The vice-president of the Assembly Naïma Moutchou, of the Horizons group, distances herself on Sunday from several measures of the immigration bill, bringing grist to the mill of the right by estimating with regard to article 3 that “the ‘at the same time’ on this subject shows its limits”. “On an intellectual level”, Naïma Moutchou says she is “unfavorable” to this article which plans to regularize certain undocumented workers employed in “professions in tension”, in an interview with Figaro.
“There is nothing obvious in considering that the irregular maintenance of illegal workers on the territory could open up rights,” believes the MP, member of the majority, also seeing “a form of encouragement to illegal immigration “. If she will be “attentive to a new wording of this article”, the MP does not however make it “not a totem because (she) ultimately wants the text to be voted on”.
Favorable for “transforming state medical aid into emergency medical aid”
Naïma Moutchou also says she is “favorable to the idea of transforming (…) state medical aid (AME) into emergency medical aid (AMU), as proposed by LR senators”. She invites us to “question the conditions of family reunification”. And she considers that article 4, which “gives the possibility to certain asylum seekers to work immediately in the territory (…) raises questions”. “European law does not require it and no other country practices it in Europe. Is it really necessary?” asks the MP, a member of the party of former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe.
In general, she judges that if the text presented by the Minister of the Interior Gérald Darmanin is “indispensable”, it is “not sufficient to face all the challenges of society”. She is in favor of “chosen, not forced, immigration”, and like LR advocates the Danish example. “They admitted that they could not combine the opening of borders with a generous social model and the absence of a project to share common values. We must also have this debate in France,” says She.
The immigration bill arrives in the Senate chamber on November 6. Several right-wing leaders took turns this week to highlight its limits, raising doubts more than ever about the possibility of the government finding a majority on this text.