Comment: Denmark has tightened its immigration and integration laws an umpteenth time, according to the BBC. The Danish case is a cause for concern since it may involve a breach in human rights and EU laws. The political power balance is held by the far-right Danish People’s Party, who have voted for legislation in return that the government tightens immigration laws.
The question to ask about Denmark is what is the end-game? Will immigrants embrace Danish society when the country’s laws are hostile to this group of people? Does it promote inclusion? Does it create the groundwork for a new healthy generation of Danes of different ethnic backgrounds?
If you asked DPP’s Pia Kjaersgaard she’d probably tell you to go fly a kite.
Two important matters are at play with respect to the rise of far-right parties in Europe: the so-called war on terror waged by former President George W. Bush after 9/11 and the financial meltdown of September 2008.
Some see strong anti-immigration sentiment in Denmark as a blow to the country’s image. Can we speak of Denmark being a liberal, enlightened Nordic welfare state? Probably the correct description would be reactive, far-right and populist at least when it comes to immigration.
Do you agree?
___________
By Chris Bowlby, BBC Radio 4
Critics of Denmark’s tightening rules on immigration and integration say the country is violating European norms, including human rights legislation. How much has Denmark’s approach to these issues been transformed under pressure from a right-wing populist party?
To keep on reading click here.
Denmark has for many years been far too tolerant of incoming migrants, the reason for the so called rejection of their past values is simple? The incoming immigrant does not wish to integrate or abide by the rules of the Danish nation.
There is also a huge problem with radical Islam all over Europe and I applaud Denmark for taking this stance, and as for their immigration laws breaching european laws so what, the EU is a disgusting organisation and hopefully one day it will implode, sovereign nations do not need an unelected body of people telling their countries what or not what to do….
–Denmark has for many years been far too tolerant of incoming migrants, the reason for the so called rejection of their past values is simple? The incoming immigrant does not wish to integrate or abide by the rules of the Danish nation.
If Danish society were so inclusive, why all the flack? Here are some fallacies of the far-right on immigration: (1) immigrants and refugees don’t want to adapt; (2) the host society has accepted them with open arms; (3) there is an effective integration plan in effect; (4) radical Islam is a “huge” problem.
Don’t you agree that far-right parties like the BNP and DPP should be THANKFUL to rfugees and immigrants? Think of all the political opportunities they have got: new jobs and becoming household names. And they have also been able to spew their ignorance about other people as fact. This could not have been possible without the refugees and immigrants. So they should at least show some gratitude.
As shown by today’s events in Britain with MPs voting to continue banning election votes for prisoners despite defying the European Court of human rights and the Council of Europe. As I have always said whenever there is a will, there is always a way, and ultimately a country governs itselfs not Strasbourg. So for those who say refugee and asylum seeker laws cannot be tighten for those very reasons have shown to be wrong.
So Klay it’s ok in your opinion to give the thumbs down to the European Court of human rights and Council of Europe? Human rights and the Council of Europe are two institutions that have played a crucial role in defending civil rights. Did you know that Finland was one of the last nations to join the Council of Europe because it was outspoken about the abuses in the former Soviet Union. You forget, Klay, that humans are social animals and work together.
I’m a bit puzzled about all of this admiration for Denmark in relation to asylum procedures. Perhaps someone could explain precisely how the Danish practice described here differs from the Finnish practice described here.
There are significant differences in the policy of these countries towards foreign spouses. Someone like Tony the Toby, for example, would not get into Denmark on this basis quite so easily as into Finland. This has resulted in the constructive expulsion of Danish spouses and their children, many of whom have settled in Sweden.
Klay
The UK has simply chosen to take the option of paying millions in compensation to disenfranchised citizens. These claims will not go away. It’s all a bit like blowing the rent money on a big fuck the landlord party. You may have a good time, but ultimately the rent will have to be paid with delay penalty interest.
ECtHR awards are enforceable as ordinary debts in English and Scottish law. It will be interesting to see how this works out, because ultimately it concerns the reliability of a promise made by the UK government to a process that was to no small degree also sponsored by the UK government.
Very interesting article. A similar political agenda may be in the making in Finland if the True Finns have a successful election. They will be able to horse trade their votes for the other parties’ support of their anti-immigration agenda.
–Very interesting article. A similar political agenda may be in the making in Finland if the True Finns have a successful election. They will be able to horse trade their votes for the other parties’ support of their anti-immigration agenda.
Hi Juan and welcome to Migrant Tales. I sure hope not but if that happens, Migrant Tales will be around hitting even harder.