Welcome

A series on contemporary European cinema.

2) Welcome (France, 2009)

Bilal has an impossible plan.

Having reached Calais after a 3-month journey from war-torn Northern Iraq, the Man Utd-obessed refugee is desperate to cross the Channel and make it to London where his beloved girlfriend Mina has recently emigrated with her family.

After an aborted early attempt that was thwarted by the police, Bilal conjures up a strategy to defy the freezing waters and swim all the way to England.

Not being a fine swimmer, however, he realises that he's in need of some intensive training.

This is how he meets local swimming instructor Simon, (Vincent Lindon) a surly, middle-aged French geezer who's in the throes of divorce papers and major changes in his life.

As the training sessions continue and the two develop an unlikely bond, the story meets a major turning point when Bilal finds out that Mina is suddenly being forced to marry one of her cousins in London.

With the boy getting increasingly impatient and unsettled, Simon learns first-hand the intense prejudices and restrictions that illegal immigrants and asylum seekers endure, cue his hostile neighbour (whose doormat sports the word WELCOME in capital letters - oh the irony) grassing him up to he police for "aiding and abetting" illegal immigrants.

Directed and written by Philip Lioret, Welcome's intensity is not always easy to digest and the drama and anguish of its final moments may prove too much for some people to take.

Yet, the film's gentle and minimalistic script and its touching tale of determination and humanity will make you feel grateful for allowing you into its world - a world that too many people refuse to acknowledge, blinded as they are by xenophobia and the convenient refusal to accept that some people are desperate and will do anything to escape war, poverty and devastation.

An extraordinary story that will stay with you for days.

You cheat, you win

They say football is a reflection of society. It certainly proved so last night.

I made a vow that Hagley Road to Ladywood shouldn't be about football. As tempting as it may be, it just wouldn't particularly fit in with the blog.

Today, however, there's going to be an exception. As you may have overheard already, following yesterday's play-off match against France, Ireland didn't make it to to the World Cup. A blatant handball by French striker Thierry Henry proved crucial.

Henry owned up to it and apologised, which is commendable. Too late, however. France's goal left Ireland little time to reply and proved decisive.

Now, given that the video evidence is blatant and that Henry himself said it was handball, FIFA should take heed to what the Irish FA are saying and order a replay of the match. Surely the French too would rather qualify in less controversial fashion.

Above all, if the result stands and cheating gets the official stamp, any future 'Fair Play' campaign as sponsored by FIFA or UEFA would simply look like an absolute joke. Just look at the official FIFA Fair play webpage.

"The generic concept of fair play is a fundamental part of the game of football", it says, adding that: "The Fair Play Campaign was conceived largely as an indirect result of the 1986 FIFA World Cup™ in Mexico, when the handball goal by Diego Maradona stimulated the admirable reaction of the England coach, Sir Bobby Robson".

Also: "Children need strong values to grow up with, and football, being a team sport, makes them realise how essential discipline, respect, team spirit and fair play are for the game and for life".

Well, then?

Air France wreckage spotted in the Atlantic

...But given that experts have ruled out the lighning strikes option, how can a plane vanish from radar screens just like that? It has been reported that the plane had entered turbulence, but no distress signal was ever sent. The BBC is talking of "Mystery surrounding Air France flight".

All seemed normal when the plane left Brazilian radar contact at about 11 p.m. Brazilian time. The aircraft flew past the Fernando de Noronha archipelago, 180 miles off Brazil's coastal city of Natal, and then failed to make final radio contact with Brazil.

According to the Telegraph: "A hijack was quickly dismissed and although Air France was unable to conclusively rule out terrorism, Pentagon officials said that there was no indication of a deliberate attack". That will probably turn out to be the case. But, as it stands -without a black box- why are they so certain?

French lessons

"I'll kidnap the gaffer on my way to the dole office"

Last Tuesday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy decided to join the debate. He asked a rhetorical question: "What's this new thing of abducting people now?", and then warned: "I won't let such things happen".

Sarkozy was talking about a new type of protest kickstarted by certain workers facing redundancy: "boss-napping", the abduction of company managers as a way of exerting pressure when there's nothing else left.

It all kicked off in March, when a group of workers from a Sony plant in Pontonx-sur-Adour held their human resources manager captive until he agreed to restart talks on their severance packages. "We've got nothing to lose: we've already lost our job", the workers justified themselves. The boss made it home safe and sound but, since then, the trend has caught on fast.

The unemployment rate in France is currently standing at 8%, but the number of companies laying off staff or closing down altogether is increasing non-stop.

Two weeks ago, outraged at the mass redundancy of 110 workers while huge bonuses were being handed out to executives, the staff at the American company 3M in Pithievers abducted their manager while another executive was forced to join the workers' demonstration.

The most blatant case was when some workers from the Caterpillar plant in Grenoble abducted four managers for a whole day with the aim of ending a standstill in the negotiations affecting the future of 733 workers. The fact that Sarkozy himself got involved in the search for a compromise was enough to persuade the strikers to free the executives. "We're only human", said one of the protesters, while another added: "We don't want to abduct the bosses. We just want to save our jobs and that's all".

But as the number of abducted executives grows, more politicians are having their say but remarkably no-one appears to be seen siding with the bosses. Last Sunday, former presidential candidate Ségolène Royal stated: "It's illegal to deprive people of their own freedom of movement, however the workers are looking for ways to stop injustice". Martine Aubry, general secretary of the French Socialist Party, added: "No violence against a person's freedom can be justified, but the brutal social violence that is unravelling in front of us may explain the cases we are seeing".

Last Tuesday workers at British adhesives firm Scapa in Ballegarde-sur Valserine held hostage four of their executives, three Brits and a Frenchman, asking them to renegotiate redundancies. They kept them overnight until, the bosses accepted to talk over a meeting at the local Town Hall.

Some French sociologists, like Denis Muzet, believe that the recent abductions are a symptom of "the increasing discrepancy between people and the elites". A recent poll showed that 64 percent of respondents predicted that the French would "revolt" against the crisis with more violent incidents with little sympathy being expressed towards banks as well as political and business leaders. The French equivalent of the CBI have expressed their preoccupation: "No matter who is affected by the crisis, the law cannot be breached".

So far though, none of the abducted managers or executives have been injured and their ordeals are yet to be reported to the police.

British bulldog or British pussycat?

Which is more outrageous: the banks continuing with their multi-million bonuses or the British people's lack of interest?

"Fury over £4bn bonuses at the bailed-out banks", writes the Daily Mail. Fury? Where's the fury? Can you see any?

A quick look around and it's quite apparent that, fair dues, the Express is alone in giving the scandal due coverage. Its front page goes "SCANDAL OF £1BN BANKERS' BONUSES", reporting Vince Cable's view that "This is unbelievably crass and irresponsible behaviour by people who have learned absolutely nothing and appear to have no standards of honesty whatsoever".

After digging the black hole that swallowed £37billion of our money (with plenty more on its way), and after the government bought up stakes to part-nationalise them, the banks are continuing to award themselves bonuses and act like nothing had happened.

According to the Times, "some of the worst-performing banks - notably the Royal Bank of Scotland, which last year delivered the biggest loss in British corporate history - are set to pay out close to £1 billion in bonuses". And every single day Alistair Darling warns. He announces reviews, he calls for inquiries. "The very fact that he has ordered a review suggests he has no clear idea what to do", writes Philip Johnston in the Telegraph. Last October, Gordon Brown said: "The government is bringing and end to rewards for failure". We're still waiting.

But aside from the Express, the issue doesn't appear to be given the relevance it deserves. Yes, there are columnists and financial analyses. But we're nowhere near Baby P-standards of public outrage. Which is why talks of British spirit and British bulldog are even more pathetic nowadays than they ever were. British pussycat more like.

In the US, Barack Obama stepped in quickly and decisely to cap executive pay and what he calls the "shameful" culture of bonuses. In France, where people showed their sheer anger last week with mass demonstrations, Nicolas Sarkozy announced that "there would be no 2009 bonuses at banks that have received state aid", while today French banks and the financial watchdog have agreed to cap bonuses and link them to performance in order to curb "overly-risky conduct".

In Britain the most radical act is, at best, an overpaid celebrity cretin poking fun at the Prime Minister for being "one-eyed" or, at worst, rage completely mis-directed at foreign temporary workers. That's where the famous 'British spirit of the blitz' is today.

If I was a banker I wouldn't worry in the slightest. I'd look around and see The Sun busy talking about Peaches Geldof's marriage "WRECKED BY VIRGIN" and the Mirror's revelations about Jade Goody's family feud. Then I'd conclude that the BAFTAs, or Tony Adams sacked by Portsmouth, are getting more coverage than our latest bonus-related news. And then I'd wear a big fat grin.

Civil unrest, state of emergency: who’s next?

You don’t take to the streets and go on a rampage because the latest video game you bought does not quite quench your thirst for violence - if there is such a thing – or because you suffer from heavy attention seeking behaviour. You do it because you’re left with no other choice… By Vinz.

The Greek riots are a cold reminder of what shook up France at the end of 2005. To outsiders, it's easy to relate these two sad events: similar violent pictures and TV broadcasts, protestors clashing with police, vehicles and shops in flames, burning barricades across the streets, stores being looted, schools being damaged, etc…

Both of these riots were identically triggered. On the one hand, the death of two French youths of African and Arabic origins in the Parisian suburbs, as they were chased by the police for alleged burglary. On the other, a Greek teenager shot dead by the police for having thrown stones at an armed patrol, as stated by most reports. That is, two disproportionate responses that made it the last straw, as well as the same sort of controversy over what sparked the incidents.

Both the French and Greek troubles started in the capital cities. Both did spread through the whole country. Both of these riots are the worse seen since the latest major unrests in these two countries: 1968 in France - massive student protests - and 1974 in Greece - student uprising against the military dictatorship. Not to mention that both countries are member of the EU, meant to be a steady region.

Similar anger and discontent have been building up among the disillusioned French and Greek youths. France and Greece also have in common a high unemployment rate, especially among young people. That said, the riots' underlying issues and the pre-existing tensions are fare more complex, and their causes are slightly different. It is acknowledged that the social context in the banlieues (French suburban areas), where the 2005 turmoil started, was one of the main reason for the events in France.

The population of these devastated and appalling housing projects areas, mostly poor working-class immigrants’ communities, has suffered social and racial exclusion for decades. Indeed France has always been hiding its shameless practice and tradition of racism, xenophobia and ethnic discrimination. In that respect, these people blatantly don’t feel integrated within the French society, and cannot identify with it.

None of the latest governments have been able to address this issue. And it might take a while until they do. Funny enough, France likes to call itself le pays des droits de l`Homme (the country of Human Rights).

In Greece, the riots seem to find their roots in the incapacity of the government to deliver its promises and gain the trust of its own people. Over the last days, various reports and testimonies mentioned corruption and tax scandals, as well as failures in the legal and justice systems. The government is blamed for being out for itself, for only serving the rich and ignoring the poor. A wide range of the population seems to be now involved in the protest, from thugs to bored rich kids through leftist groups. All of this in Greece, the country where democracy was born centuries ago. As opposed to France’s president Jacques Chirac in 2005, Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis is now clearly under pressure from both protesters and opposition parties to resign (see Athenian democracy in ruins and New riots erupt around Greek funeral).

The French riots went on for about three months, until the “tolerance zero” policy declared by the Inner Minister at the time, Nicolas Sarkozy (Who???), got the last word. In Greece, the troubles only started a week ago, and the country is now going on general strikes. It is obviously difficult and too early to tell how the government will respond in the mid-long term or when the situation will be back to “normal”…

At the other end of the world, as reported by The Guardian (International edition, Saturday 09/12), the Chinese government, within the context of the economic crisis, has issued warnings of possible increases in menaces to social stability as consequences of mass unemployment. All in all, the anger of youths and populations might not only be a French or Greek concern, but a global one. To be continued?

Anonymous. Cherche le travail.

The celebrated Canadian author Douglas Copeland defines the notion of McJobs as a "crap underpaid job often seen as a great opportunity by people who've never held one". If that's what you're after, no doubt the UK is 'the' place. As much casual, minimum wage-strapped employment as you want, just take your pick. But in the age of decent jobs becoming an increasing commodity, France came up with an approach that seems nothing short of revolutionary. Yesterday, a White Paper was given the go-ahead by the French Senate, introducing a scheme based on anonymous application forms and CVs. Under the new legislation, people won't have to jot down their name, address, age and sex when they're looking for work as all that matters will be experience, education and skills. Photos also won't be required and the only contacts will be e-mail address and phone number.

In the UK, so-called equal opportunities is increasingly a formula, a rigid matter of form, more likely to increase recriminations based on dubious positive discrimination schemes. The French approach appears the fairest way forward. It nips prejudice in the bud as it's based on surveys confirming that a foreign name, certain physical traits (i.e. obesity, age or specific notions of attractiveness) or a person's place of living make your job search a serious uphill or downhill task according to circumstances. With the new legislation, French employers won't have a clue about your looks or ethnicity at least until the interview stage. Selection will be more likely to be based on merits. Perhaps the buffs in human resources may wish to take a peek south of the Channel?