"For those member states faced with specific and disproportionate pressures on their national asylum systems, due in particular to their geographical or demographic situation, solidarity shall also aim to promote, on a voluntary and coordinated basis, better re-allocation of beneficiaries of international protection from such member states to others, while ensuring that asylum systems are not abused.

"In accordance with those principles, the Commission, in consultation with the UNHCR where appropriate, will facilitate such voluntary and coordinated re-allocation. Specific funding under existing EU financial instruments should be provided for this re-allocation, in accordance with budgetary procedures."

After weeks of negotiation in the face of stiff opposition, this is the clause on burden sharing which Malta has been able to entrench in the EU Pact on Immigration. Except for one word in the text, the introduction of burden sharing into a pact that started off without any reference at all to such a concept would be regarded as a triumph for Maltese diplomacy. That one word is "voluntary".

When it came to it, most EU countries balked at anything other than a "voluntary" arrangement - not a binding pact making it compulsory for all nations to share the minute burden Malta would present them with but an arrangement not dissimilar to what has already been offered by some countries, such as The Netherlands. Ever since Malta joined the EU, successive European meetings have talked seemingly magnanimously of recognising Malta's unique plight in bearing an exorbitant influx of illegal immigrants. "Solidarity"', "responsibility-sharing" and "burden-sharing" have been the buzzwords. Yet, the rhetoric has consistently fallen short of action to remedy the island's situation in a meaningful way.

The Prime Minister has two options. He can refuse to sign the pact unless the word "voluntary" is removed from the text or he can sign it on the basis that half a loaf is better than none.

The Times has consistently urged the government to refuse to be party to a pact which did not include some reference to equitable burden sharing. Is the current draft agreement adequate? Not really.

Yet, if Malta were to insist on the removal of "voluntary" from the text under threat of not signing the pact there would be no deal. Many EU countries might not be too concerned about this.

There is no over-riding pressure for the integration of existing immigration policies or a common asylum policy, desirable though these might be in principle.

Refusal to sign is not, therefore, a realistic option. The Prime Minister should thus be prepared to sign the pact. But, if he is not to continue to stand accused of surrendering, he must also make it clear that he does so subject to two provisos.

First, he must insist that the mechanism for a voluntary system be put in place by the Commission expeditiously with the key criteria of simplicity, cooperation and speed of execution.

Secondly, he must return to the charge on the Dublin II Convention by pressing for its review and revision before the start of the next sailing season in April 2009. Only in this way can the pact - despite its current limitations - be made to serve Malta's long-term interests.

The Maltese people have no problem extending solidarity with people in need. If only all the other EU member states could do so too!