h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

In Italy, Berlusconi has put together a package of measures to tackle what is seen as a growing immigrant problem. These include harsher penalties for immigrants convicted of crimes (compared to sentences for Italians). This is done amid claims that immigrants are disproportionately represented in the crime figures. Other measure include troops patrolling alongside the Police.

This is all being done within EU legal guidelines.

Italy has seen a rise in anti-immigrant feeling and parties promising to crack down on immigration have been voted in by the electorate.

No doubt this will bring howls of protest from some quarters. In an unlikely alliance, the Catholic Church and far-Left politicians have denounced the moves as racist

What are Forumites views on this?

Is an elected Democracy entitled to take any measures it sees fit to tackle immigration problems within EU law?

>> These include harsher penalties for immigrants convicted of crimes (compared to sentences for Italians)<<

I would have thought that would breach Human Rights legislation because of discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity.

Are the immigrants being discussed people that are legally given entry into Italy?

Where are the immigrants coming from? Why are they going to Italy? (just so we don't start discussing them as some amorphous mass, you know Scary Immigrants)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7522612.stm

Come on Kea, some of they might be brown, or even worst case scenario moslems.... They are coming to get us and force us to eat straight bananas....

So it's illegal immigrants that the new laws affect. I really think you should have said that in the OP SWL. Or do you not think there is any difference?

That link only answers one of my questions. Not who the immigrants are, where they've come from, and why they're going to Italy.

What the F is a straight banana?

Apologies for the lack of "illegal".

I don't know the who, where or why. Aren't the answers likely to be as diverse as humanity itself?

However, I do know that there is a lot of unrest about gypsies, who are perfectly legal immigrants. I believe the Italians want to fingerprint all Roma immigrants.

FB, I'm surprised at your flippancy. The thread isn't about immigration per se, but the (imo rather extreme) steps the Italian government are taking. Given the general shift in the EU to the Right,(witness France's move yesterday to attack worker's rights), I would have thought you in particular would be concerned.

Or is having a go at me more important?

It does seem slightly worrying to me. There's one thing trying to close your borders and another to try to discriminate against people who are already in your country (legally or illegally). Illegal immigrants' circumstances should be looked into, but that shouldn't mean treated them with harsher penalties for the same crimes.

It will be easier for divisions to arise, and easy for that magic word 'illegal' to disappear, and we are left with huge divides between people who come from the same country (albeit with a different colour skin etc.).

It's not guaranteed to happen, of course, but it's an extrapolation that I don't think is beyond the bounds of thought.

You open the debate with a title likt the one you chose then get surprised at other people's flippnacy.

Pot - kettle, SWL.

If anything, SWL, it goes to show that a lot of the anti-EU hysteria in some parts of the UK are totally misplaced. If these laws are being enacted under or within EU legislation it is possible that it could also happen in Britain. (or other EU countries for that matter)

And that is what I find worrying.

FB I think you misunderstood SWL's reference to the EU legislation there - in this case he's pointing out that something that usually stands up for and defends equality and free movement is actually being used to aid these discriminatory laws.

Where does it say that this is being done within EU rules? Or is that a given?

I think it's more than slightly worrying. I think it's a fundamental breach of human rights, irrespective of whether an immigrant is legal or illegal. What they're saying is that there are two classes of law now, instead of one law for all.

SWL, I think it's important to understand who the immigrants are, where they've come from and why. How can we understand what the Italian govt is doing, what Italy in general is doing, if we don't understand the context?

For instance, do we take the word of the anti-immigration MP quoted in the BBC link, on the numbers of immigrants commiting crime? Or do we wonder how those stats are being skewed to the anti-immigration view?


>> I believe the Italians want to fingerprint all Roma immigrants.<<

Why?

Just quickly because I don't have much time.

The first post mentions it's within EU guidelines.

Berlusconi is an absolutely immoral, power-hungry psycho. I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to invade Albania - I'm certainly not surprised by this.

The Italian government is barely functional, the Italian economy is dropping like a stone and basic functions like tax collection and rubbish disposal (have they cleaned up Naples yet?) barely occur in some places. The country is riven with social and economic divisions.

When people are scared and their government is ineffectual they do two things: they move to the right and they find a scapegoat. In Italy's case it's immigrants in general and the Roma in particular.

(Quick aside: kea - Italy sees quite a lot of immigration from Africa - there a few islands just off the coast of Africa that are Italian soil and relatively easily reached. Spain suffers a similar problem).

It's worrying that Rome now has a neo-Nazi mayor and that Mussolini's old party is becoming respectable once more, because they might get a real shot at power.

And as for breaking EU rules - it wouldn't matter if they did - France breaks the rules all the time and the EU doesn't do a thing. It'll only punish the small members, like Bulgaria.

Thanks Iago, that's very helpful


>>The first post mentions it's within EU guidelines.<<

You want us to take SWL's word for it?

(actually I wouldn't take anyone's word without an explanation, so no offense SWL).

I did say I don't have much time - I haven't managed to read the link yet.

"...another to try to discriminate against people who are already in your country (legally or illegally). Illegal immigrants' circumstances should be looked into, but that shouldn't mean treated them with harsher penalties for the same crimes. "

Vip, in the US, if you commit a crime (say assault or murder) and it turns out you did it based on prejudice/discrimination ("hate crime") the penalties are harsher. If you commit a crime in pursuit of committing another crime, the penalties are harsher than for the individual crimes.

Why not apply the same thing to illegal immigration? Breaking any law, while already having broken the immigration law, results in increased penalties.

Well the OP is basically a precis of the BBC story, so I suppose we'll have to take the word of the famously biased, viciously anti-immigrant Beeb Beeb Ceeb then

I'm with kea . One set of laws to cover everyone, anything else is privilege.

I think, if the current economic downturn does continue or intensify, then we will see anti-immigration politics on the rise as competition for jobs increases.