The biggest danger? People who artificially cheered migration. The same ones who created the Green Deal, says Gregor

In recent weeks, you have started your discussions with citizens. How satisfied are you with the public’s interest in European issues?

It gets my blood pumping. Only 3 out of 10 people go to the European elections, and we often have completely packed halls. People are asking questions, they want to join the campaign, and you can also see that they have a great understanding of some topics. Sometimes, of course, even fewer people come, which often means an even better discussion. I remember Dolní Benešov and Kladno, where we met in the number of a few dozen during the working week and talked as if over a beer. A person then discovers how many things connect him with people, sometimes even generations older, who live across half the country. It is a great school for me and I am grateful for such an opportunity.

So far, what resonates the most among the people who participate in your talks? Are they national or European policy?

Thanks to your age, you are more of a representative of the younger generation. Is it also reflected in the participation in your discussions? Or do young people stay more in the digital environment?

I was doing talks even a year ago, and today many more of my peers come to the meetings. Of course, the vast majority of young people’s activity is on the Internet. As an MEP, I will want to show my peers how the European Parliament really works.

In recent days, you have criticized the migration pact very sharply. What bothers you most about receiving it?

The very idea that the migration laws and asylum policy of 27 countries will be managed centrally by the European Commission bothers me. Migration policy is the backbone of any country’s security. And the decision-making about it should be in the hands of the national government of each state without discussion. When we encountered the first big wave of migration in 2015, the European Union came up with some kind of solution, and today we see that it rather worsened the problem. So if the EU comes up with a similar solution 10 years later, I am naturally skeptical.

I have two very important objections to the migration pact itself. The first is called “compulsory solidarity”. An oxymoron that forces everyone involved to some form of solidarity with states that can sometimes take responsibility for the migration crisis (e.g. Germany) with their own national policy, but do not want to bear responsibility. The Migration Pact doesn’t actually give you the option not to participate. You either pay or redistribute. And the second problem is the redistribution, which at first glance appears to be purely voluntary, but upon a deeper study of the migration pact, we will find that if a sufficient number of migrants in the EU are not redistributed voluntarily, Brussels will redistribute them compulsorily according to its key. The Migration Pact is such a large piece of our freedom, sovereignty and security that we will hand over to the European Union. Besides, nobody wants him. The government did not have it in the program statement and did not even ask the citizens to sign it.

Minister of the Interior Vít Rakušan defends the migration pact and calls his critics disinformers. What do you think about it?

The Austrian minister also lost the trust of his supporters on the issue of the migration pact. He lied, did not tell the truth and distorted. And when it gradually dawned on him, he didn’t have the courage to say, “I made a mistake, I’m sorry,” and set things straight. He started preferring to label critics of the migration pact with various insults. This is simply not how a democrat and an honest politician behaves. This is how a primitive behaves. But it is a frequent phenomenon in the government of Petr Fiala. Its ministers often celebrate and sell achievements that do not yet exist. And then, in a few weeks, when the details of their “successes” begin to leak out to people, they have to deal with crisis communication. So I think that the Austrian minister cannot look for fault anywhere else and in anyone else, but in himself and in his government. In the future, it would be enough to deal with people on a level playing field. From the beginning.

In this context, there was a lot of talk in the public space about an exception for the Czech Republic due to the acceptance of a large number of refugees from Ukraine. How about this exception?

This exception is not in the migration pact. This has already been confirmed by several lawyers who have familiarized themselves with the pact. For example, Robert Kotzian. It is something that we should not tolerate for any government and any politician. A politician is our representative and in his speeches he should clearly and precisely communicate what is happening. Lying, distorting or inventing for the sake of one’s preferences is something that no one in the Czech Republic wants to get used to.

How do you think the European Union should deal with illegal migration?

We need to protect the external borders. It doesn’t sound earth-shattering, it’s been talked about for years, but still nobody in the European Commission has really understood it completely. Over the years, Italy, Greece and, for example, Spain wanted to protect their borders. Brussels refused to implement any such plan on the European field. In short, buffer countries must have a strong plan to protect their borders and be prepared for it. And the other EU states should help them financially (and if necessary, also in terms of personnel). I think that no EU state would have anything significant against that. But that’s not how the EU wants it. Any politician who wanted to protect the external borders was harshly criticized as an inhumane dictator. At the same time, we know that redistribution did not solve anything. The Czech Republic has been involved in the past in the framework of police assistance. Our police officers helped on the borders of Hungary, or in Macedonia for example. I was proud of them as a boy. That was something that really helped. Even without mandatory solidarity and other inventions. The European Commission simply likes to be able to manage everything centrally, plan and then punish those who don’t like it. And that is why it has not solved anything at all on the issue of migration in the last 10 years.

Is migration really the greatest danger facing the old continent today?

The biggest danger for Europe are people who have artificially cheered migration. They are often the same people who created the Green Deal. Danuše Nerudová said that a third of Africa will migrate to us. I rather think that migration in connection with the Green Deal could create a deadly cocktail for Europe. If we want to maintain a high standard of living and become an economically strong, secure and competitive player in the world, we must not shoot ourselves in the foot. A strong Europe will be one where each national government handles migration on its own without fear of ending up at the European Court of Justice.

Add PL to your favorite feeds on Google News. Thank you