A few weeks ago, a report on the consequences of the Libyan crisis, for which I was co-rapporteur, was adopted by the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly. The report focused on the effects of the conflict on neighbouring EU and ACP countries.
... we make it a habit of hitting the right button- David Casa
The report calls for the implementation of a more effective system of burden sharing or, more specifically, for “the formalisation of a system of ‘compulsory and irrevocable solidarity’ with member states exposed to specific and disproportionate pressures in the form of intra-EU relocation, together with greater cooperation with Libya”.
Nauseatingly, Labour has tried to manipulate the facts on this one, so let’s set the record straight.
In 2009, Malta became a signatory to the Asylum Pact, which introduced a framework for voluntary burden sharing. Joseph Muscat decided to oppose the government’s signing of the Asylum Pact on the basis that we should accept nothing less than mandatory burden sharing. This was an instance in which the Leader of the Opposition’s abysmal aptitude for foreign affairs was perhaps more pronounced than usual.
At the time, the setting up of a system for voluntary intra-EU relocation was a positive achievement and pulling a Mintoff would have had us marginalised.
That is not to mean that we should not continue to strive to make burden sharing more effective. And it certainly does not imply that my report is inconsistent with the government’s position.
It would also require superior imaginative capabilities to interpret this report as justifying Dr Muscat’s politically foolish position back in 2009.
In 2004, when we had just joined the EU, nobody was even aware that we were struggling with migration. All policymakers would mention were Italy and Spain. But, now, things have changed. And this has only been possible because the government continues to effectively and responsibly bring our concerns to the fore.
We have used the forums at our disposal to raise awareness on our concerns and, while we continue to expect a great deal more from Europe, progress has been made.
Let us also dispel this myth that the EU is solely responsible for our migration woes. If we were not an EU member state migration flows would be the same and migrants would anyway be treated in a manner dignified of a civilised country. The only difference would be that member states would owe us much less in terms of relocation and we could also forget all about EU funding.
Where on earth has Labour been on migration? How many parliamentary questions have labour MEPs tabled on migration compared to the Nationalist Party’s 35? Unsurprisingly, not a single one. And when it comes to speeches in plenary, Nationalist MEPs, who amount to half the number of Labour MEPs, have delivered double the number of speeches on the issue.
But let’s get past the statistics. What about when it comes to crunch time? In May 2009, when the European Parliament voted to amend the Dublin Regulation, which makes the country of entry responsible for migrants, astoundingly the three Labour MEPs at the time voted in three different ways: one against, one in favour and one not all, thereby nullifying their contribution to the vote. Incredible! A mistake apparently…
And, in 2010, when Simon Busuttil spearheaded a resolution to reject new Frontex rules that were not in Malta’s interest? Well, not only did they not manage to convince a single other socialist MEP but, with the vote being lost by only 33 votes, we did not even get our three Labour votes worth as one of them did not turn up for plenary.
It is true that my report changes little in the short term. But it is a step in the right direction and the unanimous support it received marks a shift in how the issue is perceived. These small steps could make all the difference in the long term. We have worked hard for these small victories. We are always there when it counts and we make it a habit of hitting the right button.
Mr Casa is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.