foreigners representing a serious threat to public order. It should be noted that 85% (!) of La France Insoumise voters share this repressive desire. 78% demand a reduction in the number of possible appeals against expulsion decisions. 65% of Jean-Luc Mélenchon's supporters support this position.

The article that crystallizes passions

Article 3 of the bill crystallizes passions. It concerns the regularization of undocumented workers in sectors in tension. In recent weeks, pressure has increased around this article, which particularly divides Republicans and centrists. He proposes the creation of a temporary residence permit for foreign workers in sectors with a labor shortage.

The Republicans are firmly opposed to the idea of ​​issuing a “full right” residence permit to undocumented immigrants employed in sectors in tension, fearing that this would constitute a migratory “call for air”. The centrists, for their part, are in favor. They proposed a rewriting of the article, which provides for "exceptional regularization within the framework of the discretionary power of prefects", while removing the requirement for written authorization from the employer to request regularization, in order to avoid the “low-wage traps”.

Despite these disagreements, the President of the Senate, Gérard Larcher, called for caution during a group meeting, stressing that we must not "break all the dishes". A Senate which returned a blank copy would have the worst effect for Gérard Larcher, who defends the role of stabilizer of the Senate.

“In these times when the institutional balance has been profoundly modified due to the absence of a majority in the National Assembly where the majority fact is no longer, the Senate has an essential role in the functioning of our Institutions. It has managed to be the point of balance for a struggling democracy,” he claimed on October 2.

Marine Le Pen, who had not yet taken a position on the bill, indicated that she could ultimately vote in favor of this "small law with small measures which improve the situation a little bit" if the article 3 was deleted, thus seeking to thwart the Republican strategy. However, the left continues to present a disunited front on the issue of immigration, with La France Insoumise refusing to support the regularization of undocumented workers.

The possibility of a 49.3

It remains to be seen whether the government, in desperation, will resort to article 49.3 of the Constitution to have the text adopted by force. Gérald Darmanin defends his bill on immigration as "a text of general interest for the French", and he has a major advantage: a large majority of French people are calling for an indisputable toughening of immigration policies and of immigrants.

The bill presented by the Minister of the Interior is part of a long tradition of immigration policy which oscillates between firmness and permissiveness. But this initiative seems insufficient to many experts to fundamentally change the situation.

One more law that is very ineffective in terms of control

In 1985, France gave up control of its land borders by signing the Schengen agreements, favoring the free movement of flows , including humans. However, after the migration crisis of 2015 and the massive arrival of illegal migrants in Europe, the European Commission showed itself powerless. To counter this, it created the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, commonly known as Frontex, whose role is to protect borders. However, the initial budget allocated to Frontex was paltry, well below the annual budget of a small French town, reflecting the contradictions between respect for borders and the European Union's principles of openness and individual rights.
As a result, the Schengen Area's borders remain porous, allowing migrants to freely enter Europe through various routes.

The all-powerful Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)

Despite France's attempts to reestablish lasting controls with Spain and Italy after the 2015 attacks, the Court of Justice of the European Union reiterated that such pushbacks are contrary to the Schengen agreements in a ruling last September. The overall trend is towards more openness and less firmness, as evidenced by previous decisions of the CJEU.

The solution lies in the Member States of the European Union. The Minister of the Interior campaigns alongside Italy for the creation of international zones near illegal entry points, in order to prevent migrants from entering European soil until their administrative situation is resolved , instead of letting them disperse throughout Europe, from where they generally do not leave. Some believe that revising the Schengen agreements is necessary to address these problems, without necessarily withdrawing from them.

France's attractiveness for migrants is largely explained by the generosity of its reception system. Certain measures, such as State Medical Aid (AME) or the unconditional right to housing, are not imposed by European obligations. They could have been included in the bill currently under discussion, but they were not. As a result, many associations working to welcome migrants influence public policy by acting against expulsions and increasing legal recourse.

Another major problem lies in expulsions, which come up against budgetary and diplomatic constraints. Administrative detention centers (CRA) lack places, the costs linked to expulsions are high, and diplomatic relations with countries of origin complicate forced returns.

Although measures have been taken to create more places in CRA, it is necessary to double or even triple their number. France could also exert diplomatic pressure to facilitate expulsions, in particular by reducing the issuance of visas or diplomatic passports....