Production: By Europod, in co-production with Sphera Network.

EUobserver is pleased to partner editorially with Europod for the joint release of the podcast series Briefed, presented by Lea Marchal. The series can be found on every major platform.

The complete transcript appears below.

The long-standing reluctance toward deportation centers, referred to in EU terms as return hubs, has ended.

Several EU countries now seek to establish these facilities in non-EU nations and seek European Union backing for their costs.

Which governments back the hubs, which resist them, and what outcomes can be expected?

Images may have appeared of European Parliament members in Strasbourg calling out send them back following a ballot.

The incident occurred last Wednesday once lawmakers passed the measure on returning irregular migrants.

Far-right deputies on one side of the room repeated the phrase about migrants, prompting left-side members to reply Shame on you.

The measure passed thanks to backing from far-right, conservative and centrist liberal groups.

We addressed this topic in an earlier episode. The return measure aims to simplify removal of those present irregularly in the EU. Additional details are available in the description.

Our focus today rests on the disputed deportation centers placed beyond EU borders. The plan involves moving migrants there when return to their home country proves impossible.

The return measure awaits formal approval, expected in the coming weeks.

During last weeks European Council meeting, 19 nations headed by Italy and Denmark urged faster progress on the initiative.

In a shared statement they highlighted the urgency of setting up return hubs and pressed the European Commission for funding support.

This prompts a key issue: can such funding occur?

EU resources have so far been barred from supporting these facilities.

A similar case arose in 2021 when twelve member states requested EU money for border barriers.

Home affairs commissioner Ylva Johansson rejected the request then.

Positions have shifted markedly since.

The Commission now states readiness to review any developed proposal from member states.

Put differently, if enough countries request Commission contributions to these centers, talks can begin.

Where do positions stand?

Arrayed against the 19 supporters are eight nations: Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Finland, Ireland, Croatia and Luxembourg.

As expected, Spanish prime minister Pedro Sanchez, who favors a more welcoming approach, rejects both the centers and the wider return measure.

He contends the policy fails to deliver answers and conveys an unhelpful signal to origin and transit states, urging instead deeper ties with them.

French president Emmanuel Macron also expressed clear opposition after the summit.

He maintains that return hubs clash with European principles and notes that current examples have yet to show success.

The United Kingdom tried a comparable arrangement with Rwanda, yet courts deemed Rwanda unsafe for asylum seekers and the plan ended once the Labour government took office.

Australia has maintained similar sites in Papua New Guinea and Nauru for years, drawing repeated criticism over living conditions and incidents of harm.

A nearer case exists close to Europe.

Italy concluded an accord with Albania for two centers on Albanian soil. Transfers faced court blocks in 2025, yet new movements have occurred. Around one hundred individuals are reported to have arrived there since January.

All 27 EU members must still give formal approval to the return measure in the months ahead.

Even if the eight opposing countries halted the measure, which seems improbable, Italys approach demonstrates that individual states can act without EU endorsement.

Any nation may negotiate separately with a third country to receive deported migrants.

The central matter remains who covers the expense.

That discussion will likely coincide with talks on the EUs upcoming long-term budget.