In an interview in Strasbourg, PN MEP ROBERTA METSOLA, speaking to Kevin Schembri Orland, gave her reaction to her recent appointment to the Shadow Cabinet, and her views and concerns about the Libyan situation, immigration and the fact that recent terror attacks in EU states have ignited anti-Islamic sentiment. Dr Metsola was recently appointed PN Shadow Minister for EU and Foreign Affairs, making her one of two MEPs - the other being Therese Comodini Cachia - to ever hold the position of a Shadow Cabinet member as well as an MEP simultaneously.

Did Simon Busuttil hold discussions with you prior to you being selected as Shadow Minister for EU and Foreign Affairs?

Yes, Dr Busuttil held meetings with every member of the PN Parliamentary group and we discussed what role he wanted to assign to us individually. I accepted with honour and humility and thanked Dr Busuttil for assigning to me this important role.

Since being appointed Shadow Minister, have you had any communication with Foreign Affairs Minister George Vella? If yes, what was discussed?

My counterparts are Foreign Affairs Minister George Vella, Deputy Prime Minister Louis Grech and Parliamentary Secretary for EU Affairs Ian Borg. I made contact with all three to discuss my role as Shadow Minister, to see how we can be a constructive Opposition in this regard and gave my opinions on particular issues. With regard to Minister George Vella, we have already taken a position on Libya, welcoming the discussions in Geneva between different Libyan factions. My appeal to the Minister was to keep the Maltese public informed of developments and the position the government is taking on this situation, which is of great importance to the Maltese people.

This is the first time MEPs have been made members of the Shadow Cabinet. What can you tell us about this and how do you work as both an MEP and a Shadow Minister?

The message sent by the PN was that the party is capable of internal change so that its policies can improve. The fact that I, as an MEP, was given a role in the Shadow Cabinet shows that a link exists between what happens in the European Parliament and what happens in the Maltese Parliament. When I was elected as an MEP, alongside MPs in Malta, I began introducing the PN's European policies to Malta, because what happens here in the EU will be reflected in European legislation discussed in the Maltese Parliament. I will continue doing what I did before and what I am doing now, while strengthening my position on EU and foreign affairs in Malta.

Would you consider running for the Maltese Parliament in the future?

My position has always been to serve when asked by the PN. I will do what the PN Leader needs me to do. That is my position.

Minister George Vella had said that he is not communicating with the Tripoli Chargé d'Affaires based in Attard. If you were in the Minister's position, would you communicate with him and, if so, why?

Recognition of the Tobruk government was the position taken by the international community. As part of the international community, the Maltese government must adhere to that position. Had I been Foreign Affairs Minister, I would have kept the same position and recognised the Tobruk government. Since that decision was taken, major events have unfolded and all Libyan parties have been invited for discussions in Geneva in an attempt to create a government of unity. Naturally, the situation in Libya is complicated. Day by day we see that there are still parties on the Tripoli side who have shown that they have no interest in trying to negotiate in order to try to find a compromise, and naturally we must monitor these developments.

My message is that, as seen over the years, Malta has taken a principle role whenever Libya has been involved and I hope this government will continue to work in the same way. As such, the Minister must recognise those who are recognised by the international community as well as those who are on the ground. We must send a message to the Libyans - a message showing that our interest is to protect them and not let their country collapse into total chaos. This is our priority and as a government this should always be at the forefront of Malta's priorities.

An MEP in the European Parliament recently claimed that extremist camps in Libya are not restricted to a small part of the country, but rather are scattered throughout the country, including along the coastal region. Do you believe Malta has to be more careful?

Reports coming out of Libya, as well as those in Europe, show how careful we need to be when analysing terrorist movements. The discussion taking place in the EU and the national parliaments of all democratic countries is how can we, as part of the international community, feel secure within our own countries and those on our borders? How can we ensure that there will not be any movements that can result in acts of terror?" I believe we have a responsibility to be careful and build policies that can act as a deterrent. The EU is often criticised for waiting for an attack to happen before taking action. There were those who said that we waited until the Charlie Hebdo attack for the solidarity movement to occur in Paris. What can we do to ensure that such an attack does not happen again?

At the same time, another argument can be made: 'How can we safeguard freedom of expression for politicians, journalists and the general public?' The balance we must keep in mind when making recommendations or adopting resolutions must always be part and parcel of everything we do. If we do not do this, we would lose sight of the threats that exist on our doorstep, including within Libya, as well as the rights of all those who want to express themselves.

Given that terrorist attacks are taking place in Europe and the fact that countries like Iraq are in total disarray because of the presence of IS, do you think it is possible that terrorist groups can use illegal immigration for terrorist acts? What do you think of this situation?

Our fear is that there are networks of human traffickers whose aim is not only to make money out of refugees who are escaping from terrible situations and persecution, but who also want to try to provide a movement mechanism for terrorists. This is something that is a source of great concern to us and every government should be worried.

The EU must have stronger mechanisms in place than it has now, and experts on the ground to monitor terrorist movements. The EU's role to give protection to those who are eligible must not be abused by human traffickers. Discussions in Parliament about 'ghost ships' - a new means of transport used by human traffickers to move migrants seeking protection - are underway. In the EU, we cannot continue talking about the situation after these things have already begun to happen and in fact, in the LIBE [Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs] committee, of which I am a part and which tackles the immigration situation, we must see what we can do to ensure that vulnerable people are not abused and that people with criminal intentions must not be allowed into Europe.

Ghost ships are a new phenomena, but the link between human trafficking and immigration has been there for quite a long time. The EU seems to have just opened its eyes to the issue of human trafficking in the wake of immigration. Why has it taken the EU so long to wake up? Migrants have been packed onto rafts and set in the direction of European Mediterranean countries for years - it's nothing new.

This is a question that I ask as well. Why has the EU taken this long to really discuss and try and tackle the networks trafficking migrants within the EU, resulting in many deaths? The idea of 'ghost ships' is innovative as instead of small boats departing from Libya and being left in the middle of the sea in the hope that they will be rescued, now there are large decommissioned ships being used to illegally traffic migrants. Our first priority is to stop further tragedies in the Mediterranean. The EU has finally begun to discuss the strengthening of its presence in the Middle East and North Africa. EU representation in these areas is still small and we need to give them the facility to distribute asylum documentation directly, thereby eliminating the risk of death while crossing the Mediterranean. The Mediterranean cannot remain a cemetery.

Minister George Vella has expressed concern regarding people going to the Libyan embassy in Attard, housing the Tripoli Chargé d'Affaires, as he does not know what they are doing over there. Do you share his worry?

My worry is the lack of transparency. We would like to know who is representing whom in Malta. When I was appointed Shadow Minister, I received many calls to see what is happening on diplomatic territory, that is land over which the Maltese government has no jurisdiction. What we would like to know, even from the Foreign Affairs Ministry, is where are the visas being issued, to whom are they being issued and what controls exists.

Our message as the Opposition is that we need more transparency and need more answers.

How much money does the EU provide to Malta to deal with the immigration situation and how much money does Malta spend on immigration?

A difference must be made between funds given to Malta during the first financial programme and those that will be given under the new financial programme that began in 2014.

The first programme for the first seven years saw €130 million given to Malta to build and develop open centres, reception centres, etc. A lot of work still needs to be done in this area. Money was also made available for the Commission for Refugees to establish from where the migrants are coming and to the armed forces for life-saving rescue operations. All these funds are budgeted and published. What we do not know, for example, is how much the asylum office spends and how much of its expenditure is directed towards the migrant situation in Malta. This requires a detailed report on the costings of the office. Under the previous financial programme, a large amount of money at European level was spent to open the first asylum office here in Malta, an agency that operates within this sector.

For the coming seven years, we have what we call the Asylum and Migration Fund. Currently, we are waiting for the Maltese government to tell us how much of these funds will be used by the government for immigration and how it will be used. One thing for which we are still waiting is that, under the previous government, we had pushed for a single migration policy called "the migration policy review". A task force was established to oversee the funds given to Malta to handle immigration. Unfortunately, this government did not maintain this task force and we are still waiting for the report to be  updated and published for the stakeholders and Opposition representatives to review.

Financial help is not the only argument, as it is easy to say the EU helped by giving Malta millions in this field. The argument rests on policies. What will we be doing in the coming five years on a European level and a local level, as well as within the Council of Ministers? What will they do to ensure solidarity between Malta and other Mediterranean countries?

 

Following the brutal attack on French magazine Charlie Hebdo, as well as other terrorist attacks over the years, do you believe there will be further anti-Islamic sentiment throughout the EU?

When considering terrorist attacks like this I do not identify the terrorists by their religious beliefs. My fear, as well as the fear of the PN and the EPP, is that by attributing such acts to a particular religion, we would be spreading intolerance towards that religion.

Such sentiments are spread by certain populist political parties within the EU in order to propagate fear. This means that we need to do much more to focus on extremists. In reality, the terrorists committing these acts are extremists. EU nationals, for example, have become radicalised by extremist factions of a certain religion and have travelled to Iraq with the aim of attacking Christianity and the Western world.

It is our responsibility to focus on extremism and not on a religion that can be practiced in a democratic society.

Given that a large portion of terrorist attacks over the years since 9/11 have been committed by persons claiming to be of the Islamic faith, can you blame people for becoming angry and not being able to differentiate between Islam and terrorism?

I do not blame people for seeking direction from their leaders. I blame politicians who take advantage of the lack of information available, and also the fact that governments have not yet done enough to ensure that their citizens live in liberty and peace. Weak security policies have led to this failure and there are politicians who seek to spread fear and racism. It is the fault of certain political systems that do not enable cooperation at a political level, where politicians can come together and recognise that disseminating fear and racism can only incite more attacks. If you send out a message that it is all right to have a free-for-all and attack a journalist for his position, rather than respect the right to express one's opinion, then you will have a broken society. This is the moment when we need to fix our broken society.

One particular newspaper reported that the terrorist attacks last week were an attempt to bring France to its knees, yet instead they united Europe. This is a message we, as politicians, need to send to our citizens - that we are here to protect them but, at the same time, we need to get our house in order. We must ensure that, through our policies and leadership, terrorists and terrorist networks - and here international cooperation is extremely important - will be dismantled once and for all by all necessary means.