Nice Premiรจre: What do you think of Nicolas Sarkozy’s statement: “If some people don’t like France, they should leave”?
Robert Injey: With this statement, Nicolas Sarkozy is merely echoing a theme from the National Front. He seeks to capitalize on xenophobic instincts to sidestep the real issue: the choice of society in which we want to live.
Rudy Salles: I think we need to be careful about the words we use. Of course, when you live in France, you must love and respect it. And this applies to everyone, including us French. This warning is just one more statement of intent that does not address the problem. For that, it’s better to vote for laws that truly allow for the sanctioning of offenses against our country. That’s what I did by proposing an amendment in the internal security law, penalizing insults to the Marseillaise and the Tricolor flag. Since then, offenses against these symbols of the Republic have almost disappeared.
NP: What role should the theme of immigration play in the 2007 presidential elections? Is it a major issue? If so, how?
RI: After the victory of the “NO” in the referendum, after the victory against the CPE, it’s not on social issues that the right will convince. Its choice of society is one of precarity and exclusion for the majority and record profits for a small minority. Electorally unappealing, the right, after playing on the insecurity card in 2002, wants to rely on the fear of the foreigner for 2007.
RD: I do not wish this theme to be the central theme of the 2007 presidential elections because there are many issues like employment, housing, the environment, energy policy, etc., that should mobilize us. Of course, the theme of immigration should be part of it, and candidates should be able to make concrete, non-demagogic proposals. Otherwise, we will have a caricature of a debate in which those who shout the loudest will be heard more, but that does not mean they are right. I would like us not just to talk about immigration and integration, which are the consequences, but to discuss a very important subject like cooperation, which consists of allowing potential emigrants to live in their own countries. And for that, we need to aid in the democratization of these countries, fight against pandemics, and eradicate corruption. If this work is not done, we can vote for whatever immigration laws we want; they will remain dead letters because the migratory pressure will be too strong.
NP: What are your hopes regarding the new immigration bill?
RI: Sarkozy’s version: none. However, what the left has failed to do is a significant institutional reform aimed at giving voting rights to foreign residents.
RD: That this law is adapted to the reality on the ground and thus applicable. Unfortunately, too many laws in France are passed for communication purposes but are then not applicable. It would also be advisable not to make immigration a subject of conflict among the French. Immigration is a major issue that requires national cohesion and a long-term vision. If a law divides public opinion, then it struggles to withstand political change. And the legal uncertainty thus created favors illegal immigration.
NP: Last week, the inter-ministerial committee on integration decided to make granting any residence card conditional on a proper level of French. What do you think?
RI: It would have been more ambitious to set up structures allowing foreign residents to acquire proficiency in the French language. Today, this mission is mainly carried out by popular education associations.
RD: It’s a very good thing. To integrate into a country, you need to be able to speak its language, understand its culture, customs, and the workings of its institutions. Such a measure should have been taken a long time ago. Similarly, a measure that I have been proposing for many years was recently adopted: that French nationality be granted during an official ceremony. It’s important for someone who has just acquired their naturalization because it gives them a sense of the significance of their change of civil status. It’s a solemn way to join the French community which I like. It’s better than receiving a nationality certificate in your mailbox between an EDF bill and a Monoprix advertisement!
NP: What is your feeling about affirmative action?
RI: It carries the risk of fostering communautarism.
RD: It can be beneficial. We need to allow people from visible minorities to access positions of responsibility to give those who have not yet had the chance to hope and consider that the republican social elevator can work.
NP: Have you read Philippe de Villiers’s book, “The Mosques of Roissy”? What did you think?
RI: No. There are more useful things to do at the moment, like mobilizing against Sarkozy’s project for “disposable immigration.”
RD: I haven’t read it, but I’ve heard about it in the press. What I take from it is that we need to shed light on this matter. However, we must keep our heads cool and not fall into the easy generalizations that this information might lead to. Our country’s authorities must investigate and deliver the information clearly.
NP: Don’t you think immigration is beneficial for France?
RI: That’s for certain. The contributions of various immigrations throughout the 20th century, such as Italian and then North African, have greatly contributed to the reconstruction and development of France after 1945.
RD: We know well that zero immigration is a mirage. We need immigrants, as do all Western countries. However, integration must be successful, and flows must be controlled. We must be strict to effectively fight against illegal immigration, which is a scourge not only for our country but also for the illegal immigrants themselves who are in the hands of a few mafia networks.
NP: List some adjectives that come to mind for each of the following terms:
Democracy
RI: participatory
RD: The best of regimes
Secularism
RI: Tolerant
RD: Living together while respecting the beliefs of the other without necessarily sharing them.
Immigration
RI: discrimination
RD: Mutual respect
Vote
RI: trust
RD: Essential to allow the expression of democracy
Changes
RI: permanent
RD: Inevitable. The world is changing; we can’t ignore it.
Openness
RI: vital
RD: Desirable. No country closed in on itself makes its people happy.
*Interviews conducted by Barbara D.*
Additional Document: Speech by the Minister of the Interior to present his law: [https://www.interieur.gouv.fr/rubriques/c/c1_le_ministre/c13_discours/2006_05_02_projet_loi_immigration](https://www.interieur.gouv.fr/rubriques/c/c1_le_ministre/c13_discours/2006_05_02_projet_loi_immigration)
