The recent debate on immigration has provided the public with a bewildering variety of opinions, most of which are contradictory.

While it is a fact that Malta’s security forces are outnumbered by more than one-and-a-half times by the total number of immigrants, there are those who are suggesting the opening of even more centres, thus stretching our security forces to breaking-point.

The government side accepts that we have an “invasion”, that the situation is a “critical” one, that illegal immigration is the greatest problem at the moment. On the other hand, the government advisor on immigration claims that the situation is manageable, and that the sounding of alarm bells constitutes populist policies.

Jacques Barrot himself used the word “emergency” and before he left Malta, warned one and all that the migratory flows are bound to increase. This seems to agree with the Calleya/Lutterbeck analysis of November 2008 that forecasts the possibility of 8,000 immigrants living in the community by 2012.

We read that there is a proposal in the EU Parliament to make burden-sharing mandatory, but the Justice and Home Affairs Minister has stated that he does not agree with that policy since, once Malta had taken in the agreed number, he could not refuse to help others coming in should they be in distress – an argument that, taken on its own, is irrefutable.

After learning that incoming immigrants are not tested, that a considerable number of them have HIV and hepatitis, we are told by the health authorities that you cannot screen people against their consent. An incredible statement that was promptly answered by an eminent medical gentleman who told the Health Ministry that: “once illegal immigrants and asylum seekers are seeking some form of refuge on our shores, these rights can be waived, at least for a while, because you have a wider public to protect.” Moreover, “we have a moral duty to keep people in quarantine until they are cleared” and that means at least a year in detention.

Jacques Barrot departed saying he would do his best to help Malta but little will be actually in place for this summer or even possibly the next; unless that is, the recently announced memorandum of understanding with Libya will actually deliver more than the much trumpeted Frontex and burden-sharing agreements did. Twice bitten....

So what will happen when the boats start coming in again? Well, in The Independent (UK), we read that France and the UK are planning how to repatriate the thousands of illegal immigrants in the Sangatte camp facing the English Channel (or La Manche, not to offend the French). While the battle lines are already being drawn, British Immigration minister Mr Woolas said that London and Paris wanted to “send a message” to immigrants and their smugglers. “We want to increase the profile of the deportations because we have to get the message back to Afghanistan and Iraq that Britain is not the Promised Land,” he said.

My belief has always been that Malta too must keep on sending messages that this island is neither a Promised Land nor a stepping stone towards a Promised Land. That was the purpose of Azzjoni Nazzjonali’s 10-point plan. The problem is that while we have been bombarded with endless statements, editorials, commentaries etc, about what Malta cannot do, you hear precious little about what it can do beyond what it is already doing; and here many seem to agree that the administration ought to apply more teeth in its attempts to find a solution.

What in reality Malta needs to do is to grasp the nettle. France and UK may be just about ready to do that.

Dr Josie Muscat is Leader Azzjoni Nazzjonali and a candidate for the European Parliament election