Teenage Husband Attacks Dorm in Dramatic Search for Wife

[webfact]

Belgian PM offers to quit in crisis started by migrant row

By Foo Yun Chee

 

FILE PHOTO: Belgium's Prime Minister Charles Michel arrives at a European Union leaders summit in Brussels, Belgium December 14, 2018. REUTERS/Piroschka Van De Wouw

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Belgium Prime Minister Charles Michel offered to resign on Tuesday after opponents tabled a no confidence vote in a political crisis triggered by differences over immigration.

 

In office since 2014, Michel lost the support of the biggest party in his coalition, the Flemish N-VA, last week in protest at his support of a U.N. pact to foster cooperation over the world's 21 million refugees.

 

On Tuesday, the 42-year-old lawyer sought backing from left-wing opposition parties so he could hold on to power until parliamentary elections in May.

 

Instead, the socialists and greens tabled a motion of no confidence in parliament, triggering his offer to quit.

 

"I must respect the situation. I therefore take the decision to offer my resignation and will go to the king," Michel, who has been in politics since winning a provincial councillor post at 18, told parliament.

 

Belgium's King Philippe has not taken a decision on whether to accept his offer, the royal palace said.

 

The king may ask Michel to stay as a caretaker but with limited powers, potentially hampering efforts to rein in the budget and reform social security. He could also speak to other political leaders to try and resolve the issue, or dissolve parliament and trigger an early vote in 40 days.

 

Belgium's political crisis comes as Europe heads into election mode next year, with seven EU countries plus the European Parliament all going to the polls.

 

The bloc has been grappling with an upsurge of migrants since 2015 when more than 1 million people entered Europe, many fleeing civil war in Syria and poverty in Africa.

 

The United States and some other nations, mostly in former communist Eastern Europe, have opposed this year's U.N. pact, arguing it could encourage immigration.

 

After the N-VA's departure, Michel's slimmed down three-party coalition consisted of his French-speaking liberal MR and two Flemish parties.

 

(Reporting by Foo Yun, additional reporting by Phil Blenkinsop; Editing by Alison Williams and Andrew Cawthorne)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-12-19

[janclaes47]

Hurry up Michel, don't let the door hit your backside on the way out, because the Belgians are fed up with you for quite some time already.

[Topdoc]

It's easy to understand the Flemish N-VA protest. The UN pact lays down objectives to open up legal migration but the US dropped out of talks on the pact last year and countries including Italy, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Australia have rejected it. 

[dick dasterdly]

23 minutes ago, Topdoc said:

It's easy to understand the Flemish N-VA protest. The UN pact lays down objectives to open up legal migration but the US dropped out of talks on the pact last year and countries including Italy, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Australia have rejected it. 

Yes.  This 'agreement' has been mentioned before in various threads, but has been mostly 'missed' for some reason.

 

Presumably because it hasn't been reported much in newspapers etc.?

[katana]

6000 people protesting the Global Compact on Migration tried to storm the EU parliament in Brussels on Sunday (16/12/18) seems to have been largely ignored by the mainstream media.

 

[TopDeadSenter]

15 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Yes.  This 'agreement' has been mentioned before in various threads, but has been mostly 'missed' for some reason.

 

Presumably because it hasn't been reported much in newspapers etc.?

I wish there was more coverage of this migration pact. I understand it makes offering critical arguments against uncontrolled migration a hate crime. Also if all migration becomes a human right, then our countries effectively cease to exist, which is somewhat concerning. Not surprised the Belgiums are up in arms over this. They have been one of the worst hit countries in terms of unintegrated mass migration with enclaves such as Molenbeek being a safe haven for terrorists.

[simple1]

Misinformation from those consuming right of centre propaganda. The reality... 

 

UN Global Compact for Migration is a framework for migration policies. The Compact does not dictate migration policy to a Sovereign State.

 

"The Global Compact reaffirms the sovereign right of States to determine their national migration policy and their prerogative to govern migration within their jurisdiction, in conformity with international law. Within their sovereign jurisdiction, States may distinguish between regular and irregular migration status, including as they determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the Global Compact, taking into account different national realities, policies, priorities and requirements for entry, residence and work, in accordance with international law.

Edited December 19, 2018 by simple1

[Stargeezr]

Belgium still has a king?  What?? what kind of a country is this

and why does it have so much power with the EU and especially

Britain?

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

Belgium still has a king?  What?? what kind of a country is this

and why does it have so much power with the EU and especially

Britain?

 

Chocolate. And beer.

[Stargeezr]

Stnge in History I remember The Belgium Congo, but not much about

Belgium.

Geezer

[Scott]

A post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed.  

[Krataiboy]

On 12/20/2018 at 6:07 AM, simple1 said:

Misinformation from those consuming right of centre propaganda. The reality... 

 

UN Global Compact for Migration is a framework for migration policies. The Compact does not dictate migration policy to a Sovereign State.

 

"The Global Compact reaffirms the sovereign right of States to determine their national migration policy and their prerogative to govern migration within their jurisdiction, in conformity with international law. Within their sovereign jurisdiction, States may distinguish between regular and irregular migration status, including as they determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the Global Compact, taking into account different national realities, policies, priorities and requirements for entry, residence and work, in accordance with international law.

Non-binding or not, nations whose parliaments adopt the new Compact will be under considerable moral and political pressure to ensure it is implemented.

 

The US, Australia and a number of European countries realise this. That's why they have sensibly given the pact the elbow?

 

Their leaders are rightly following the wishes of their electorates, who are largely opposed to further mass immigration. The likes of Merkel, Macron and May, on the other hand, have betrayed their people and should be made to pay the political price.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Krataiboy

[stevenl]

12 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Non-binding or not, nations whose parliaments adopt the new Compact will be under considerable moral and political pressure to ensure it is implemented.

 

The US, Australia and a number of European countries realise this. That's why they have sensibly given the pact the elbow?

 

Their leaders are rightly following the wishes of their electorates, who are largely opposed to further mass immigration. The likes of Merkel, Macron and May, on the other hand, have betrayed their people and should be made to pay the political price.

 

 

"Their leaders are rightly following the wishes of their electorates,"

There you have it.

 

No, the leaders have to do what is best for the country.

[simple1]

2 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Non-binding or not, nations whose parliaments adopt the new Compact will be under considerable moral and political pressure to ensure it is implemented.

 

The US, Australia and a number of European countries realise this. That's why they have sensibly given the pact the elbow?

 

Their leaders are rightly following the wishes of their electorates, who are largely opposed to further mass immigration. The likes of Merkel, Macron and May, on the other hand, have betrayed their people and should be made to pay the political price.

 

 

You would have noted the inclusion of the term  "International Law". An aspect of International Law would be UN Convention for Refugees, International maritime laws (rescue at sea) and so on. Those countries which have declined to sign up to the Compact framework, should, IMO, cease hiding behind false and misleading claims of abiding to laws covering humanitarian issues.

 

Merkel made an error of judgement in 2015, which was of good intention, to assist frontline EU border countries, she has publicly apologised under pressure from the hard right. Really don't understand what border control issues for which May and Macron should apologise. If you and others admire the move to right of centre governments, be a good idea to keep an eye on the likes or Orban to see where he is taking Hungary. Doubt you wish to live under the dictates of an authoritarian hard right regime, there again one never knows...

[Krataiboy]

On 12/21/2018 at 12:03 PM, simple1 said:

You would have noted the inclusion of the term  "International Law". An aspect of International Law would be UN Convention for Refugees, International maritime laws (rescue at sea) and so on. Those countries which have declined to sign up to the Compact framework, should, IMO, cease hiding behind false and misleading claims of abiding to laws covering humanitarian issues.

 

Merkel made an error of judgement in 2015, which was of good intention, to assist frontline EU border countries, she has publicly apologised under pressure from the hard right. Really don't understand what border control issues for which May and Macron should apologise. If you and others admire the move to right of centre governments, be a good idea to keep an eye on the likes or Orban to see where he is taking Hungary. Doubt you wish to live under the dictates of an authoritarian hard right regime, there again one never knows...

Given the choice, I'd far rather live in a Hungary under Viktor Orban than in a UK under Sharia law - a nightmare even more likely to become reality since we signed up to the egregious UN compact.

[Krataiboy]

On 12/21/2018 at 9:35 AM, stevenl said:

"Their leaders are rightly following the wishes of their electorates,"

There you have it.

 

No, the leaders have to do what is best for the country.

Electorates ARE the country.