This is the cost. Mathematically, if it's about protecting refugees and the building is not safe, then the refugee is not protected. The purpose of the system and goals of ensuring safety is nullified. You were notified in late August of a potential gas leak at a refugee building in France and the leak continues today without repair or any resolution. There are also Canadians who have no EU Citizenship harassing the refugee and their families by stealing, as volunteers at refugee offices. They steal the mail and then they are sending the mail by post to their families in the refugee's home country. The matter has been referred, as rumored to the European Court of Justice as the refugee is being denied the guaranteed reception under the EU directives as a result of the interruptions caused by the Canadians. See the following: Case C-79/13 Saciri and others (Arbeidshof te Brussel, Belgium, reference for a preliminary ruling; Reception Conditions Directive, 27 February 2014) Judgment // AG Opinion // Application 1. Article 13(5) of Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers must be interpreted as meaning, where a Member State has opted to grant the material reception conditions in the form of financial allowances or vouchers, that those allowances must be provided from the time the application for asylum is made, in accordance with the provisions of Article 13(1) of that directive, and must meet the minimum standards set out in Article 13(2) thereof. All material reception conditions under this regulation must be provided from the time of the application according to Article 13(1) and 13(2) accordingly. That Member State must ensure that the total amount of the financial allowances covering the material reception conditions is sufficient to ensure a dignified standard of living and adequate for the health of applicants and capable of ensuring their subsistence, enabling them in particular to find housing(hotel, motel, hostel as they have no proof of income for standard rentals) having regard, if necessary, to the preservation of the interests of persons having specific needs, pursuant to Article 17 of that directive. The material reception conditions laid down in Article 14(1), (3), (5) and (8) of Directive 2003/9 do not apply to the Member States where they have opted to grant those conditions in the form of financial allowances only. Nevertheless, the amount of those allowances must be sufficient to enable minor children to be housed with their parents, so that the family unity of the asylum seekers may be maintained. 2. Directive 2003/9 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude, where the accommodation facilities specifically for asylum seekers are overloaded, the Member States from referring the asylum seekers to bodies within the general public assistance system, provided that that system ensures that the minimum standards laid down in that directive as regards the asylum seekers are met. The failure to use all the available state resources to save the life of the individual who is in need of help as certified is also a Criminal offence once notified. See.... CHAPTER III OF THE FRENCH CRIMINAL CODE. ENDANGERING OTHER PERSONS Articles 223-1 to 223-20- gas leak in building SECTION I RISKS CAUSED TO OTHER PERSONS Articles 223-1 to 223-2 ARTICLE 223-1 (Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 Article 3 Official Journal of 22 September into force 1 January 2002) The direct exposure of another person to an immediate risk of death or injury likely to cause mutilation or permanent disability by the manifestly deliberate violation of a specific obligation of safety or prudence imposed by any statute or regulation is punished by one year's imprisonment and a fine of €15,000. ARTICLE 223-2 Legal persons may incur criminal liability pursuant to the conditions set out under article 121-2, for the offence defined under article 223-1. The penalties incurred by legal persons are: 1° a fine, pursuant to the conditions set out under article 131-38; 2° the penalties enumerated under 2°, 3°, 8° and 9° of article 131-39. The prohibition mentioned under 2° of article 131-39 applies to the activity in the exercise of which or on the occasion of the exercise of which the offence was committed. -------

This is the cost.  Mathematically, if it's about protecting refugees and the building is not safe, then the refugee is not protected. The purpose of the system and goals of ensuring safety is nullified.   You were notified in late August of a potential gas leak at a refugee building in France and the leak continues today without repair or  any resolution.  There are also Canadians who have no EU Citizenship harassing the refugee and their families by stealing,  as volunteers at refugee offices.  They steal the mail and then they are  sending the mail by post to their families in the refugee's home country. The matter has been referred, as rumored to the European Court of Justice as the refugee is being denied  the guaranteed reception under the EU directives as a result of the interruptions caused by the Canadians. See the following: Case C-79/13 Saciri and others (Arbeidshof te Brussel, Belgium, reference for a preliminary ruling;

Reception Conditions Directive, 27 February 2014)

Judgment // AG Opinion // Application

1. Article 13(5) of Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum 

standards for the reception of asylum seekers must be interpreted as meaning, where a 

Member State has opted to grant the material reception conditions in the form of financial 

allowances or vouchers, that those allowances must be provided from the time the application 

for asylum is made, in accordance with the provisions of Article 13(1) of that directive, and must meet the minimum standards set out in Article 13(2) thereof.  All material reception conditions under this regulation must be provided from the time of the application according to Article 13(1) and 13(2) accordingly.  That Member State must ensure that the total amount of the financial allowances covering the material reception conditions is sufficient to ensure a dignified standard of living and adequate for the health of applicants and capable of ensuring their subsistence, enabling them in particular to find housing(hotel, motel, hostel as they have no proof of income for standard rentals) having regard, if necessary, to the preservation of the interests of persons having specific needs, pursuant to Article 17 of that directive. The material reception conditions laid down in Article 14(1), (3), (5) and (8) of Directive 2003/9 do not apply to the Member States where they have opted to grant those conditions in the form of financial allowances only. Nevertheless, the amount of those allowances must be sufficient to enable minor children to be housed with their parents, so that the family unity of the asylum seekers may be maintained.

2. Directive 2003/9 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude, where the 

accommodation facilities specifically for asylum seekers are overloaded, the Member States 

from referring the asylum seekers to bodies within the general public assistance system, 

provided that that system ensures that the minimum standards laid down in that directive as 

regards the asylum seekers are met.

The failure to use all the available state resources to save the life of the individual who is in need of help as certified is also a Criminal offence once notified.  See....

CHAPTER III OF THE FRENCH CRIMINAL CODE.  

 ENDANGERING OTHER PERSONS Articles 223-1 to 223-20- gas leak in building 

 SECTION I

 RISKS CAUSED TO OTHER PERSONS Articles 223-1 to 223-2

ARTICLE 223-1

(Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 Article 3 Official Journal of 22 September into force 1 January 2002)

 The direct exposure of another person to an immediate risk of death or injury likely to cause mutilation or permanent

disability by the manifestly deliberate violation of a specific obligation of safety or prudence imposed by any statute or regulation is punished by one year's imprisonment and a fine of €15,000.

ARTICLE 223-2

 Legal persons may incur criminal liability pursuant to the conditions set out under article 121-2, for the offence

defined under article 223-1.

 The penalties incurred by legal persons are:

 1° a fine, pursuant to the conditions set out under article 131-38;

 2° the penalties enumerated under 2°, 3°, 8° and 9° of article 131-39.

 The prohibition mentioned under 2° of article 131-39 applies to the activity in the exercise of which or on the occasion of the exercise of which the offence was committed.


-------








Comments

Popular Posts

By FSJ 16/09/2025. The Housing and the Affordability issue: The architect said lets reason together as we build and design an energetic future with financially energized people; a discussion. By Mary Godwhen. Click here. BW Where would it go if I reverse engineer a "BAPE" shoe logo? Charles cares. He has vowed to have the most able and responsive Tiger economy in Europe and North America and the most safe and ably funded citizens in those regions; his citizens, his people. It is that we will be the economic winners; not losers; at the top and not the bottom...in front and not at the back. It would only take him a day to get it going. We can design anything. Certainly, anything we design demands and requires people with money for us to enjoy it; if it's a restaurant, an amusement park, a shopping centre or a town or city in general. The Bugatti sellers will have more sales and the Vauxhall owners will finally make full payment for the shopping and vacations; for their vehicles also. We do not enjoy suffering, lack or insufficiency. But maybe a vengeful bum might. Money is important. It has to be important. So, why are we incessantly brought to have this conversation about income support rather quite often when observing the economies west of Calais as run by; whom? Laissez Faire is not an economic policy but the policy of no policy in light of industrial mechanization of labor and the social problems it occasions when the families do not have enough money to buy their coal for heat, milk, bananas and vegetables. They would usually just take what they need; wherever they can take it. The economy is run by whom? The income support in Vermont, Minnesota and Massachusetts exceeds $70000.00 per year. This should be so for the whole, entire continent. But, some states and provinces, not all, are being run by income support benefit men touring boxes of undistributed emergency debit cards that they can now hand out to people in those camps. They seek public attention more than public efficacy. They have had enough time to solve the obvious. Money is the obvious issue but you wouldn't be waiting for an God fearing man to come and campaign on this issue when we know you can see the problem and solve it for us. We do not enjoy suffering, lack or insufficiency. But maybe a vengeful bum might. They are experimenting with money in terms of crypto or bit coin and its definition before they would agree to just HAVE MONEY. Money is the most important weapon in spite of all your Oppenheimer detonators that can't read help during peace time and for what when you would still need money?