The European Commission, under its new Commissioner for Justice, Cecilia Malmstrom, has just launched a set of proposals aimed at strengthening the role of its border agency, Frontex.

Frontex, which is the European agency for "the management of operational cooperation at the external borders of the member states of the European Union", performs a number of different roles loosely connected to border control. Its operational maritime role in the central Mediterranean is the most important from Malta's perspective.

There are two main improvements among the new proposals. One is the possibility of Frontex being able to buy or lease its own patrol equipment, such as ships or aircraft, to be used in anti-immigration patrols. The other is Frontex's (or the Commissioner for Justice's) ability to oblige EU member states that have committed themselves to taking part in a Frontex operation to actually do so. Dealing with the second of the proposals, Ms Malmstrom was quick to admit that it would be only "semi-compulsory" for member states to provide equipment or manpower, as the states in question would not be obliged to participate in Frontex operations against their will "but only to keep their word to do so. What we are saying now is that if member states make a pledge they will have to keep it". Not much of a step forward there, then, and barely worth announcing.

The more interesting, and potentially more important, proposal is that dealing with the ability of Frontex to purchase or lease its own patrol equipment for operations, instead of being dependent, as it is now, on states stepping forward to do so. Regrettably, this proposal is not supported by any increase in Frontex's budget. Although with a budget of €80 million, Frontex is not exactly strapped for cash, it would probably leave very little room to find funds for leasing or purchasing patrol equipment to bolster its operations. By their nature, these are expensive options and purchasing equipment is almost certain, in practice, to be ruled out on cost and manning grounds.

Thus, in the circumstances, the Justice Commissioner's proposals are, sadly, to be merely regarded as, at best, window-dressing.

The heart of the problem remains that member states are still not obliged to share the illegal immigration burden of those states worst affected. Although there is a voluntary resettlement scheme in place, this is patchy and unreliable. From Malta's perspective, while every little bit of support helps, the existing arrangement fails to provide the security of knowing that there is a well-ordered process in place for sharing the burden fairly among all the EU member states. Frontex's operations in the central Mediterranean are still hampered by the agency's inability to operate in coordination with Libya's maritime forces. Not even leasing more equipment is likely to change that. The possible ill-effects of the unfolding visa row between Libya and Switzerland must not be forgotten either.

Frontex still has a useful role to play in helping Malta to return those asylum-seekers whose cases have been rejected. It does this by enabling talks to proceed with diplomatic representatives of third countries and assisting in the return of failed asylum-seekers to their country of origin. This is an important contribution to Malta's immigration authorities.

While Frontex has signally failed to meet the expectations placed in it by Malta when it was first set up, it still has a role to play as a focal point for cooperation on EU external border controls.