Members of Parliament last night gave no quarter to sentiments of xenophobia and racism related to the irregular migration phenomenon while Malta continues to face increased strains in the area, as the House of Representatives continued to debate proposed amendments to the Refugees Bill.
There was also a consensus that Malta must live up to its international legal obligations by assisting asylum seekers to the best of the country’s abilities, but also that so-called “economic migrants” should not be tolerated.
MPs speaking last night also agreed the phenomenon had no end in sight and that it was practically impossible to forecast future irregular migratory movements.
The amendments are aimed at transposing two European Union Directives into Maltese law – the Qualifications Directive and the Asylum Procedures Directive, which provide minimum standards applicable to third-country nationals and persons with international humanitarian protection status.
Opening the debate, Education, Culture, Youth, and Sport Minister Dolores Cristina remarked how the last two sittings on the topic had sparked wide discussion, while outside Parliament, the debate on immigration continues.
Among the amendments’ most important aspects, Ms Cristina said, was the definition of those falling under its remit – in that those who truly warranted subsidiary protection status should be given such protection, but that Malta’s repatriation process needed to be improved for those who did not warrant such status.
There was an erroneous tendency in Malta to lump all immigrants into the same category with labels such as “immigranti” or “klandestini” – without making any distinction between individuals with, for example, different forms of humanitarian protection status or rejected asylum seekers.
Acknowledging the situation was delicate and difficult, Ms Cristina stressed Malta had international obligations and moral values to fulfil and, separately, that the country would not tolerate any form of racism, xenophobia or incitement toward either sentiment.
The migration phenomenon, she said, presented a considerable challenge for Malta – remarking how in 2004, Malta’s open centres under her remit at the time had housed some 200 irregular migrants while today, the number stood closer to 2,000.
Ms Cristina also hit out at “unjust” international criticism over how Malta is grappling with the problem, while also dispelling a notion among segments of the population that irregular migrants were living in comfort and were being pampered at the taxpayers’ expense.
Recent criticisms from Amnesty International, she said, were incorrect and completely unjustified.
Taking the floor next, Opposition MP George Vella described the phenomenon as a “serious, worrying” issue and said that it was clear from the last two sittings on the proposed Bill that the issue was not of a partisan nature, but rather of the national interest.
The issue was also a multi-faceted one reflecting a real human tragedy that needed to be weighed with both the heart and the head.
The issue, he said, involved real people – not blocks of concrete or some other quantity to be measured in units – with rights like anyone else.
Dr Vella highlighted the discrepancy between an underdeveloped, politically-unstable sub-Saharan Africa and the social and economic success that is the European Union.
Having two such extreme poles, Dr Vella said, created a natural pull for both Africans fleeing persecution and intolerance as well as economic migrants merely seeking better life circumstances.
A distinction between the two groups, he said, was essential.
In protecting those with legitimate reasons for seeking new pastures, Malta had both legal and moral obligations to provide the best assistance possible.
On the other hand, asylum seekers also have rights that need to be upheld.
But, he added, Malta can only give from what it has available, and the country’s resources have limits – far more limited than an island such as Lampedusa, which had the Italian mainland to rely upon for resources and resettlements.
Dr Vella said he had personally always been against the principle of detention, with Malta’s automatic detention period running as long as 18 months, but questioned the repercussions on national security if undocumented and unidentified irregular migrants were allowed to roam free upon arrival in Malta.
The exploitation on the labour market of such individuals, he said, was another issue needing to be tackled, while the EU, Malta included, also needed to find ways of cooperating better with Libya on the issue.
Also addressing yesterday evening’s session were PN MP Charlot Bonnici, PN MP Jean Pierre Farrugia, and PN MP Joe Falzon. The debate on amendments to the Refugees Bill continues this evening.