Nicolas Sarkozy

Mr President,
Mr Rapporteur,
Ladies and gentlemen,

For five weeks, the draft law on immigration and integration is in your hands.

Let me tell you what mood I turn the discussion which opens today at the national representation.
> My belief is that in a modern democracy, immigration should not be a taboo issue.

In all countries dEurope Western immigration is seen for what it is: a matter of society, a major political issue, involving the future of a nation. It is allowed den discuss, without having to excuse sen. And it can dagir, not fear not, if it needed more time to hand the job on louvrage.

Thus, the Labor government of Tony Blair has reformed four times British legislation on asylum and immigration. Spain has changed its law three times since 2000. A profound reform of the German system, designed by the Social Democratic government of Mr. Schröder, entered into force on 1 January 2005. In these major European countries, immigration reform has led to projects Confrontation, a real debate of ideas, both passionate and rational: a fully democratic debate and policy.

This debate, I wish that it takes place in our country, because the French ahead.

Ladies and gentlemen, the French are asking us to face reality.

The gap has never been greater between the speech of certain elites and the reality perceived by our compatriots. These realities, we should not hide. A Sofres poll published by Le Monde in December 2005 showed that 63% of French people believe there are too many immigrants in France. 50% of voters believe the left as well.

I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of our countrymen are not racist or xenophobic. But for many, immigration is a source of concern. They see a threat to their security, their jobs, their way of life.

The French who think this way are as respectable as others. We must understand the expectations of the silent majority, for whom immigration is primarily an everyday reality.

Our fellow countrymen know that immigration presents huge benefits for life. In the exchange with the migrant, it yal'apprentissage of diversity, taste the difference, the sense of tolerance. There are the best. But there is also the worst, produced by thirty years of unmanaged immigration: Cities ghettos, the squatted, the phenomena of gangs, urban violence!

The French know that the violence that erupted in our suburbs last fall are not unconnected with the failure of immigration policy and integration.

The truth is that twenty-seven nights of riots, we have suffered in October and November are directly the product of the failure of our system integration!

The truth is that the grandchildren of immigrants arrived in the 60s are French, but they often feel less French than their grandparents, yet were not!

The truth is that foreigners most recently arrived in our country are the first victims, unfortunately, our collective inability to control immigration. I think, of course, fires 25 and 29 August 2005, in Paris, which killed 24 people, originating in Africa. I will remember these children that I saw, that night, lying on stretchers, strangled, killed by poverty.

The truth is that entire families of immigrants are living in squatter settlements or slums, and their children, who can not do their homework in housing too cramped, are often left to themselves on the street !

Faced with this reality, the French do, I am convinced, opposition political front that have absolutely no sense.

They refuse to be prisoners of two extremes: zero immigration on the one hand, total immigration from the other.

The zero immigration is a dangerous myth. I reject in the most clear the misconception usual right-wing extremism, that there are cultures' impossible to integrate, and who preach the concept totally misleading of zero immigration. It is time to speak clear: France is not intended to be inward-looking, behind only knows what Maginot Line! Inbreeding is synonymous with national decline.

But not more than intolerance and unrealistic supporters of zero immigration, I accept the other extremism. I do not think men are interchangeable, that the borders are illegitimate and we can do clean slate of its past and its culture.

That is why I refuse, with the greatest firmness, operations adjustments global undocumented aliens, as the governments of François Mitterrand and Lionel Jospin have performed in 1981, 1990 and 1997. These operations are very dangerous because they have a call for air. The migrant regularized brought his family. He tells his friends in his village, that emigration to France is possible. Channels are created. And in countries of origin, the signal is received, the border is open!

The Spaniards know, that 570 000 illegal rectified in the first half of 2005. This only encourages the unfortunate thousands of African migrants crossing the Sahara in the hope of obtaining papers in Spain, before they hit the wire of Ceuta and Melilla. The regulation raises illegal migration.

The Italians know, too, that regulate every two or three years hundreds of thousands of people. But in between it more. And we must regularize further € |

Let there be no mistake: regularization decided in France for 25 years have greatly contributed to the confusion and disorder. Revive such practices weaken our social pact.

I know France too fragile to undergo the test. This does not mean that I am opposed to any regulation: I will come back during our discussions. But I refuse, with total determination, false solutions dictated by the simplicity and blindness.

I propose to break through the top of this issue without debate between the two extremes.

For the first time under the Fifth Republic, a minister is responsible for the whole of immigration issues. To coordinate the different authorities in this area (interior, foreign affairs, social affairs), I have been preparing since last June, the text before you today.

I do not pretend to present a perfect text, which would adopt the report.

But I believe you present a balanced text.

Firm against those who do not respect the rules of the game just against people who apply to come to France following the admission rules we set.

It is in this spirit that we must maintain the balance established in 2003 during the debate on the reform of the "double jeopardy".

The demand for justice leads me, so do not wish to challenge the provisions on residence of foreign patients. I will not accept any amendment that would change on this balanced legislation that is now ours, although I will explain it to us, without changing the law, fight against fraud.

The best proof of the balance of the bill, I think it is that the subject of virulent attacks, both from the extreme right, which accuses me of laxity, as some fringes of the left, who accuse me of xenophobia.

In a way, I welcome such criticism. They indicate that I probably charted a middle path.

I will not deviate from the line I have drawn.

> My determination is total in four years, I tried to rectify the helm of a ship adrift.

In May 2002, the situation that I found on arrival at the Ministry of Interior was dramatic. France was paying the price of a risky management of immigration. It was time to get out of negligence.

Asylum applications had quadrupled in five years: from 20 000 in 1997 to 82 000 in 2002. The waiting area at Roissy outside from all directions. The hangar was Sangatte, across Europe in the world, the shameful symbol of French immigration chaos. And no interior minister had seen fit to go!

The flow of immigration had increased by one third in five years: 120 000 1997 160 000 in 2002.

In four years, a considerable reorganization was done.

In passing the Act of 26 November 2003, you gave the government new tools to fight against illegal immigration.

I will not present the balance sheet, because you know it. The evaluation of the law has been led by your excellent rapporteur
Thierry Mariani, in a remarkable document that you presented last March.

I recall only that the number of renewed implemented at the border has doubled in three years: from 10 000 in 2002 to 20 000 in 2005.

Yes, we do not hesitate, unlike our predecessors, to enforce the law.

An illegal alien does not normally intended to stay in France. He intended to return to his country.

We are given the means to better enforce these rules make sense.

The increase in removals was made possible by the construction of administrative detention centers (968 seats in June 2002, 1 447 places today, 2 500 seats in June 2007) and longer retention (increased from 12 to 32 days).

I am not afraid to set quantitative targets for removal. Month after month, prefecture by prefecture, I am these indicators.

I make sure that the administration of immigration obeyed, on the ground, the political will expressed by the legislature in 2003.

The widespread system of "biometric visas" is another key measure that could be had "implemented through the 2003 law.

In countries of origin, our consuls issue each year, 1 900 000 short-stay visas. It is clear that some of these visas are hijacked by people who introduced regularly in France, are improperly maintained. The "biometric visas" lets you know the identity and nationality of those who, as luck would have lost his memory € |
Extended to all the consulates by the end of 2007, this system facilitates the expulsion measures, identifying illegal aliens and their nationality. I would add that vigorous diplomatic actions that we have, better than yesterday, get some foreign consuls they issue their nationals passes that allow us to return home.

Another encouraging result: the global flow of immigration is stabilized for the first time in ten years. The number of first residence permits issued, excluding nationals, has even declined slightly in 2005 to 164 234 titles (- 2%).

I would add that the reform of asylum, you voted with the law of 10 December 2003, has had very positive effects.

We remain faithful to our tradition of welcoming refugees. But we are fighting against the abuse of process.

The reform has reduced greatly the time taken to process asylum applications and, therefore, the attractiveness of this procedure for candidates to illegal immigration.

The delays have increased by more than two years in 2002 to eight months today. Therefore, the total number of applicants has dropped: 82 000 2002 65 000 in 2004, 60 000 in 2005. It continues to decline in 2006. If the trend on the first two months of 2006 continues, we will save this year 15 000 asylum applications in less than last year.

These figures demonstrate that our action since 2002, helped restore order in a migration system which had become completely chaotic.

But I show no triumphalism. Despite progress, the situation of immigration in France is far from satisfactory.

Flows remain at a high level. They are, above all, very unbalanced.

Immigration "for family reasons" occupies a very important place in migration: nearly half of residence cards are issued in this respect (82 000 in 2005). In our European partners, the level of family immigration is much lower: 66 000 in Germany and 35 000 in Great Britain in 2004.

That I understand I am not an immigrant does not have the right to bring his family in France. I am too attached to our humanist tradition, the constitutional principle of protection of family life and our European commitments, to challenge a father the right to live with his wife and children!

But I would like things are clear: it is political power, the Government, legislature, to define under what conditions apply in France the right to privacy and family! There can be for all families throughout the world, an absolute and unconditional right to settle in France, no integration without work, without decent housing, without prospects.

The distribution of migration is even more illogical in our country that immigration because of work remains to a marginal 11 500 residence permits issued to this title in 2005. This means that we are not able to accommodate migrants in France in employment and contributing to growth.

We are in fact immersed in a completely paradoxical past 30 years.

In the guise of protecting national employment, it was locked by a system of checks carried out a priori by the labor administration, the introduction of foreigners in France in employment. And at the same time, against all logic, is allowed to enter our country an increasing stream of family immigration â € "which strongly imbalance in the labor market, by bringing in our country of foreigners, mostly very low qualified and poorly integrated!

This system is absurd. This, I believe, a key source of unease French. All my ambition is to leave as soon as possible.

> My desire is to transform deep, immigration policy.

I am not afraid to say, those who reproach me to come a second time to parliament to present a bill: I am well aware that the 2003 law was only the first step the transformation of our immigration policy.

In 2003, as interior minister, I asked you to vote for new instruments to fight against illegal immigration. I've done since then, a specific use.

Today, minister responsible for all aspects of immigration, I propose to establish a new policy.

The new policy builds on some foreign examples. In Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, innovative ideas have been tested and put into Å "action. I wanted to take this into account. Not to copy any particular foreign system, but to retain the ideas that I think can be adapted to our country. History and geography have shaped our relationship to immigration. We are not a state-continent such as Canada or an island like England. We are a Mediterranean State, which has special ties with Africa and looks away, toward the overseas French and land.

It is therefore not for us to transpose instance in France a foreigner, but to define together a new French model of immigration.

I propose to define this model based on three fundamental principles:

â € ¢ immigration chosen,
â € ¢ assertion of a link between integration and immigration,
â € ¢ co-development.

> The first principle is that of selective immigration.

I applaud this term. I know she was sometimes caricaturée.

My belief is that, like all great democracies of the world, France must be able to choose the number of migrants that it welcomes what objectives, under what conditions.

The selective immigration, the opposite of the absence of immigration. And that is the opposite of immigration suffered â € "suffered by the French and suffered by migrants who are in France that failure.

Immigration chosen, therefore, first, the possibility for the State to set quantified targets immigration, to determine the composition of migration in the interests of France as in countries of origin.

The selective immigration is the refusal of fatalism and the determination to link immigration to the capacity of our country.

The selective immigration is a system whose rules are clear and predictable for the French as for migrants. It is a system where the candidate ¹ immigration in France should be allowed to come settle before entering our territory.

Nothing could be more logical for this: to come to France to come and study, work or join family, it is necessary that the Republic is in agreement and it means clearly the migrant in his country that It is ready to receive them.

The selective immigration is not an elitist system that would in France as highly skilled foreigners!

The selective immigration is regulated immigration, much better accepted by our compatriots that they will recognize its positive contribution to the life of our nation.

And this immigration will be successful, truly, that if immigrants manage to integrate into society.

> This is the second principle of this reform: the affirmation of a strong link between integration and immigration.

I want to break in this regard, with decades of false pretenses.

Experts, called such, even dare say that the issues of immigration and integration must be separated. In order not to "stigmatize" newcomers, we are told, it is important not to consider them as migrants and take them into account, at best, under the policy of the city.

It makes no sense.

My philosophy is quite different for me, there is no doubt that immigration and integration issues are closely intertwined.

And that, for an obvious reason: to enter France a large number of migrants without the resources to accommodate them, organize their integration into French society led to explosive situations.

Integration is a long, complex, costly, involving the balance of our social pact.

What we want is to oblige foreigners who want to settle permanently or permanently in France to the efforts to integrate.

I ask: how could we expect integrate in France without speaking a word of French? How to find work, organize a social life, raise their children? It's impossible, of course!

Now, to get a right to stay sustainable, we must demonstrate its willingness to integrate, making the effort required to learn our language.

It will also, it is the least commit to respect the laws and values of the Republic.

And he will meet this commitment.

Foreigners have rights. They also have duties.

The first of these duties is to love the country that welcomes them, and respect its values and laws. Otherwise, nothing obliges them to stay!

> The third principle of reform is that the immigration policy of France should be a true co-development strategy.

To choose immigration, integration to succeed, France must build genuine partnerships with countries of origin.

It would be a major strategic error to define immigration policy in isolation, without consideration for countries of origin.

Of course, migrants are pushed to our country because they hope for a better life and they believe that their future can not be built in the country ¹ where they were born.

I am fully aware.
And I would like to respond in advance to some objections that I have made. I have read or heard criticism that the bill would encourage the "brain drain" of the poorest countries.

It is not.

Today, most skilled migrants, the most talented move the American continent while the less educated are welcomed in Europe. According to the European Commission: "54% of immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa, who hold a university degree, living in Canada and the United States, while 87% of those who have not completed their primary or secondary are in Europe. "

I do not solve this situation.

France has long maintained a tradition of hosting the elites of the South. I want to revive this tradition, based on dialogue and mutual interest between the country of origin and the host country.

I therefore propose to facilitate the arrival in France of students and personalities (artists, intellectuals, athletes, creates jobs € |) that can bring to our country and acquire skills, in turn, a useful experience to their country of origin.

My ambition is to develop mobility, movement skills, in the interests of developing countries.

This requires, make choices immigration different geographical areas.

We must therefore develop tools to act in a flexible, intelligent, responsive, adapted to the realities of France and the countries of origin.

To put it differently: host France in a few Chinese engineers or scientists in India will certainly not slow the growth of these two countries, the most populous in the world. I do not see the name of what should refrain from recruiting in France of Chinese engineers! And there is no need to condition such engagement to a return of engineers in China after several years of residence in France.

However, I am resolutely opposed, for example, any final immigration of doctors and medical professionals of the poorest countries in Africa, who so desperately need them. My aim is therefore to help train the elites of developing countries in the prospect of a return.

The bill that I suggest trying to organize this "movement skills".

But I am fully aware that it does not dote France, alone of all the necessary tools to a policy of co-ambitious development.

We must, in this matter, act in a pragmatic way, through legislation in part, but also in mobilizing diplomatic and financial instruments, with pragmatism.

It is in this spirit that I will be in Africa at the end of the month.

The experiences that I launched in Mali in 2003 have allowed several hundred immigrants, returned to their countries, to launch an activity, create jobs. We must, I am convinced we develop new tools for co-development. The mobilization of migrants savings for investment purposes seems to be a key issue. Today, savings that migrants in France transfer to their countries reached each year, the sum of 2.6 billion euros. We must consider how to transform these savings for the move towards productive investment to countries of origin.

We must make "work of imagination, building true partnerships with countries of origin without fear to raise with them, directly and frankly, the issue of migration.

> We need new legal instruments defined by the bill.

I want to stress that we were very careful that, as is the duty of every Republican, the bill meets the constitutional requirements. As you are presented with some editorial changes, the project is that approved by the General Assembly of the Council of State.

So that this text does not ignore human rights or civil liberties!

He has five goals.

> Our first objective quantitative regain control of immigration.

New instruments will allow us to better regulate migration flows.

To see clear, it must first provide. That is why, now, the Government set each year in a report to Parliament, targets on the number of migrants that France wants to host, distinguishing between broad categories of residence permits, for reasons: work, study, stay home.

The recent jurisprudence of the Constitutional Council does not allow us to write explicitly in the law that the report to Parliament include such targets when they are not normative but only estimates. Also, on behalf of the Government, I take national representation before a solemn commitment: the next report to Parliament will include for the first time these quantitative estimates.

It does not define "limits" that needed to each Consul or each prefect and which can not be exceeded. This rigidity would be defeated.

In contrast, defined in terms of the demographic situation of France, its growth prospects, the needs of the labor market and its capacity, quantitative targets constitute a scoreboard that will allow useful Authorities have references operational. The ambassadors will be one element of their dialogue with the governments of countries of origin.

In the same vein, the bill states that the issue of a long-stay visa, a consulate, becomes a prerequisite to immigration in France. It is a fundamental principle: no long-stay visa issued by a consul there can be no exception for a residence card issued by a prefect.

Therefore, I intend to reform the conditions under which an alien who has not obtained a visa and who remains illegally in France may, exceptionally, to obtain a residence permit.

I therefore propose to repeal the system of automatic adjustments after 10 years of legal residence. This "premium hiding", introduced by the laws of 1997 and 1998, is to reward an extended violation of the law of the Republic. It is even more absurd that the period of 10 years is not in itself a relevant criterion for regularization.

I will explain that the abolition of automatic adjustment does not, quite the contrary, practice adjustments on a case by case basis, taking into account humanitarian situations and interests of our country.

> Our second goal is to redefine the conditions of family immigration.

I invite you to reform the rules for family reunification, to serve a specific purpose: to ensure that all conditions are met so that the family can integrate into our society.

The reform applies primarily to the process of family reunification. The migrant who wishes to bring his family will reside regularly in France for at least 18 months rather than one year, essential to prepare for the arrival of his spouse and children.

He must prove that it conforms to the principles governing the French Republic â € "and in doing so, it must demonstrate its commitment to integration into the host society.

He should be able to provide for his family by the resources of its work and not only social benefits.

It will also provide decent housing, under the same conditions as a comparable French family.

But the reform of family reunification would be meaningless if, at the same time, we do not change other routes of family immigration.

The conditions for issuing residence permits for reasons of "private and family life" will be clarified. A foreigner in our country must have seniority, stability and intensity of its ties to France, the nature of its relationship with the family remained in his country, living conditions in France and its inclusion in our society.

Similarly, I propose to better fight against marriages of convenience, whose sole purpose is to obtain a residence permit and ultimately citizenship, the spouse of a Frenchman.

It was surely not prohibit a French citizen to marry a foreigner, or even prohibit him to marry an illegal alien. But we must remove the automatic link between marriage and the right to stay to discourage marriages of convenience. Three main measures will allow us to do:

â € ¢ First, the requirement for long-stay visa for spouses of French citizens who request to obtain a residence permit: marriage and will no longer automatically entitled to a residence permit as needed, prior , Obtained in his country of origin, a visa;

â € ¢ then, longer (three years) of the common life from which the spouse of French may obtain a resident 10 years, it demonstrated its integration;

â € ¢ Finally, the extension (four years) of the common life required before becoming French.

In this way, we are redefining the route that leads from mixed marriages to the acquisition of nationality. We shall not discourage the real weddings, but we eliminate those who have no other purpose than to obtain papers.

> Our third goal is to better accommodate students, talents, assets that want to come in France.

The logic of selective immigration and the co-development are here. For each measure, we must strive to find the right balance between the interests of France and the countries of origin.

I propose, first, the creation of a residence card "skills and talents", a term of three years. It will be issued to persons whose presence is a chance for France but is not vital to their country of origin. For example, it will be given to Indian scientists, but not to doctors Benin.

I propose, then, to simplify the home in France students have been selected in their countries of origin. The young graduates will also be eligible for a residence permit to look for work. For those who come from developing countries, it will be a first experience before returning to their country, they will be able to receive training and experience in France.

I propose, and a relaxation of conditions for recruitment abroad, in sectors and employment areas suffering from shortages of labor Å "work, such as catering and construction. Professional organizations and unions in each region should be involved in the definition and implementation Å "work of the new device. It is complemented by a series of measures to better fight against illegal employment.

> Our fourth goal is to achieve successful integration of immigrants.

It is to define a coherent and progressive, a true process of integration, arrival in France until lasting.

To do so, signing a contract for the reception and integration must be made mandatory for all persons entering France to legally immigrate in a sustainable manner.

This contract should not be a paper that you sign and you forget. The foreigner will take commitments to the host society: learning the French language, respect the laws and values of the Republic. In return, the contract will include commitments of the State towards the foreign language training and civic guidance in the first steps to adapt to French society.

When asked abroad, after several years in France, to receive a residence permit of 10 years, he must prove it was well integrated. This "condition integration", verified by the prefects after notice of Mayors, will include three elements: the personal commitment from abroad to respect the principles governing the French Republic, the observance of these principles and adequate knowledge of our language.

The process of integration will therefore several appointments: the contract of welcome and integration with the arrival in France, and verifying the effective integration before issuing the card 10 years.

> The bill includes a fifth goal: controlling immigration overseas.

I visited last month in the Caribbean. I have read with great interest the report of the mission of information that your Assembly devoted to Mayotte. I will be soon in Guyana.

A particular situation, particular answer! The explosion of illegal immigration to Mayotte, but also in Guyana and Guadeloupe, undermining the balance of these territories. While respecting the unity of the Republic, I am convinced that the dramatic situation of immigration in these three communities requires a very strong response.

The mobilization of operational resources and firm instructions that I gave to prefects have helped us these last months, to expel a large number of illegal immigrants. The figures show that voluntarism produces results! During the first quarter, 3 500 foreigners, mostly Comorians were expelled from Mayotte is a 250% increase compared to 2005. In Guyana, we have renewed 2 300 illegal immigrants, representing an increase of 160% over first quarter 2005.

The operational effort will be more effective than pragmatic measures be taken in legal terms.

Whether facilitate checks of vehicles and identity, destroying boats used by smugglers or to fight with determination against the recognition of paternity fraud and exploitation of illegal workers, the draft Act includes a battery of measures that will allow state services to act more effectively against illegal immigration in these territories.

In total, ladies and gentlemen, the 84 articles of the bill will give us tools to develop Å "work, specifically, the transformation of our immigration policy.

But these 84 articles, in my mind, are not frozen.
> I hope that the text be added to reflect the ideas expressed by those on the ground that I encountered.

I listened to the proposals that have been made. I heard some criticism.

Christian churches in particular are in their role when they insist on the requirement of respect for human dignity. I am, of course, totally agree. In dialogue with representatives of churches, I tried to remove misunderstandings.

I have already agreed to amend the bill to address some remarks. The extension of 15 days to one month's time Aliens Appeals against decisions of obligation to leave French territory seems necessary. Similarly, I want the text states expressly that the residence card issued to employees they will not be withdrawn in case of breach of contract work.

Because I am not the owner of each article of the bill. I submit to the parliamentary discussion with the conviction that it can be improved!

I want to express my opening two ideas that seem very relevant.

Reports confident working between government and civil society â € "each remaining in his place â €" seem essential to succeed the new French model of immigration. In this spirit, I believe it useful to create a national immigration and integration, bringing together officials and representatives of civil society. I would like to undertake two missions.

It will establish with complete impartiality statistics of immigration. We've made great progress since the establishment of the High Council for Integration, whose statistical observatory provides a useful contribution to the work of the Secretariat General of the Interministerial Committee of immigration control. We must move away permanently controversial figures, assessed objectively illegal immigration, set in the most precise numbers of legal immigration.

It will also to the new body to monitor the implementation has prompted the immigration and integration, making proposals to the Government. I see a way to include over time the relations of trust which have been established with civil society.

A second idea, which has been suggested at the meetings of preparatory work to the bill, seems to be explored: the creation of a committee bringing together officials and associations, whose aim will be to ensure the Harmonization of practices prefectural for regulation.
I hope Indeed, that adjustment in each case, which remains possible under the bill, are performed according to uniform criteria in the territory. It is, in part, to take account of humanitarian requirements, as we do by circulars since 2002. But it is also, in my mind, to allow timely adjustments of foreigners whose presence in France can be an opportunity for our country.

In the associations, actors are willing to enter into this logic. I intend to help them.

> Let me conclude by telling you what I expect the parliamentary debate begins.

I fully trust the national representation to be on this important topic, as imaginative as constructive.

I read with great interest the work of the National Assembly and Senate have recently prepared. I welcome in particular the Commission of Inquiry that the Senate on illegal immigration, and the Mission of information that has worked in the House, on the difficult issue of immigration to Mayotte . Some sections of the bill are directly derived.

I want especially to pay tribute to the great quality of your work Rapporteur, Mr. Thierry Mariani. It has prepared very thoroughly debate on the bill before you, bringing the work of the Law Commission a remarkable contribution.

At the outset, I wish to stress that I am in favor â € "in drafting some reservations â €" the 90 amendments that were adopted by the Law Commission at its meeting last week.

Whether to strengthen the right of residence of foreign workers redundant, to better take into account the situation of women victims of domestic violence, to create a residence facility for foreigners volunteered to participate in humanitarian missions or " lengthen the period of appeal available to aliens challenging decisions obligation to leave, I want to commend the very useful improvements made to several sections of the bill in a spirit of justice.

I am convinced, so that the definition of the map "skills and talents" could be refined so that foreign beneficiaries of this card, where they originate in a developing country, are required to participate in actions of cooperation for their countries of origin.

Let me, above all, express my full agreement with three major amendments presented by the rapporteur.

I thank him for proposing a better compliance of the contract reception and integration.

I want to emphasize, too, the rapporteur's contribution to the reform of family reunification and, in particular, the requirements of housing, which should be the same as those of a comparable French family living in the same region.

More importantly, I wish that I fully share the idea, presented by Thierry Mariani, to establish "welcome ceremonies in citizenship" in prefecture or city hall, to the attention of people from d ' acquire French nationality.

I am delighted, and that the Commission has adopted an amendment presented by the rapporteur and Jean-Christophe Lagarde to clarify that the resources of the person requesting family reunification must take into account the size of its family.

Lastly, I wish to thank Mr. Patrick Braouzec and members of the group of communist deputies and Republicans have introduced an amendment that confirms the choice of the Government to offer assistance to voluntary return to aliens who have been refused residence.

My only regret at this stage of your discussions, is that on a matter as fundamental as immigration policy and integration, the Socialist Party has adopted a posture politician. The inability to propose positive measures, the Socialists simply submit amendments to delete.

I have noted, however, that some sensible voices had known voice within the Socialist Party to make proposals that are quite close to ours. I have read with great interest the inventive work of Mr. Malek Boutih, which supports a quantitative regulation of immigration. I heard, too, very reasonable about Mr. Manuel Valls and Mr Bruno Le Roux.

But I regret that, in total, their voices have not brought up the streets of Solferino!

MM. Laurent Fabius and Jack Lang, perhaps nostalgic for the days of 1981, we can offer nothing less than to reopen the door to major adjustments for mass. A quarter century after participating in the government left most of the Fifth Republic, they have still not learned the 25 years that just passed.

Mr President,
Mr Rapporteur,
Ladies and gentlemen,

The debate begins will be crucial in shaping the face that France would within 30 years. Because the time has come to assume, without taboo, a real choice of society.

I propose a path ambitious and demanding.

I propose to define a new model, that of selective immigration, to successfully integrate and strengthen the cohesion of our country.