A radical reform. Everything leads one to believe that the law will pass, apart from a set of the opposition’s amendments that may, at the most, soften a wording that promises to be one of the most rigorous on the subject in Europe. The key points of the reform are expressed in Sarkozy’s comment: immigration has to become a resource for France, and stop being – at least in Sarkozy’s view – a problem. So room is now being made for immigration à la carte. The French consulates abroad will handle the preliminary analysis of residence and work applications, based on the applicant’s aptitudes. In short, the immigrant’s level of education and working abilities will be assessed, cross-matching the data with the French labour market’s needs. This will allow only those immigrants necessary for France’s economy to be accepted. In this sense, the Sarkozy law tops even the Bossi-Fini law in Italy, which for years has been considered the most restrictive immigration law in the European Union. The Italian law controls the number of entries allowed in Italy according to a quantitative criterion (the so-called ‘flow judgements’), tying the number of necessary foreign workers to the country’s economic-industrial needs. The Sarkozy law goes beyond that by elaborating a qualitative criterion. It no longer counts just how many people are necessary, but also, and above all, what counts is that whoever comes into France has to be qualified and specialised.  

Thousands of lives hanging by a thread. Controversies concerning the wording of the law are not lacking. According to the opposition and associations that fight for immigrants’ rights, it has a marked streak of racism. Opponents of the law claim that with the qualification criterion, a policy regarding the southern half of the world is being readied, aimed at draining it of the best talents, a sort of manipulated brain drain. There is also another revolutionary element in the wording of the law, which consists of eliminating a principle in force in France for some time, that according to which the illegal immigrant takes up regular residence after ten years. Sarkozy believes that this mechanism is a reward and incentive for illegal immigration. In order to make the reform less harsh, particularly with regard to the ten years of purgatory before obtaining regularisation, Sarkozy has promised “amnesty” to about 800 families who in this situation have had children in France, many of whom already attend school. On the whole, the pardon concerns 1200 people, but there are thousands of families who risk deportation. According to a network of educators and teachers, united in the Learning Without Frontiers association, no fewer than 10,000 children will be forced to leave France at the end of the school year when the law passes. Another highly disputed aspect of the Sarkozy law is that which makes the criteria for obtaining family rejoining more rigid. In order to have one’s family arrive, the foreign worker in France must in fact demonstrate that he has been legally residing in France for at least 18 months and to have sufficient income for supporting his loved ones. Knowing how many immigrants may never succeed is a problem that apparently does not interest Sarkozy.