An agreement on a possible re-negotiated membership status for Britain in the European Union (EU) failed to materialise during talks between European Council (EC) president Donald Tusk and British Prime Minister David Cameron at 10 Downing Street on Sunday. Mr. Tusk’s terse “no deal” remarks to journalists as he left the Prime Minister’s residence gave an indication of the impasse.
However, negotiations on an acceptable draft text are to continue over the next 24 hours. Mr. Tusk had earlier hoped to put up a draft for discussion before the 27 EU heads in Brussels on Monday. A summit on ‘Brexit’ (Britain’s exit from the EU) is scheduled for February 18 and 19.
State benefits to refugees
Britain’s demand that it be allowed to restrict state benefits to EU migrants for the next seven years has emerged as a sticking point. As per this condition, any migrant arriving in Britain over the next seven years will have to wait for a period of four years before becoming eligible for any government benefit that British citizens enjoy.
The European Commission (EC) has instead offered the option of an “emergency brake” — a ban on benefits that can be activated only if the country can prove that its public services are under unsustainable pressure. This cannot be invoked by the country concerned but has to be voted on by the EU.
Mr. Cameron, whose promise of an ‘in-out’ referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU may take place as early as June this year, has argued that the emergency brake should be effected immediately after the referendum and for a period of seven years.
Cameron's other demands
The seven-year emergency brake is the most ambitious of Mr. Cameron’s demands that he would like to see incorporated into the draft. Additionally, Mr. Cameron’s basket of demands include a strengthening of national institutions like Parliament vis-à-vis the EU’s legislative institutions; protection to London City’s status as a financial hub from policies that favour eurozone economies; and the elimination of “unnecessary legislation” that hinders economic growth.
With migration levels into Europe from Syria and other countries in West Asia continuing to be high, European leaders want Britain to step forward and commit to taking in a larger share of migrants. So far, Mr. Cameron has pledged to take in 4,000 Syrian refugees every year over the next five years, an offer that British Opposition parties, charities and even the Church of England have bitterly criticised.
On Monday, 120 leading economists added their voice to the demand for a more generous refugee policy. In an open letter to Mr. Cameron, the academics said that the current policy is “morally unacceptable”. A million refugees are expected to reach Europe’s door this year. “Refugees should be taken in because they are morally and legally entitled to international protection, not because of the economic advantages they may bring,” the letter notes, adding, “Nonetheless, it is important to note that the economic contribution of refugees and their descendants to the U.K. has been high.”
Talks still on for a negotiated status for U.K. in the EU; refugee inflow a sticking point
Response
It's a big deal right now in Britain whether they are staying in European-Union. The negotiation between European Council president Donald Tusk and British Prime Minister David Cameron had failed. However, not all the negotiation had failed. Cameron's demands were too high and he didn't want to take lots of responsibility. Donald Tusk claimed no deal to the journalists. However, the negotiation on refugee inflow is still going on. Since Britain doesn't want to have lots of migrants from other country coming into their country, the negotiation will be harder to reach the agreement. This article is biased since it only talks about British side of the argument. I see where Britain is coming from and I understand their issues but allowing such little number for refugee migrants is not moral. Agreement should be reached qucikly so that more refugees have place to stay
No comments:
Post a Comment