This is where all download will be listed, utilizing the Page Add plugin.
File Name | S21-Policy-NCFCA-05-AFF-Dublin-2.docx |
File Size | 189.10 KB |
Date added | August 31, 2020 |
Category | Archived |
Tags | Debate, NCFCA, Policy, Season 21 |
When a refugee applies for asylum in the European Union, the EU faces a difficult dilemma – how to determine which member state will be in charge of examining and processing that application. The current solution comes in the form of the Dublin system, a policy that sets forth criteria to indicate which country is responsible. Unfortunately, the Dublin system has serious flaws that make it an unfair and impractical way to process applications. Three of these flaws are in the 1AC, with an additional one in the 2A brief
The fundamental problem with the Dublin rule is that it mostly assumes the first country a migrant arrives in should take ownership of their situation. If you ‘re in an interior country or in the far north of Europe, you are insulated from these unexpected arrivals (migrants have to pass through other countries first to get to you, so you have every right to send them back). If you’re in the Mediterranean (like Italy), everyone finds you first. If you’re a country with generous welfare benefits, you might want the Dublin rule enforced to keep migrants from passing through other nations in search of the best deal. But sending everyone back to the first country creates unfair burdens on those suffering from the accident of their geographical location.
Don’t be confused by some of the evidence referring to the EU Parliament having “approved” or “passed” the reform mentioned in this plan. The EU Parliament voted for it in 2017, but it was never approved by the other necessary EU agencies, so it never got implemented. This Plan overcomes that inherency barrier by having them approve and implement the reforms.