Call for European migration policy

Europe needs a well-managed migration policy, Parliamentary Secretary Mario Galea told Parliament yesterday. By 2050, because of the decline in the birth-rate, the population in Europe is expected to decrease by 50 million to 400 million and would need immigrants.

Speaking during the debate in the second reading of the Bill amending the Refugees Act, Mr Galea said the irregular immigration problem was beyond Malta's capabilities. Compared to the size of the land and the population, one irregular immigrant landing in Malta was equivalent to 140 landing in Italy, 150 in the UK and 250 in Germany.

He quoted former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan saying that as much as migrants needed Europe, the continent also needed migrants. An open Europe, he said, would be fairer, richer, stronger and younger, provided Europe managed migration well.

Mr Galea said a number of good football players in Malta were of African descent and they were considered as heroes. There was no xenophobia at all. Unfortunately, this was not the case for other dark-skinned people. But the ancestors of the football players could have also been asylum seekers in Europe.

The problem of xenophobia should be dealt with as soon as possible because the country had already had to face incidents as a result.

He referred to election observation missions organised by the EU and the Commonwealth in countries where there was unrest. He had attended a number of such missions and, after spending a month in these countries, he had started to realise why nationals of such countries wanted to leave.

He recounted an incident in Zimbabwe where, in a village close to where he was, five youths had been abducted and beaten, one of them to death, because they did not sing Mr Mugabe's party anthem when they were ordered to by supporters.

Unfortunately, Malta was the second most densely-populated country, 10 times more than the EU average. The number of illegal immigrants arriving in Malta amounted to 50 per cent of Malta's birth rate.

Many never intended to land here but did so as a result of bad weather. The Mediterranean Sea had become a mass grave for irregular immigrants crossing from Africa to Europe in search of a better future.

The EU and other countries, including the US, had offered support, but the problem of illegal migration was much bigger than Malta could contain. Malta had its international obligations, both legal and moral. The Bill under discussion was aimed at establishing a common migration policy, protecting both the immigrants and the country. This was a problem which could not be swept under the carpet, he said.

Many migrants had already contributed a lot in many European countries and they would continue to do so, considering that by 2050 more than a third of the Maltese population would be over 65. Malta was trying to develop a well-managed migration policy which Europe lacked.

In 2002 illegal immigrants in Europe had sent to their countries of origin some $88 billion, 54 per cent more than these countries received in development aid. This was an indirect contribution of illegal migration.

Mr Galea said there was a link between bad and corrupt governance and poverty. Where there was good governance and respect for democracy, wealth was created and more people advanced further. Many immigrants who ended up in Malta came from countries where there was corrupt governance.

Nationalist MP Michael Frendo said that everybody had the duty to contribute to development for better governance, economic development, a fairer trade, and development aid which would get to the people. This would ease the pressure on the need of people to escape their country of origin. But positive results came about only where there was human respect.

Those judging Malta had to be conscious of the country's particular realities. Malta expected the EU to show solidarity when this was required, and the EU should note that more solidarity was indeed required in this issue.

More assistance was needed. The Maltese government was doing a lot. Malta had an excellent record in the award of refugee and humanitarian status and the EU had to show solidarity with the countries in the south that were suffering from this phenomenon.

Many EU countries felt that rather than unity, a Mediterranean Union as proposed by French President Sarkozy would create a different reality of division, and they had requested to go back to the Euro-Mediterranean Union.

The interest of the EU countries on this matter meant that they acknowledged that the problems of the EU's southern flank affected the whole of Europe.

It had not been easy for Malta to obtain solidarity, because many could not understand the devastating effects that such numbers had on so small a country.

The problem had to be addressed in a holistic manner, and as Foreign Minister he had made the case that the EU should not emphasise just one part of the Mediterranean but all of it. In not doing so it would be inviting criminal organisations to transfer their line of business to another part of the Mediterranean.

Europe had to continue working to have an agreed common policy sending a clear message to criminal organisations that they would find no part of Europe that was more favourable to them than another.

All EU member states had to work together for the necessary repatriation of persons to their country of origin when this did not pose a risk for them.

Turning to the resettlement of refugees, Dr Frendo said the UNHCR had the duty to help Malta because of its circumstances. Malta was a special case which needed special solutions. There was an urgent need for the government to bring to the UNHCR's attention the need for European countries to take refugees and people with humanitarian aid status from Malta, reducing this number from their quota committed with the UNHCR.

The UNHCR was not allowing countries taking persons from Malta to reduce them from their quota. This meant that countries wanting to show solidarity with Malta had to take the number from Malta over and above their quota. This was making it more difficult for Malta to find countries willing to resettle people from Malta. One such country was Finland, which could not fill its quota but which did not take any refugees from Malta because it was unable to reduce them from its quota.

Dr Frendo said that he had repeatedly made this request to the UNHCR, and Malta had to continue pressing for it. The UNHCR had to acknowledge that Malta was a very small country and that it required assistance.

Malta also had to seek other avenues as an expression of solidarity in agreement with all EU countries.

Nationalist MP Beppe Fenech Adami said that Malta had started experiencing the problem of irregular migration in the late 1980s. Then, after the fall of the Berlin wall, Malta had started to experience a larger influx, with people coming from Albania in the early 1990s.

Up to a few years ago there had not been a good system for those wanting to apply for refugee status. Applying for status used to take ages. Progress had now been registered and pending applications had dropped substantially. Due to the Refugee Commissioner's commitment and the investment made, this year's applications were now being processed.

Dr Fenech Adami said that Malta was right to expect international cooperation and burden-sharing within the EU. One of the major problems being faced by Malta was what it should do with those irregular immigrants who would have been denied refugee status because they did not qualify.

Some of the refugees in Malta were being exploited, even though they could work legally and enjoyed freedom of movement. He called for an end to this abuse.

Dr Fenech Adami said the NGOs were committed to helping the government in its policy on refugees, by assisting the immigrants applying for refugee status both during and after the process. One such NGO was the Jesuit Refugee Service, which had been functioning in Malta since the mid-1990s, providing several services, including legal, to those applying for refugee status. The JRS was even training lawyers to assist these refugees. The irregular immigrants needed legal aid and protection from racial prejudices which existed among some of the Maltese.

Concluding, Dr Fenech Adami paid tribute to Dr Katrin Camilleri who dedicates her professional time and wisdom to the refugees' cause. Her work, he said, was also recognised by the UNHCR and she had been given the International Woman of Achievement Award.

Philip Mifsud (PN) recalled that five years ago there had been Maltese people sowing fear of an invasion of people from northern and central Europe, but the situation today was one of regular landings of thousands of people seeking a better future in the north. While they remained here, Malta classified as one of the most densely populated countries on earth, with 1,300 people per square kilometre.

It was a mistake to think of the problem solely in numbers, rather than people. No irregular immigrant would have put his life at risk unless he had lost all hope in his country of origin. The Mediterranean was known to have taken a toll of some 600 lives in a year.

Mr Mifsud said that while an irregular immigrant left his country to find a better future, a refugee left only because he could do nothing else. Unfortunately there were too many Maltese who did not seem to be able to grasp the difference. This could only be helped by programmes of public education, even though the Maltese could not really be called racists.

The EU should do much more than just lend a listening ear to Malta's problems in this regard. Individual member states chose instead to drag their feet or just sit on the fence. It was not enough for Malta to be offered financial help to deal with irregular immigration; the real answer was true burden-sharing, with all member states becoming convinced that this was also their problem.

At the end of 2005, a group of 20 refugees and 16 people with humanitarian protection had left to start a new life in the Netherlands. This had been a positive step that had gone down very well, but only Germany, Lithuania, Ireland and Portugal out of the EU had done anything similar. There were others who could do much more but did not. It was ironic that the biggest help was coming from a non-European country, the United States.

Mr Mifsud said he considered the Bill under debate as the finale of the existing law because it reinforced the rights of refugees. The numbers of their applications had more than doubled in two years.

Nationalist MP Ċensu Galea said irregular immigrants were neither invited nor wanted, but arrived in Malta only because traffickers contrived to bring them in for their own personal ends.

A recently-published book said there were three million immigrants in Italy. Their presence there affected not only what happened in Italy but also in other EU member states, including Malta. In the same way, irregular immigration to Malta also affected the rest of the EU.

Mr Galea said the number of nationalities of children attending St Paul's Bay primary school had risen to some 25 in recent years. This made for a mixed community living in the area, but the vast majority of these people had made a success of integration and the Maltese community had largely accepted them.

He said these people needed to work and he suggested that the ministry in charge of the open centres, such as that at Marsa, should have a register of their skills. This would do away with the image of begging for work, and ensure that they eventually received the right and just wages.

Irregular immigration was set to continue until such time as Europe remained a shining destination. Too many irregular immigrants could tell hair-raising tales of what they had gone through to achieve that goal, even though they ended up in Malta by some miscalculation.

Unfortunately some irregular migrants resorted to crime, but they were the exception and not the rule. Even these, Mr Galea concluded, needed to be taken good care of.

Winding up, Home Affairs Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said it seemed there was agreement on the substance of the Bill, but there were some different ideas about how Malta should take action. There was no one right solution.

Throughout the years the Europeans had built a free, democratic area giving people many rights and had a strong economy which needed more workers than it actually had. This was a favourable situation for migration.

Reasons why people migrated included lack of stability, hunger and wars. The UNHCR website noted that 5,400 persons had moved from one refugee camp to another. A number of immigrants had also ended up in Malta, which was an affluent country with a democratic system that guaranteed stability.

The minister commended the office of the Commissioner for Refugees for the good work it was doing, garnering experience through the large number of immigrants. This expertise, which did not previously exist, also centred on the logical way of how applications for asylum could be analysed. Unfortunately, the commission's work was not always appreciated. There was a lack of truth and information. Facts were not clear.

In one of the most recent European Council meetings of the Justice and Home Affairs Ministers, it had been suggested that the subject of migration be discussed in a holistic manner. All the major complexities and realities in Europe had to be considered together.

When it came to employment there were those who tried to exploit immigrants. This reality was faced by the whole of Europe.

The detention centres and the open centres now fell under the aegis of the same ministry, and as a consequence a holistic vision had to be taken into account.

Within two years, open centres had grown from 200 to 2,000 persons. This was leading to internal ministry discussions for the drawing up of new policies after consultations with the Opposition to present a united front.

The Bill was helping to clarify matters, giving persons the dignity they deserved while being tough with those who did not deserve refugee or humanitarian status.

This was not an easy matter because one was deciding on the lives of other human beings. The Bill was a step in the right direction. Malta had been more than responsible, setting an example to other Mediterranean states. Malta's good work was now being acknowledged, even if misinformation remained.

Referring to comments by Labour MP George Vella, the minister said Maltese citizenship was not given on the basis of territory but of blood. So a child born to non-Maltese parents in Malta would not be given citizenship.

Concluding, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said the government was committed to protecting those who deserved protection and repatriating, voluntarily or involuntarily, those who did not.

The Bill was unanimously approved.

During yesterday's sitting, the House also unanimously approved the appointment of Nationalist MP Frederick Azzopardi as vice-president of House committees.