On analysing immigration

In his article Lost Causes And Iron Boxes (July 29), Andrew Azzopardi would have been better equipped to present a comprehensive analysis of the operations of an open centre for illegal immigrants had he contacted our services to see from the inside the reality of the management of irregular immigration or, at least, that part of it that falls within our competence. Over the years, we have met hundreds of visitors, all wishing to see and understand from up close the complex reality unfolding in this part of southern Europe. With many we have debated long and hard, agreeing on some issues and disagreeing on others.

I am in no way attempting to defend our services but I would like to bring the issue within parameters where a discussion can take place.

I am satisfied with the reception standards achieved in some centres while I am aware that there is room for improvement in others. The presence of “rats and other unwelcoming creatures” referred to by Dr Azzopardi stems from the surrounding rural environment and the bad personal hygiene practices adopted by some, not all, of the residents.

Year after year, open centres have been housing immigrants in numbers that exceeded their projected capacity. In fact, there were times when the centres accommodated about 3,000 persons and we are presently getting close to that number once again due to recent arrivals. During periods of overpopulation, the use of mobile homes and tents becomes inevitable. It should be highlighted that resorting to temporary facilities is the exception and not the norm.

Persons using our services are not Zizek’s “lost causes” and we do all we can not to come across that way. This harms the message we are trying to convey to those who seek our services, a message that inspires them to get on with their interrupted lives. On a daily basis we strive to provide access to what is required, that is long-term solutions and immediate care when needed.

We are promoting employment and education for adult immigrants and schooling for their children. Many professionals provide other services as and when required. As a reception network, we link with mainstream services while volunteers and civil society provide the necessary crucial assistance and support.

Dr Azzopardi proposes that “we construct a movement of human solidarity led by our politicians”. The “movement of human solidarity”, in fact, already exists; this agency is proof of this. However, a lot still remains to be done.

On the other hand, those who express condemnation and portray a doom and gloom image for the situation prevailing in this sector simply lack the ability of seeing the whole picture. It is worth highlighting that, as a result of the government’s commitment to provide temporary accommodation to migrants, we do not have people sleeping on pavements, scenes that are, unfortunately, experienced in some other countries on a daily basis.

Valid contributions in this area from the University would definitely be most welcome. In many cases, Malta’s structures of solidarity in this field are only a few years old whereas other countries with the accumulated experience of second and third generation immigration are still facing challenges that are similar to ours.

Finally, I would like to invite Dr Azzopardi to go beyond analysing immigration from his car and start communicating with us at the Agency for the Welfare of Asylum Seekers with a view to exchange ideas that would lead to the betterment of this complex sector.

The author is director of the Agency for the Welfare of Asylum Seekers.