Ranier Fsadni
Return to sender
He described the government as incompetent in handling immigration. He pointed out the pressures on hospitals. And he called for a cap on migrants entering the country. Labour leader Joseph Muscat last Monday? Yes, but he was copying, point by point, the British Conservative leader David Cameron's criticism of UK Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
The funny thing is that Dr Muscat never cited Mr Cameron as his model. On the contrary. his speech was reported to have cited Mr Brown and Spanish socialist Prime Minister José Luis Zapatero as what, in his words, "progressive governments" were doing.
Does this matter? For two reasons, yes.
One is that it seems to matter to Dr Muscat. While sanctifying Maltese public opinion on immigration and suggesting that Malta should consider suspending its international obligations for a period he still wants to be considered the head of a progressive political party.
Just because a Conservative leader says something, of course, does not mean it is wrong. But the political address where a Labour leader is getting his arguments from is important. It mattered over the European Union issue, when Labour derived many of its arguments from rightwing Eurosceptics. It matters now, when Labour claims so much about its progressive credentials.
The second reason has to do with the Maltese public's cynicism about the government's measures on irregular immigration. One important reason for this cynicism is that it is believed that the government can do more, that there are stronger, more effective measures that can be taken.
So looking at what is actually being done by the UK, Spain and Italy - all cited by Dr Muscat - is important. Dr Muscat only cited Mr Brown and Mr Zapatero on what they are doing to tighten border controls. But given that he justified his recommendations - about an explicit limit on immigrant numbers and suspending international obligations - in terms of "the national interest", it is worth looking at what the UK and Spanish governments have not done, as well.
Let us take the UK, first. A cap on non-EU immigration (regular and irregular) is part of the Conservative Party policy, not Labour's. "An explicit and reasoned" limit was also recommended by a House of Lords Committee a year ago. However, its Chair, Lord Wakeham, explicitly said that the quota should exclude asylum seekers, noting that "the UK must continue to respect its human rights obligations".
Notice that the term used is "seekers". Some of those will be found not to deserve it. But they would need first to be taken in and have their case examined; they would not be rejected before that. Since, in the case of Malta's irregular immigrants from Africa, practically all seek asylum or protection, even if slightly under half do not qualify, placing a cap on immigrants to be taken in would either be an empty gesture - as pointed out by Home Affairs Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici - or else be a measure to the right of the UK Conservative Party.
Meanwhile, Mr Brown continues to ignore the call for a cap. His recent measures for tighter border controls, in fact, have gone hand in hand with measures for better integration of immigrants.
Unless he was misreported, integration seemed largely absent from Dr Muscat's speech on Monday. He said a lot about civic lessons for immigrants but it is unclear in what civic community they would use them: some of his proposals would only serve to ghettoise African immigrants further.
Yet, integration is a key policy of progressive European governments. Dr Muscat stressed legality: but one of the key distinguishing measures taken by Mr Zapatero was to legalise some 600,000 immigrants, partly in order to get them out of the black economy, get them to qualify for proper social services but also to make them contributors to the social system. And he also cared enough to carry public opinion with him.
Of course, one can cherry-pick what other governments do. But the selectivity should be pointed out, especially when one tries to ride on another Prime Minister's progressive credentials.
Meanwhile, Mr Zapatero, whose country also faces much larger waves of irregular immigration from Africa than previously, is seeking agreements on sea patrols and repatriation with African countries. However, this is using a large network of Spanish forces of law and order and negotiating short-term agreements that a Spanish defence analyst has described as always advantageous to the sending country.
Despite these conditions, Mr Zapatero has not spoken of suspending international obligations or holding the EU to ransom. The rhetoric continues to be that of discussion with EU partners.
As for the recent agreement Italy has struck with Libya on sea patrols, it deserves a separate article. Suffice to say that the deal involves $5 billion over a 20 year-period - $250 million per year in the midst of the current economic climate. And it was greatly helped by the (unofficial) involvement of Italy's oil giant ENI; it appears that joint energy ventures by Italy and Libya in third countries are envisaged.
None of these negotiating counters are within Malta's ken. That does not mean that Malta's position is hopeless. But it does mean we should be wary of political arguments posing as progressive and repatriate them to where they come from.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
S. Calascione
Mar 19th 2009, 22:04
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs ought to be engaging in serious bridge building with all of our North African neighbours, focusing on a solution to the conflict in Darfur.
J Martinelli
Mar 19th 2009, 19:49
One would expect those commenting on a report, to at least read the report such as the one published by the Times of the 16th where Dr. Muscat's Plan was laid out.
The speech consisted of three parts:
1. Actions which are already in place
2. Actions which should not be done
3. Actions which would be stupid to carry out.
1. The fact that illegal immigrants are 'detained' demonstrates that the situation is under control. It is not perfect but it works.
2. Segregation is illegal. Setting up of training and schooling gives the impression that these immigrants are here for the long haul. It is inadvisable to spend money and effort if the real plans are to expatriate them as soon as possible.
3. It would be very unwise for Malta to suspend international obligations for obvious (not to Joseph) reasons. Retaliation is but one. Fixing a quota is silly because no one has come up with an action plan to be implemented once the quota is filled. Or is it the case of adjusting the quota as necessary. Is that not what is taking place now?
Try again Joseph, more diplomatically next time, please!
leonardo vince
Mar 19th 2009, 16:44
Ranier said 'That does not mean that Malta's position is hopeless'.
It is hopeless with people like you who consider themselves inferior vis a vis foreign powers.
Big brother is big brother, after all, you argue. We are the makku!!!!!!!!
And your solution? Boq.
A Borg
Mar 19th 2009, 12:59
Yesterday it was the Honorevoli Carm Mifsud Bonnici to day its Mr. Ranier Fsadni with the same Merry-go-round type of arguments lead nowhere!
We need ‘doers’ not ‘talkers’ with arguments that do not amount to much more than ‘a Sparking Plug Bla Spark’.
With regard to this issue of illegal migration, had there not been people like Robert Arrigo, Frank Portelli, etc, who can talk clearly about illegal migration, I would give up on the PN.
d.attard
Mar 19th 2009, 12:24
I can mention ten opposition leaders who brought up these key universal issues over the past few weeks.
A covenient way how to avoid discussing issues. Pity.
Eric Soames
Mar 19th 2009, 11:52
Does it matter where the original ideas come from so long as they are made to fit local circumstances? Nevertheless, a confusing hodge-podge trying to shore up a policy of doing nothing, from a correspondent who comes over quite clearly as a government shill.
louise vella
Mar 19th 2009, 11:36
Rather than speaking about Zapatero, I advise Mr Fsadni to read the following article in today's The Times: "Spanish town struggles with 75 per cent unemployment"
Here are some relevant quotations to feed his progressive theories:
During the height of the country's credit-fuelled property boom the dozens of small and medium-sized building firms which sprang up in La Lantejuela employed up to 80 per cent of the town's workers as local residents abandoned farm work for more lucrative jobs in construction. But those jobs began to quickly disappear last year as the global credit crunch exacerbated a slowdown that was already underway in Spain's real estate sector.
Today nearly 75 per cent of the town's economically active population is jobless, one of the highest unemployment rates in Spain, which in turn is the nation with the highest jobless rate in the 27-nation EU.
Spain's unemployment rate hit 14.8 per cent in January after the impact of the collapse in the building sector spread to other areas, and many economists predict it will continue to rise to hit 20 per cent next year.
Muscat.Pat
Mar 19th 2009, 11:25
The point is Mr R.Fsadni, are you Progressive, are you a Social Democrat like Brown, Muscat and Zapatero? Probably you are not, and you find it convenient to attack Joseph as a "conservative" when you yourself are more conservative than Cameron himself! Obama is progressive and "left wing" is he opening up the US frontiers? You still need VISAS and Passports because USA has military and politcal clout.Yes Progressive Obama repatriates illegal immigrants to their own country! Imbeki, a progressive "South African" anti-apartheid politician, is repatriating all Zimbabwe illegal immigrants. Is he not progressive and of the left becasue of that? Zapatero used tear gas and SAS style comandos to quell a riot in Ceuta at the tip of North Africa. By the way, he still keeps his little African colony, even though you don't mention it! The truth is that you are trying to defend Gonzi because he is paralysed by the tsanami that might engulf us all! Gonzi has NO solution and is suffering from an inferiority complex when it comes to talk to foreigners. This does not help us solve our problems.NB. I've just read that "progressive" Gonzi wants to ripatriate all illegal immigrants; a closit progressive?
louise vella
Mar 19th 2009, 11:11
David Cameron. Gordon Brown. Zapatero. Progressive. Rightwing Eurosceptics. To the right of the UK Conservative Party. Progressive credentials. Progressive credentials again. Zapatero. Zapatero again. ENI ...
What a cocktail! What a mess! Enough to make you dizzy. All this meaning what? That GonziPN has been right in its open door policy towards illegal immigation? Or that Malta should go on accepting an unlimited number of illegal and unwanted immigrants?
One good thing Mr Fsadni says about Zapatero: "he also cared enough to carry public opinion with him." Can Mr Fsadni say the same about Dr Gonzi? Does Dr Gonzi care enough about Maltese public opinion on illegal immigration to carry public opinion with him? Why not have a public consultation process on illegal immigration as the government has held on some 20 other issues? Is illegal immigration not important enough to justify one? Indeed, why not a referendum?
lgalea
Mar 19th 2009, 10:40
"Yet, integration is a key policy of progressive European governments."
No it is not.
EXPULSION is the key to the problem.
Is is as simple as that.
Once they know they will never be allowed to work or settle here they will stop coming.
If only one is allowed to work and remain here we shall continue to have a deluge of illegal immigrants.