The PN strategy for the next general election is to try to depict the Labour Party, in particular its leader Joseph Muscat, as incapable of governing and keeping good relations with the European Union (see Opportunity Cost Of Trusting Labour, by Simon Busuttil, April 20). This politics of discreditation tries to instil the feeling in the electorate that it is better to trust in a PN government no matter how incompetent it may be.

The difference between the two political parties and their leaders is crystal clear in relation to the immigration problem, which is of fundamental importance to our country. The PN is satisfied that many member states have recognised and expressed gratitude to Malta for its role and effective contribution in the Libyan crisis. Needless to say, Malta’s role is praiseworthy. However, when Malta itself needed help, only a few member states agreed to relocate immigrants on a voluntary basis. The Minister of Justice and Home Affairs was content that, following the last European Council meeting, some member states offered help and almost half of them agreed with our position. In reality this means nothing because the Council requires a “qualified majority” to adopt a decision.

More than two years ago, when there was an agreement within the Council on the matter of immigration, Dr Muscat stated clearly that a system of solidarity that was not based on an automatic mechanism would not work when a country was faced with severe flows of immigration. In fact, this is precisely what happened. The government, on the other hand, had come out saying it was the best agreement possible under the circumstances and that it was better than nothing.

There is nothing wrong with saying that our national interest should be safeguarded. EU history illustrates many instances of member states and their leaders negotiating intensely to protect their country’s interests. The history of the relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union is full of these instances.

While the negotiating strength of our country may not be that of Germany and France, it does not mean that Malta has to take decisions lying down in areas that are fundamentally important to it, only to come out later saying it was better than nothing.

Italy, like Malta, has also suffered from the EU’s inaction vis-à-vis the immigration problem. It wasn’t just Minister Roberto Maroni, who hails from the Lega Nord, who declared his utter disappointment with how the EU dealt with Italy on the matter. Both Foreign Affairs Minister Franco Frattini and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi also expressed disgruntlement with EU institutions that had once again proved ineffective when asked to react speedily and show solidarity with member states in need.

I expect the Maltese government to engage in diplomatic efforts with Italy to ease the tension that has arisen between the two countries, which have deep historical, cultural and commercial ties.

Our country cannot afford to distance itself from Italy because we stand to lose as a result. Surely the statement made by Minister of Justice and Home Affairs Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici on April 27, when he severely criticised Italy’s policy of issuing temporary visas to immigrants, did not help. Giving such temporary visas is envisaged in both EU law and Italian domestic law. Furthermore, one cannot look at the policy employed by the Italian government without mentioning the agreement between Italy and Tunisia, which states that any future immigrants arriving illegally in Italy from Tunisia will be repatriated.

This is why I believe Dr Mifsud Bonnici’s criticism was irresponsible. Our countries have a common interest in tackling the issue of migration and the minister’s words do not help in this regard. The government, therefore, needs to show it is doing something concrete and not waste time attacking the Leader of the Opposition.

For one, it should ensure it conveys the message that Italy and Malta will work together on the common problem of immigration. Secondly, it should not attack but work with the Leader of the Opposition because internal differences like these undermine Malta’s position when dealing with other countries and with EU institutions. It is to be noted that the online La Repubblica referred to this divergence and called into question Malta’s ability to have a strong and unified voice on immigration.

Thirdly, the government should work without let-up to make sure the automatic mechanism of solidarity is put into force.

A common internal policy hammered out between the government and the opposition will make these aims attainable.