Opposition Home Affairs spokesman Gavin Gulia yesterday criticised the government for having failed to convince the EU that it was not fair to allocate funding on illegal migration on the basis of the number of migrants.
The government was ending up spending more on migration than it received from the EU, even though migration was supposed to be seen as a common EU problem. And this limited financial funding was the only assistance which Malta was receiving from the EU to ease the migrants problem. EU member states had only taken a few tens of migrants from Malta. In contrast, the US was taking much more than all the EU countries put together.
The government, he said, was also failing to stem the influx of migrants and Frontex patrol had been inconsistent. Malta had not tapped into the EU emergency migrants fund. Financial assistance was important, but Malta also needed to convince the EU that a common problem demanded a common solution, Dr Gulia said.
Replying, Home Affairs Minister Tonio Borg said that up to September the total number of migrant landings was the same as for the same period last year. The government was being firm but fair on this issue, respecting national interests, international law and individual rights. One could not, however, expect Malta to take migrants rescued in the waters of other countries.
It was Malta which had proposed in the EU that migrants rescued in international waters should be distributed among all EU member countries in the spirit of burden sharing.
And it was on Malta's insistence that Frontex patrols were launched in the Central Mediterranean last year and extended this year. True, the patrols could be improved, but they had served a useful purpose and sent a signal that the EU was not closing an eye to human trafficking in this region.
EU funding was such that the EU did not meet all the costs incurred by a member state, even in the case of migration. Malta had so far received €2 million in EU funds for migration and another €3 million were committed. Had Malta not joined the EU, none of these funds would have come this way.
The EU had also provided special funds which were set up precisely after Malta complained about the funding formula. Malta had benefited to cover costs incurred by the AFM, legal costs paid by NGOS and the housing of migrants.
Dr Borg praised the US for having agreed to resettle 200 refugees from Malta every year, with the first group of 50 set to leave shortly.
The government, he said, stood by its detention policy - even Australia had one despite its huge side. This policy was now more humane than ever before. The detention period reaching a maximum of 18 months and vulnerable groups housed elsewhere.