Appealing for some logic on immigration

Another day, another paint-by-numbers commentary about illegal immigration. Enrico Gurioli (September 25) makes a big song and dance about the three Maltese men allegedly caught smuggling immigrants across the Mediterranean. He terms the smuggling an "illegal and morally shameful" practice and condemns the "criminal organisation that even in Malta is taking advantage of immigrants desperate to reach the continent". He makes all the necessary overtures to border patrol authorities and, in a PR move worthy of Alistair Campbell himself, declares unwelcome only those illegal immigrants who "produce ill-gotten gains". The rest are, of course, free to stay and help themselves to the single malt.

It is as would be expected. Mr Gurioli toes a distinct party line and his pebble of a contribution to the summum bonum of public debate sinks without a ripple straight to the bottom of the pond.

Mr Gurioli's quarrel, it transpires, is not with the sordid realities that make illegal immigration necessary, nor with the conditions that have exacerbated it in recent years. That hardly appears anywhere in his piece. No; his itch is with a very basic economic diktat, that of supply and demand. Mr Gurioli is no student of history. If he were, he would pragmatically realise that wherever there is an illegal need that needs satisfying, enterprising sorts ready to charge a price for it will never be far behind.

It is ebb and flow. It is tidal gravity. It is ecological balance. If there ever was an immutable law of human nature, this would be it. Think Al Capone bootlegging alcohol during the Prohibition. Think prostitutes peddling their hips under flickering neon lights. Think divorce paradises like Reno, which feed off the misery of the unhappily married. And most emblematically of all, think the contraband of narcotics, which chugs on unabated despite much-publicised drug hauls. When people need something badly enough, they are unlikely to ask for leave or consent from the statute books. Necessity knows no law.

The griddle iron of illegal immigration could do without this sort of gummed-up rhetoric. What is needed instead is a clear-headed and fearless assessment of cause and effect and realistic efforts at resolution. If the problem with Africa is a defunct infrastructure, extreme poverty, runaway overpopulation and Church-sanctioned superstition and ignorance, then it is these issues that should be addressed before the social organism can even hope to dig itself out of the immigration hole.

Phrases like "containing the traffic of illegal immigrants" and "turning the tide of undocumented migrants" blunt the edge of what is in fact a blood-blotered reality, reconciling the people to injustices they'd fight vigorously if they could but see clear of the propaganda covering them up.

My appeal is one to logic. Sifting through my letter will perhaps help Mr Gurioli find it for himself.