b2ap3_thumbnail_image2[1]

Interview in Kurier Wnet

Below is a translation of an article in Kurier Wnet in which Syed Kamall, MEP for London is interviewed about the situation in Poland and problems across Europe from banking to immigration.

– Translation from Polish –

First of all I would like to thank you for the magnificent defence of Poland in the European Parliament.

Thank you. Usually I reply that I was simply doing my job. Law and Justice is a part of my political group. I’m very proud of that. It was unjustly attacked and treated with a great hypocrisy. I think that we should monit

or the events that concern Poland and take the procedures to a good end.

Did the debate from the 19th of January differ from the other debates at the EP?

No. In many respects it was similar to the debates that were conducted by the MEPs from different groups of the EP, who use the situation to attack their political opponent. It happens often that the politicians cannot achieve an exchange of views in the national parliament, so they try to bring the problem to the EP in order to achieve an international dimension for their case.

For me however this debate was unjustified. There was no reason for an attack. In the general elections Law and Justices achieved a clear parliamentary majority; the attack was launched however not only at the party but also at its voters, who brought it to power. When we look at some of the “justifications” that were presented before the debate, such as the case of the Constitutional Court or the media, we can see that the previous government’s actions in this regard were completely ignored. So my question is: why didn’t the EP react back then? Why does it act only now? The only justification is that the Law and Justice has won a decisive majority in the elections.

In Poland we are pondering whether PiS has won the debate. What’s your opinion?

I think that PiS has won a decisive victory. Initially we only wanted to explain that the debate is uncalled for. But when we’ve put the cards on the table it was plain to see for everyone how the situation looks like. At that moment the deputies had to find an answer to the question: why are we dealing with that case now? Why is Law and Justice and its current actions, in regards to the Constitutional Court and state mass media, are being contested. Anyone who looks at the facts will see that the balancing of the narrative is sensible, as well as that the former government has tried to push in their own people into the Constitutional Court.

It’s obvious that you’re well versed into Polish affairs. Do you think that the actions against Poland will continue?

Let’s wait and see. European Commission has, of course, initiated a proceeding. I think it was a very important step for the Polish government to look to the Venice Commission for an evaluation and counsel in respect to the legal steps that have been taken. Now we have to wait for the results of this evaluation, and only later we’ll see what the European Commission will do.

Right now we’re dealing with common, oafish politics and an attack on the democratically elected Polish government.

You’re sitting in the EP for almost a decade. What are the most important issues for our continent?

We really have a lot to do instead of attacking the Polish government. Firstly – the migration crisis of an unprecedented scale. Up to this point we didn’t try to differentiate between those who are escaping war and seek asylum and those who look for better living conditions. We can, of course, understand that they hit the road since an opportunity arised, but they’re not necessarily the first ones to whom we should offer our help. The situation is made worse by the open invitation that was issued by Angela Merkel. She declared that they will be accepted no matter the circumstances. It has created a great pressure for the Schengen zone and the states that border Germany, it has also undermined the international Dublin agreement. For me personally it’s simply shocking.

The other crisis takes place in the euro zone. Instead of fixing the situation we’re just plastering over it, as we say in England. We have a high unemployment, the economic growth did not come back, the whole euro zone is suffering for this reason. The next issue is the coming referendum in my country, Great Britain. The citizens may decide that we’re leaving the EU. These are the three challenges that the EU is faced with. And we didn’t even mention such things as terrorism. We have witnessed terrorist attacks last year in France, other European countries, and a statement can be risked that the next ones are coming.

You have mentioned several important issues. Let’s start with immigration. Spring is coming and with it the human wave will be on the move again. What should be done to somehow control it?

There are different solutions available. Most important issue is calming down the situation in Syria. We need to do all in our power – if we have any influence on these issues – to help the people who live there. We can help in picking up the talks; contribute to the reconstruction and recreation of the state institutions.

Secondly, if we make deals with persons who have left their country we need to check if they’ve fled for the fear for their lives, if they were somehow persecuted, or if they are simply economic refugees. Presently on the Union’s borders appear not only “refugees” from Syria or Afghanistan. There are also travellers from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Morocco and Algeria. They’re not faced with extreme poverty or persecutions. They come because they’re looking for better lives. It can be understood, of course. They don’t have the right to any priority however. In those countries there are working embassies and consulates, our countries have their immigration systems that can be used. Proper applications, documents and so on can be filed in.

In my electoral district in London we’re very diverse and open. We have people literally from all over the world; some of them are seeking to bring in their families and are waiting for their cases to be considered in accordance to law, by an immigration office. Now they’re telling me: maybe my family should simply jump on a rubber boat, go over the Mediterranean Sea and come to Great Britain? Of course such attitude additionally undermines the functioning systems that are legal. We need to also organize the reception points on the Schengen borders. There everyone should go through the process, give their fingerprints and at this stage it should be established who is a refugee and who’s not. Those who are not refugees should be turned back. The refugees should be divided between the Union’s member states, it should be done voluntarily. The European Commission should not try to force the number of refugees that have to be accepted. Also we should finally decide what kind of help we can offer once they reach the country.

Such policy needs to be based on common sense, instead of simplistic approach of Angela Merkel – we welcome everyone – and Junker’s simplistic approach – we force the refugees upon the member states.

What are the reasons for Germany’s and Angela Merkel’s actions, are there some real reasons behind them?

It’s actually interesting. I’ve asked my German friends for reasons for such actions. Why did Mrs. Merkel present such a generous offer? The answers depended on whom you talk to in Germany. Some say that the motive lied in the protests in the refugee camps and Mrs. Merkel reacted to them. Some role was played by the photos of this poor boy, who drowned while trying to get to Europe and whose body was lying on the beach. Other Germans point to their countrie’s history and the fact that people still remember what we’ve done to the rest of Europe during World War II. Because of that they still feel guilty and for that reason they want to be in the vanguard of the humanitarian efforts. There is another issue: the German society is ageing. They need young people, who will work since their own birth-rate is too low. Therefore they see young men who are coming to their country as a potential workforce. The problem is however that nobody has made any effort to differentiate actual refugees from the people who are trying to improve their material conditions. This puts pressure on the neighbouring countries.

You’ve mentioned the economic crisis in the euro zone. It started in 2008 and continues to this day. Are you surprised by the scale and length of the difficult economic situation in Europe?

We’re dealing with different crises at the same time. There is the banking crisis of course, but it’s connected with excessive debt. To a large degree the banking finance stemmed from the debt crisis and the attempts of stretching out and rolling of the debt, using the financial instruments. That’s why it will take a lot of time to put the banks in order so that they’ll be competitive and profitable. Also there still are governments that think that they can spend the money that is not on their accounts. And that’s a problem. Every family knows that you need to handle money carefully. We need to know very precisely how much will we earn and how much we can save and spend. We rather don’t borrow irresponsibly and without a good reason. The governments however behave differently. When they encounter problems they turn they’re printers on and think that the matter is settled.

Some governments in the Union behave like that and hope that those who are more prudent will help them out. We simply need to behave in a more responsible way, the countries should play by the rules be them the Schengen, euro zone or other.

Two years ago the bankers have taken over the accounts on Cyprus, Greece is selling out the real estate – are these steps going to help to solve the crisis or rather make it even worse?

I repeat – it’s a matter of responsibility. We need to be prepared to face some really tough decisions. For example a country should balance its national budget so that it’ll make sure it will satisfy its needs but also that it pays its debts. Simply all decision makers should act responsibly and take responsibility for the things that were done badly.

That’s a very universal advice. Do you think that the European Union will survive the next ten years?

I’m convinced that there will be a European Union. People who say that’s it’s over are exaggerating a lot. The question is: can it survive in its current form? This institution must reform. Right now we cannot move away from the one size fits all attitude – the uniformization of everything according to Brussels orders. If something is implemented in one country all others must adjust and do the precise same thing. What we should have is a more elastic and flexible European Union. Let’s be frank, not all countries will join the euro zone. This currency was not good for all, and let’s not pretends that all will join. Maybe not all countries should be in the Schengen area? But the real problem lies in the fact if a given country has committed itself to following the agreements, for example in the matter of Schengen, it should honour them and this is European Union’s real problem.

What an ideal Union would look like in your Party’s opinion? Are you among the authors of the reform that is being proposed by the United Kingdom?

In deed I assist Prime Minister Camron in the talks and negotiations on the Union’s reform. Our idea is a more elastic Europe which deals with the problems and threats that appear. Maybe we’re not able to cope with the crises that haunt us because the answer to all problems is “more Europe”, which means more power for the Brussels bureaucracy and more regulation. Example? The refugee crisis. The countries should meet and each should say what it can do in this matter. Instead of that we deal with attempts to dictate the member states the amount of persons for “relocation”, no matter the circumstances. And the EU budget? Same thing! The bureaucracy speaks – and everything needs to be dealt with as Brussels wishes.

In respect to refugees Great Britain should not accept big numbers of people, since for years we’ve been having an unprecedented immigration. But we can help on the spot – where the refugees already are and accept them from the camps, instead of those that’ve crossed the Mediterranean. Great Britain has given a billion pounds for the training for the people who are in the camps. Those are concrete actions, that are in contrast with what European Commission is doing – arbitrary assignment of refugee quotas between the states.

We need more elasticity. Similarly the French, Dutch, Finish and, most importantly, German politicians need to honestly tell their voters and taxpayers: if the poorer countries are to be part of the Union, the taxpayers should take into consideration supporting them financially.

Poles in Great Britain are afraid of cutting down their social benefits, which they’re eligible for as the immigrants from the European Union.

I talk to the Poles as well as many people from all over the world. Great Britain for hundreds of years has been a goal for people, who want to build their lives here for their families and we’re very opened to that. Not everybody knows that the Poles live in Great Britain since the 16th century! So the Polish immigration cannot be linked with the European Union. Even if Great Britain decided to leave the European Union or if we will implement a decisive reforms of this institution the Poles will still be able to come. The great feature of our country is that we’re open and we invite all who want to contribute to the development of the British society. When I walk the streets of London I see Polish, Lithuanian and Bulgarian stores. All these people live next to each other and together. And this is magnificent.

Therefore Poles have nothing to fear from the coming reforms. The only change will be in giving the same rules for all. Right now people from the Union are privileged.

This is probably the first interview with you in the Polish media. Will you tell us about the history of your family?

My family comes, of course, from the Indian sub-continent. My grandfather has emigrated from India to Guiana. During the 50ties my father moved from there to Great Britain and in the 60ties my mother got here. My father worked in the railways and always told me that I can become whoever I choose to be. There on limits to your advancement if you work hard, believe in God and your capabilities. I repeat that during my meetings with the youth at schools – both Hindus and Poles that live in London. I tell them: your parents have come here so that you and your children can have a great future in the United Kingdom. We want London to be your city, feel at home here. Among my Polish friends some plan to go back to Poland one day, but many see their future in Great Britain, and this is magnificent.

We haven’t spoken so far about the crisis connected to the terrorism. What do you think the governments should do to contain this phenomenon?

There is no one solution to this problem. In England we say that there is no such thing a silver bullet (like that against a vampire). The terrorism comes from the Middle East and it is there we should act to contain it. We should also find out what makes the young people in Great Britain, France or Belgium go abroad to become terrorists. Is this simply adventuring? Young people encounter Islamic propaganda in prisons – they get there because of criminal offenses, and come out as motivated warriors and discharge their aggression while justifying it with religion. Finally there are the problems connecting with growing up. One of the psychologists told me that the boys who are undergoing puberty are most exposed – it is them who the jihadist recruiters are trying to reach.

Maybe the answer lies in engagement with the local communities? Not somewhere over there, in Brussels, but here in the neighborhood. Right now I’m creating a local football club where boys and girls meet once a week together, no matter the differences and without fear of exclusion. I think it’s a very positive experience and I want for such clubs to appear in other neighborhood and small communities.

It appears to be terrorists’ goal to create deep divisions in the European countries. Can this wall building be overcome?

Yes. Based on my own experience I know this is possible. I grew up in London and I know that people from different backgrounds and cultures can meet and cooperate perfectly. No so long ago a meeting of the followers of different religions took place in Brussels. Bishops, rabbis, imams – all in expensive and glamourous clothes. For me the London backyard, where I grew up, was the school of tolerance. I had friends who were Jewish, Christian, Muslim and Atheist. There everyone understood that I’m observing Ramadan. I knew that the Jews had their holidays, for example the Seder Sinners, the Christians told us about Easter and the Lent. On Christmas we would all give presents to each other, because that’s what everybody does. Growing up together we learned a great deal from each other.

You must be logged in to post a comment.