[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Escapee

Perhaps Belfast would be the best place for all the Romanian Gypsies to set up camp, considering you are so concerned about their welfare. I would certainly be pleased to contribute to a fund to repatriate our local gypsies of Irish origin if you want those too.

Thanks for that valuable input Escapee.

My earlier link regarding the treatment of Romanian gypsies in Northern Ireland by British Loyalists seems to have escaped your notice.

It is clear that Romany gypsies, whether in France, Belfast or wherever are fair game as far as certain British xenophobes are concerned. That you would extend your offer in relation to Irish gypsies speaks volumes about the ongoing persecution that these people are subjected to.

Cheers.

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 14:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

You Sir are the one who does not fully cook their information before digesting it.

I think not.

Originally Posted by Pierre

EU countries are only obliged to accommodate fellow European citizens (if they intend to stay for more than 6 months) as long as the citizens entering the country have:

either be engaged in economic activity (on an employed or self-employed basis);
or have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. The Member States may not specify a minimum amount which they deem sufficient, but they must take account of personal circumstances;
or be following vocational training as a student and have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay;
or be a family member of a Union citizen who falls into one of the above categories

Given that these romanians are living in shanty town I doubt they qualify in any of the above conditions. And certainly anyone found to be involved in criminal activity can be expelled immediately.

Notwithstanding the fact that the context which you quoted above has been superceded by the "Right of Residence" as defined in COM/99/0127 which afforded the right of residence even to those who were / are not economically active the core issue here is "or have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. The Member States may not specify a minimum amount which they deem sufficient, but they must take account of personal circumstances".

Simples - it is a loophole - but an entirely legal constitutional loophole which France has subscribed to. On that premise the Romany are entitled to be there and France is duty bound to accomodate their being there.

Originally Posted by Pierre

The report you linked to covers South East Europe only, namely Albania, Bosnia Herzegovina,
Bulgaria, Kosovo, FYR Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania and Serbia.

Not Northern Europe, so intresting and applicable in may be in Serbia, it has no relevance in France.

I believe I stated "The UNICEF report which I linked to, together with various other quantifiable sources - somewhat more enlightened than your opinion on the matter - clearly identify persecution as a systemic issue as far as Roma gypsies are concerned." Perhaps you could help me by pointing out any specific reference to France therein by me?

Originally Posted by Pierre

I'm sure that incertain areas of Europe, these people have a dreadful time, indeed other wise they wouldn't come to France, and other Northern European countries. But that doesn't mean they can set up camp in France and expect to treated differently.

Nor does it mean they should be treated just as badly, or worse, in France.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I would argue that anyone living in a shanty town, in unsanitary conditions, and staying beyond their legal limit - is a trouble maker.

That would be a rather opinion based argument - and given as highlighted above that there is now a right to residence for the economically inactive - a flawed one at that. Perhaps equally, or indeed more, important is the failure of the host state (in this case France) to honour it's responsibilities by letting people live in squalor / shanty villages.

Originally Posted by Pierre

It's not xenophobic, once again the last resort of someone has no real argument is to turn to race, I'm so tired of that.

See below.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I'm sure that if such a camp was set up at the bottom of your garden, you'd welcome them with open arms and share a vodka or two. Then maybe not so much when the lead disappears from your roof, and you're offered your way with a 16yr old girl for a few quid as you walk home.

Has any of this happened to you personally or are you just hypothesizing / generalizing again?

Originally Posted by Pierre

It's all very well being righteous when the issue is hundreds of miles away in another country,

Yes it is, which begs the question of why you are so worried if you are "not xenophobic".

Originally Posted by Pierre

but what of the decent French folk having to endure this?

It's "hundreds of miles away" again, what are you so worried about?

Originally Posted by Pierre

Send in the bulldozers.

Sorry, run that "It's not xenophobic" by me again....