10/06/2016 Politics Europe

Now on BBC News: Politics Europe.

Hello and welcome to Politics Europe, your regular guide

to the top stories in Brussels and Strasbourg.

We will be talking about the EU Commission's plan to stem the flow

of migrants from Africa with the offer of financial help.

Is it wise, and will it work?

Britain's referendum on EU membership is just

around the corner.

But how will the rest of the union treat us if we vote to leave,

or even if we decide to stay?

And what is more important, the EU or the Commonwealth?

We have been to Malta, the EU's smallest country,

to find out.

So all that to come and more in the next half hour.

First though, this week members of the European Parliament have been

meeting in Strasbourg for their regular plenary session.

So what have they been getting up to, and what else has been

happening across Europe?

Here is our guide to the latest in just 60 seconds.

The European Parliament agreed to set up an inquiry

into the Panama Papers revelations.

It is looking specifically at alleged violations of EU law

by the European Commission and member states.

MEPs accused Turkish politicians of undermining the rule of law

by stripping the immunity of 138 MPs.

It means parliamentarians critical of President Erdogan could face

prosecution, and it will hardly do Turkey any favours in its bid

to join the EU, especially after the Chancellor said

this this week.

Turkey is a key ally.

They're a member of Nato, by the way, an organisation we all,

on all sides of the campaign, talk up.

But is it going to be the European Union?

No, it's not.

The Commission proposed new plans to tackle the financial crisis

by offering financial incentives to African and Middle Eastern

countries, to encourage them to stop people flowing into Europe.

And time for a lol.

It looks a bit like a smiley-face emoji, but it is actually

the new Slovak Presidency logo.

It is meant to convey positivity.

Let's see how long that lasts after Slovakia takes on the EU

Presidency after the first of July.

And with us for the next 30 minutes, I am joined by the Conservative MEP

David Campbell Bannerman.

He is supporting a vote to leave in the upcoming EU referendum

in Britain, and by the Green MEP Jean Lambert, who is supporting

remain.

So let's take a look at one of the stories in more detail,

whether Turkey is going to join the EU or not?

And I would suggest to both of you that neither remain nor leave

is totally accurate or honest in this.

Let me come to the leave.

It is true that it is official Government policy that Turkey

should join the EU at some stage.

The Prime Minister is trying to kick it into the long grass.

But even if the Government was putting all its effort behind

Turkey to join, it is a long way off.

Well, it's been a long way for some time.

Exactly.

I mean, that's true.

However it is the aspiration to have Turkey, and we are spending ?1.8

billion on pre-accession funding.

That's over five countries, including Turkey.

Yes, that's right, it's part of that package.

But I think there is a poster that says it could join by 2020.

We know that is not true.

I haven't seen that one, I think that is not correct.

But I think it is - you know, the accession process has

been restarted and speeded up.

So that is fair enough, that you are not saying

it is imminent.

And on your side of the argument, it isn't going to happen soon,

but it is policy that Turkey should join at some stage.

And this referendum is not for tomorrow, or the next day.

It is for a long while, so it's fair to raise that,

is it not?

I think it's fair to raise that if you're actually talking

about future enlargement of the European Union,

not if you're using it as a shorthand for something else.

And it's true that, if Turkey were to join,

there's a long process to go through.

And certainly the current Government many of us consider

is going backwards, in the way that it is not

going to meet the criteria.

But yes, it is still on the agenda.

By the current government you mean the current Turkish government.

Current Turkish government, yes.

Because of the move to a more Islamic...

Well, a more repressive government.

It's not necessarily Islamic, it's the fact that it's repressive,

and that, you know, yes.

But it's also the fact that, as you just mentioned,

about what has happened to the immunity of people

from the sort of more left-wing Kurdish party.

So yes, it's on the table at some point.

I'm assuming that, you know, given what the Government here has

proposed in terms of future referenda, that would be

a treaty change.

And so it becomes a decision, but it's still on the table.

Alright, well, on that reasonable degree of agreement there,

let's see if I can do better!

Now, the deal the EU struck with Turkey to stem the flow

of migrants crossing into Greece seems to be having some effect,

at least in that part of the Mediterranean.

How long remains to be seen.

But can and should that deal be repeated in other countries

in Africa and the Middle East?

Here is our correspondent with the details.

The moment when hope turned to fear in May on the Med.

This footage from the Italian navy was a chilling reminder of how

fragile migrants' lives can be.

Thousands have died attempting the journey to Europe since 2014,

according to the UN.

But dealing with and sorting through the influx of migrants has

also created domestic political problems for Europe's leaders,

after more than 200,000 have arrived so far this year.

The number of migrants arriving in Greece has dropped after the EU

promised Turkey billions of pounds in aid for better sea and border

controls, although the promise of visa-free travel for Turkish

citizens within the Schengen zone continues to put that deal

to the test.

On Tuesday, the European Commission announced the outline of a new ?50

billion deal with Middle East and North African countries.

The partnership plan proposes trade deals and more investment

for at least nine states, to stem the flow of migrants

to the EU.

Top of the list are Jordan and Lebanon, hosting 1.8 million

Syrian refugees, as well as Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Mali and Ethiopia,

countries migrants leave from or travel through to get to Europe.

The key coastal states of Libya and Tunisia,

launching points for crossings where EU cash would bolster border

and sea controls, and somewhat controversially, cash for countries

with poor human rights records like Eritrea and Sudan,

where migrants leave from.

So often on the back foot during this migration crisis,

EU leaders have been trying desperately hard

to regain the initiative.

Now, they think they have.

We propose to use a mix of positive and negative incentives,

to reward those third countries willing to co-operate effectively

with us, and to ensure that there are consequences

for those who do not.

This includes using our development and trade policies

to create leverage.

If this is the EU's big push on controlling migration,

then bear in mind that this is not new money pledged,

but from existing EU funds.

It relies on the ambition that member states will also match EU

funding, and on the hope that private and public backers

will want to invest too.

The proposals would require approval by EU governments and the EU

Parliament.

But one Eurosceptic MEP has already dismissed them.

Saying that we should stabilise the countries of origin is a kind

of a copout.

I mean, what are we going to do in the intervening 30 years?

Definitely the European Union should be opening its markets

to produce from Africa.

Probably the most immoral trade policy in the world at the moment

is the EU's Common Agricultural Policy.

It means that not only are producers, exporters

in developing countries, denied Europe's markets.

It means they then very often have to face unfair competition

against subsidised EU produce at home.

And as one EU analyst notes, there is a moral dilemma

for the EU leaders too.

I think the European Union has found it quite difficult to deal

with the problems with the existing policies that it's got.

So what it's doing in effect is trying to retrofit its existing

policies, to cope with a political problem it hadn't anticipated.

The problem is how you move from a situation in which you have

a group of countries which don't necessarily have the institutions,

the rule of law and democracy, which looks and feels

like what you have in Europe.

So in its the latest plan to control migration,

the EU finds itself under fire over its protectionist trade

policies, and questioned over how it will handle autocrats.

There is no simple solution to what could be a decades-long problem.

When you look at the scale of some of the problems facing the countries

that we're talking about here, there is about nine of them,

Ethiopia being one, Mali, Niger, Senegal, is this not just a drop

in the ocean?

I think it potentially - in many respects some of us think

it is a drop in the ocean.

On the other hand, it's also at least an effort to try

and do something, as was being said.

But I think that, you know, it has to go hand-in-hand

with a whole set of other policy areas, too.

Whether that's, you know, looking again at development aid,

and whether - how effectively that's working, but certainly issues

about trade policy, and also what we're doing -

what more can be done to help job creation in the countries

of origin as well.

To stop the people trying to...

Well, so that young people there who have some...

Have opportunities.

Yeah, so they feel their country isn't broken.

What's your take on this?

Well, we've tried it with Turkey, which is basically to bribe them,

to often them trade deals, offer them cash.

?62 billion has been mentioned as one figure.

But with Turkey that is to - that is an attempt, that is not

really geared at Turkish nationals.

That is geared at the almost 3 million refugees who have fled

the war zone to go to Turkey.

Coming through, yeah.

A different - that is a big problem, but it is a different problem.

I think the approach is quite similar, and the press release

actually says that, it's quite similar to Turkey.

And I mean, my worry is that, as Oxfam have complained,

you know, this could go to some very nasty governments,

with very poor human rights records.

And is there any guarantee it is going to work?

That is an issue, in places like Eritrea, the Sudan,

where human rights are appalling, that is why a lot of people

are fleeing in the first place.

I think it is in Eritrea where it is compulsory to join

the army and so on.

That's right, and really heavy penalties if you do not.

And heavy, and a horrible existence.

But should we - because in the end I suppose this

is government-to-government aid, are we not just really bolstering

the existing regimes with this money?

I think there's a risk of that.

And this is why I think it's really important that,

you know, that when we're looking at aid as we do,

that it is stepped.

In some places it will be aid which will go more towards NGOs,

will go towards working on the ground, so you circumvent

the government.

Other places where you feel you've got a more stable government,

that is actually trying to move forward, it will be direct budget

support within the government.

And that's, for example, what we were doing countries like

Bangladesh.

Which yes, there are still questions, but you're doing

that, it's a different sort of thing.

But I think the important part of it is that, whatever

you are doing, you still keep the human rights agenda

on the table, I mean, you know, and you don't

shut your eyes to that.

I assume you agree with the point that one of the reasons these

countries, a lot of them agricultural-based countries,

because that is the stage of the development they are at,

are not helped are the protections that go with the Common Agricultural

I fully agree with Dan.

It is disgraceful, the policy has hurt many of these countries,

and makes it hard to compete with it.

You are essentially dumping cheap food.

It is a two-way process, you are saying.

You have their products, as well as dumping.

Because it has been surplus.

Do you agree with that?

It is certainly a criticism the Greens have made

for quite some time.

It is interesting who is getting on board with that criticism.

But I think one of the things that is changing is that there is no

European assistance to help countries reach the standards,

sort of the hygiene standards and the like.

I think there is also a question about, in terms of the development,

we are still looking at what you do to add value

in the country of origin.

That is where the tariffs go up though, don't they,

at the moment?

If you do things to the produce in these countries, and get

the value added, the EU puts a higher tariff on it.

This's a risk that this is where the trade restrictions

for the poorest countries of the world have been extremely

important, in that, in terms of offering

support in how they develop, not only their markets,

the European Union, but internally and to the region.

This idea of the blue card system for the EU is roughly

the same as the American grey card system.

Good, bad, indifferent?

It hasn't been used very much to date.

Only Germany, it has been used a bit.

It hasn't been very successful.

Is it worth a try?

The right direction, skilled migrants.

But if we leave the EU, of course we will be outside

the customs union, so therefore we could cut

tariffs on a lot of these developing countries.

We will see how that goes down with British farmers.

Now, if the UK votes to remain in the EU on the 23rd of June,

that is the date, how will the rest of the EU treat

us?

Are they are keen to help us implement David Cameron's

negotiation, or would there possibly be a rift?

If we leave, will they want to send a message by putting

the UK through the ringer or will they strike a new relationship

with us as quickly as possible?

Although European politicians don't talk about,

there have been warnings that the EU would be tough in any future

negotiations.

The German Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schauble, reportedly

told his UK counterpart that his country

would be tough for what he described as years of the most

difficult negotiations.

The French finance minister has warned that Britain

would be completely killed in trade talks if the country wants to leave

the EU.

We have to be very clear that Brexit will have consequences,

he said.

The Leave campaigners believe would continue to thrive,

even outside the EU's single market.

Leaving the EU would also lead the UK to take back

control of its ability for trade and trade more freely with the rest

of the world.

Plus, they argue that the European project is a steamroller

and that if we remain in Britain, we will be flattened.

I suppose the difficult thing is, until it happens, we don't know.

Of course European politicians will say, if you vote to leave,

we are going to be really tough.

They could hardly say, yeah, vote to leave,

you can do whatever you want.

We just don't know, do we?

I'm on the trade committee, and the EU is doing

trade deals around the world.

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India.

So, socially, the model of running your own country

and grating a great trade deal with the EU is proven in that sense.

Except that nobody would ever have been in our position

if we vote to leave.

That is different.

Greenland is the closest.

I would say that it makes it easier to

do a trade deal in the sense that we are already compliant now,

because we are members of the EU.

We don't have the tariffs to negotiate away,

150% tariffs on whiskey, say, in India.

What's your honest assessment?

It is almost impossible to tell what Europe's is.

Suppose we voted to leave and left perhaps

around Christmas or in the autumn, what do you think the mood would be

like in the European capitals dealing with this?

I think it will be mixed, because there will be a question of,

there are strong relationships that have been forged

over the years, there are obviously have trade implications

for the EU.

But given what we know about the rise of the hard right

in countries such as France and the like, I think

there would also be a strong desire to have a clear message that

if other countries want to go down this

route, this is not going to be sort of, sunshine ever after and almost

after and almost no change.

So in cases of Marine Le Pen and those countries?

Yes.

I think the other key issue will be the question

of free movement and if we decide, and we don't quite know who will be

doing the negotiating for the UK, your party will sort that for us,

given that we don't...

If that is going to be a key issue, then I think a whole lot of other

things become very difficult and you will

be very grateful for the work I have been doing on the EU migration

policy.

We will be knocking on your door.

The negotiation, hypothetically, the people who haven't voted yet,

if we are out of the EU, will we not be confronted

by quite an existential choice, in a way?

You can have free movement within the EU, and you can

have the single market, but you can't pick

and choose?

You have to have both if you want one?

I think this is a fallacy we have heard from the Remain camp.

Only four of 440 trade agreements have free

movement, Switzerland and Lichtenstein are getting rid

of freedom of movement.

Switzerland doesn't know what to do.

There are people voting against that.

The EU is refusing to talk because they

say, access to the single market, you have to...

I accept that.

The thing that people don't realise, including President Obama,

we have a rules-based deal which is nonnegotiable.

We have already signed a treaty, it is exactly the same relationship

the EU has with US and Canada.

So there is a fallback position, what you're talking

about is a better trade deal on top, which all of us want.

In my paper here, the former head of the German

CPI says of course there would be a trade deal.

They don't want us to leave.

We will find out.

We will see what the conditions are.

We have to find that out!

Malta is the smallest and most densely populated EU member

State.

It has a population about the size of Bristol.

What has been the effect of only 12 years of EU

membership?

This unique little country, here's Adam with our

latest in the series, Meet The Neighbours.

It's like Game of Thrones meets the boat race.

This is Malta's Freedom Day bank holiday regatta,

when crews from the six towns surrounding

this harbour and face each other in an orgy of rowing,

pulling in, and I think, swearing.

Hi Andy, how are you?

Good thanks!

Things are more genteel with Andy.

Like a lot of the people on these islands, he is part

Maltese, part British, and he loves the royal family.

In fact, he has had Prince William in the back

of his water taxi.

I got a letter from Paris thanking me for taking

Prince William around and saying how much he enjoyed being on the boat.

To me, it is one of my greatest treasures.

There are bits of Britishness all over the country.

Do we even have these any more?

Malta is just one of three EU countries that is also

in the Commonwealth, along with the UK and

Cyprus.

This is a country that basically half a million people are living in,

and it is rare that we have the occasion to sit down at the same

table with economic superpowers not coming from Europe.

Without such a platform, it would be extremely

difficult for smaller or even micro- states to put forward their

arguments, which are essentially existential

on whether they survive or not.

Right now, Malta chairs the Commonwealth and will

next year hold a rotating presidency of the EU at the same time,

at the same time, jackpot.

You would be amazed at the sort of interest that there is amongst

European countries to get to know what makes this organisation called

the Commonwealth tick, because it is very difficult to find

another organisation worldwide which has

such a diverse composition.

It has its problems, so we are trying to

resolve those and use the Presidency of the Commonwealth to put forward

the issue of say, gay rights.

Back in the harbour, the regatta is over.

It is clear that membership of the Commonwealth and the EU helps

also to punch above its weight, but it

trades much more with the EU, suggesting that is the more powerful

pairing.

I've never been to Malta, you have?

You were telling me, I think I want to go.

It is a really interesting place and has masses of history.

For them, you heard it there, for them, being at the table

is really important, as being at the table for us

is going to be important.

A small place like Malta, it can feel that its status

overall is out of their hands because it's the EU.

You've been there?

I have, it's a wonderful place.

That harbour is very beautiful.

They took a huge pounding during the war from the Nazis?

They did, proportionally the highest in Europe,

in the world, actually.

The number of bombs that fell on them.

Great people, a lot of history.

I am a great fan of Malta.

I think there is a bit of a contest between its

British history and the EU.

It has changed quite a lot.

There is not a sign that they want to leave?

It was a close-run vote at the time.

But that has been resolved.

You think it is pretty settled now within the EU?

Yes, I think it is settled within the European Union.

It has a voice there.

It is the deceit of the European Asylum support office now.

Therefore, it really feels that the solution to problems around

around, whether it's migration, climate or whatever

are very much within the EU.

So they are not going to follow Britain?

No, we might follow them, though, because they are very crowded.

Migration policies get out of control.

We might be as crowded as Malta.

Fans of Game of Thrones may have noticed that some of the scenes

there are shot in Malta.

They are the not rainy bits that are in Malta.

The rainy bits are in Northern Ireland.

That's it for now.

Thanks for joining us.

Bye bye.

Hello there.