A fortnight ago, I wrote in this column:

“To me it is obvious that the EP delegation will be critical of detention centres and detention policy. But if it had to return to Brussels with doing just that it would be making a great disservice to the cause of immigration and asylum. During its visit the EP delegation would do well to monitor to what extent, if at all, the European Union has assisted Malta financially and materially in dealing with unsustainable and uncontrolled immigration flows during the last couple of years. It would do well to determine whether the European Commission is today in a position to be able to provide immediate and sufficient relief to the Maltese government in the event that the Island faces a sudden surge of immigration. So far there is no pan-European mechanism in place.” (“Make the best out of this visit”, TMID, 20 March).

I wrote out of purpose. I have grown wary of the idleness and indifference of the international community in the face of Malta’s plight in dealing on its own with the unsustainable influxes of irregular immigrants to the islands during the last couple of years. Thousands of irregular immigrants have reached our shores since 2000, testing our geographical, human and technical resources to their limits. The Armed Forces and the Police had to transform themselves overnight into social workers and welfare officers, performing roles they are clearly not familiar with.

On detention policy, government and opposition, uncharacteristically convergent, took the brunt of criticism from both local NGOs as well as from international human rights organisations on conditions at closed centres which, quite naturally, deteriorate at the peak of the immigration season as overcrowding at these centres takes its toll. To make matters worse, the European Union is, at the same time, issuing directives making shorter detention periods mandatory and calling for more humane reception conditions with no idea in mind of what effect these policies will inevitably have on small receiving countries, like Malta, unprepared to deal with massive uncontrolled migratory flows. All this without at least a spiritual commitment to help Malta financially.

Rightly so, the European Union is geared towards enhancing individual rights and freedoms. It is to its great merit that its laws, regulations, directives and policies have always been inspired by its great respect for human rights as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. It has through the years served as a model to other systems of law, not least to our courts (even when Malta was still undecided about accession) which have looked into judgments of the European Court for interpretation and elucidation of the fundamental rights and freedoms in our Constitution.

Its unstinting quest to raise standards of rights and freedoms not only within itself but also around the globe is beyond doubt. On immigration it has provided a safety net for asylum seekers and people deserving political protection by imposing minimum reception standards on receiving states. It has still, however, to come out with a proper migration and integration policy. And until it does exactly that its reception laws continue to discriminate between member states on the extent of the burden to be carried by each one of them in providing for the welfare of asylum seekers, refugees and people granted humanitarian protection.

While Europe should be lauded for its human rights record, on the other hand, its performance in sensitising all member states towards sharing the burden is to say the least dismal. When I wrote that the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee must do more than just criticise detention policy and conditions at closed centres, I was appealing for a change in policy on the way the burden is shared among member states.

It is exactly what Dr George Vella as well as Dr John Attard Montalto, Louis Grech, Joseph Muscat and myself told Martine Roure from the Socialist Group before she returned to Brussels. She was impressed by what she saw in Malta. But she was also dismayed by the EU’s lethargy in helping frontier states cope with the problem.

She was very clear. “Europe must help Malta not only by throwing money at it but by taking most of its refugees.” Thank God for that.

Today the European Parliament will be debating Malta’s plight. This will be possible following a request by the European Socialist Group after consulting the MLP. It will also be possible because the other major party in the EP, the EPP, to which the Nationalist Party is affiliated, was making identical efforts in this direction. To further the bi-partisan approach in immigration, I feel in duty bound to thank all our five MEPs for their tireless work that will culminate in today’s Euro Parliamentary session. And it would be a shame if I do not refer to the mature and apolitical approach adopted by the Malta Labour Party and the Nationalist Party on the problem of immigration in Malta. I am proud to form part of this strategy.

Good luck Malta.

Dr Gulia is opposition main spokesman on Home Affairs and the Armed Forces.