In the corridors of Brussels, aside from Brexit, one item is dominating the agenda of every meeting, namely migration.
Controlled immigration brings undoubted benefits to Malta and has historically benefited our economy and society. It is important to recognise the immense contribution that those coming from overseas have made to our country and economy.
Historically, Malta has been outward-looking and receptive to trade, ideas and talents of others – our future must be too.
To promote community cohesion and integration, everyone recognises the need for a fair immigration policy that commands public confidence. This is important to avoid spectacles of discrimination that inevitably arise in such situations.
Speaking with people across Malta – and especially from my district, the inner harbour – I know that there are real, and oftentimes legitimate, concerns on immigration and how it can affect communities, housing and jobs. Since the first district is arguably one of those most struck by issues related to ghettoisation, I have seen the results of these concerns materialise first-hand.
Migrants coming to Malta to work should be able to support themselves, to contribute to and to benefit the economy. We need more skills and more workers in our economy and our immigration system must ensure that condition is met.
But on illegal immigration, the EU must assist in securing our borders. We have been clear that we need to do more. We need increased controls on migration and to do more to manage its impact on communities. This should be done by addressing the root causes of migration first and working closely with our North African neighbours to find a solution for the well-being of all.
People expect honesty and competence from politicians on immigration. Yet recently, we have gotten little from the PN save for tough rhetoric completely disconnected from reality – not to mention manifestations of downright xenophobia. We should be applauding success stories of integration, not attacking them, while taking a more critical approach to problematic side-effects. The Opposition often tackles this the other way round.
Criminality often crops up when speaking about migration. Criminality is not a result of migration but rather a symptom of ghettoisation. The government has been proactive in addressing citizens’ concerns in this area, providing heightened surveillance and police patrols where most needed. We are now looking at modern technology to address crime with minimal negative effects and public inconvenience.
Positive stories of migrants who build successful lives for themselves are not something to be criticised
Pervasive criminality becomes a consistent characteristic of any community that lacks direction. Uplifting and empowering communities through positive measures, as this government has consistently striven to do, provides hope.
Sure, there will always be ‘bad apples’ but they will be identified as such. Positive stories of migrants who, say, open food establishments and build successful lives for themselves and our economy are not something to be criticised – so long as the laws are respected. That said, I am determined to listen to the wider public and have an honest conversation on this issue. Only by debating can we ensure the right balance of controlled, strong, fair and effective measures and prevent the politics of hate employed by those who wish to cause division and fear.
Last month I was in Copenhagen and observed the way the Danish government is doing things. Denmark’s steps to interpolate the non-western immigrants living in ‘ghettos’ into mainstream Danish society can prevent the segregation from taking on racial undertones.
The government is aiming to instil ‘Danish values’ in the ‘ghetto children’. It has sparked controversy. Many see it as an attempt to stamp out influence of outside languages and cultural traditions.
But for those who wholeheartedly support their government’s intricate plans to successfully eradicate ‘ghettos’ by 2030, this is merely the State’s attempt at strengthening the cultural integrity of the Danish by uprooting any scope for corruption from within. The truth is that steps taken by the Danish government are received with applause and condemnation in equal measure. But the government is to a large extent acting on public concerns and would argue it is fulfilling its responsibility to its own citizens.
It is taking measures to incorporate unemployed immigrants into the working population. The local municipalities have been induced to assimilate the non-working ghetto population into the employed sector of society, with a financial incentive of up to €8,000 per worker for the successful municipalities.
There is also an attempt to make the ghettos ‘economically less attractive’ to live in, by exempting the ‘ghetto’ population from a lot of the benefit schemes offered by the State. Doubling criminal punishments in certain ghetto areas is essentially serving the same purpose.
There are a lot of flaws within the Danish model but they have succeeded in setting an example for the rest of the EU nations to follow. It is possible to control migration and remain in the EU. Unlike Britain, Denmark is trying to reform its own immigration policies from within the EU – which in itself is an act of boldness.
Aaron Farrugia is the Parliamentary Secretary for EU Funds and Social Dialogue.
This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece