Vamos to have serious difficulties if much people of color begin to reside here. Why are going to load we with the problems that bring? , said to Wiston Churchill in February of 1954 during a stormy meeting of its cabinet. Prime minister was convinced that the immigrants did not have another intention that to take advantage the British system of social security and to increase of step the criminality indices. Fifty years later, the theses of Churchill have become political dogma. The arguments have been falsified, but the spirit continues being the same. The migratory policies prioritize the obsessive control of the borders, with a cost that only in the five industrialized countries more protecting goes up to around every year the 12,000 million Euros. In the case of Spain, the expenses have increased until a point that clears the obscenity.
The fervor at the time of restricting the entrance of people is only comparable with the persistence in which it circulates all the others. There is no public declaration of the EU that is complete without plea in favor of the liberalization of goods, services and capitals, that prevails without contemplations in the new global economy. Unfortunately, the faith in the free market adapts to the circumstances: the aid from the EU to agriculture triples every year the GIP of all western Africa, but the senegaleses farmers ruined by the European disloyal competition must remain in house. This double rasero has implications that go beyond an ethical dilemma: while the European leaders take a walk by summits like the one of Lisbon discussing development objectives, the way in which their Governments impede and condition the international movement of people supposes a ballast for the global prosperity. If we want to contribute to the development of the poor countries, a right and intelligent migratory policy is one of the most effective forms to do it.