Conclusions of survey on illegal immigrants, refugees and racism in Malta

The second in a series of studies by Professor Mario Vassallo commissioned by Allied Newspapers Ltd, publishers of The Sunday Times and The Times, looked at the problem of illegal immigrants, refugees and racism in Malta.

The 300 participants in this study were first asked whether they thought the Maltese government was giving due importance to the plight of illegal immigrants in Malta. They were also asked whether Malta should accept or send back the huge numbers of illegal immigrants that have recently entered Malta by sea.

Survey participants were also asked whether Malta should grant these illegal immigrants refugee status. In view of the heavy financial burden incurred by the government to maintain the hundreds of illegal immigrants who have landed here, the participants were also asked whether the Catholic Church in Malta should also shoulder the burden and if so, in what way could it help alleviate the problem.

This study also sought to discover the latent fears of xenophobia that the Maltese harbour with respect to foreigners living here. In this regard, participants were asked whether caution should be applied when immigrants from particular countries arrive here.

This study also attempted to discover whether deep down, the Maltese are somewhat racist since participants were asked to name the nationalities that the Maltese disliked and were disdainful of to the extent that they did not want them here.

This study has shown that as many as 61.7% of the Maltese think that enough importance is being given to the problem of illegal refugees, while 38% of the participants do not believe this to be the case. Females (66.4%) register a higher percentage than males (56.8%) in this regard. The participants in the two oldest age groups (51-65: 71%; 65+: 70.5%) registered the highest percentages of those who think that "enough importance is being given to the problem of illegal immigrants".

All participants were in turn asked whether Malta should accept that persons who end up in Malta after a sea journey were breaking the law. The overwhelming majority (69%) think that Malta should consider such persons to be breaking the law. Only 27.3% disagree, while the remaining 3.7% were not confident enough to give an answer either way.

The 27.3% of participants who had stated that such immigrants should not be considered as breaking the law were in turn asked to elaborate why they had come to that conclusion. The main reasons they gave were: "we should commiserate with them' (42.7%); "they are human beings" (31.7%); "they are fighting for survival" (1.2%); and "they have nowhere to go" (1.2%).

Other reasons given verge on the political, namely that "Malta must be like other European countries" (1.2%) and thus needs to honour its obligations, notwithstanding its small size and limited resources. The reasons given by the participants reveal that the Maltese deeply empathise with the plight of these illegal immigrants and do not condemn them for their actions.

Similarly, those participants (69% of the whole sample) who had stated that persons who end up in Malta should be considered as breaking the law, were asked to give reasons for their answer. As many as 36.2% simply stated that objectively these persons act illegally when they disembark through a back door.

Other reasons were also given. Among other things, the Maltese appear to be afraid that "Malta could become more attractive for illegal migration" (5.3%) and that "illegal migrants would take work from Maltese nationals" (1.4%). Fears that immigrants could carry diseases, and they might one day actually take over Malta were also aired by some.

As many as 57.3% of the Maltese said that they knew the difference between an illegal immigrant and a refugee but this knowledge is not even among the various components of the Maltese population. The highest incidence of those who knew the difference is to be found among those aged 36-50 (69%) and among those in the AB socio-economic group (75.8%).

According to 51.7% of the respondents who knew the difference between these two terms, persons who end up on our shores should be considered "illegal migrants", while for 31.4% of the participants, such persons should be considered "refugees". As many as 16.9% could not decide what status should be conferred to these visitors to the island.

A majority of 61.7% of the participants in this study did not agree that those persons who end up in Malta, and who also manage to find work, should be legally employed. Only 34% agreed that such persons should be legally employed, while 4.3% were not sure what should be done.

Slightly more male than female participants were against the legalisation of employment for illegal migrants. Support for the legalisation of work was lowest among the youngest group of participants (62.1% among those aged 16-25) and among members of the DE socio-economic group (29.6%).

The major concern of the Maltese regarding the effect of illegal migration is primarily economic. Immigrants make new demands on the economy, ranging from the demand for work to heavier burdens to be carried by the Maltese taxpayer to finance hospitalisation, accommodation, schooling and all the other services which, once a person lands in Malta, the country must provide.

In the minds of the Maltese too, such short-term concerns must not lose sight of long-term concerns, among which 'overpopulation' and the possibility that the islands' culture, identity - though this is only a remote possibility at present - even the running of the country could be lost by indigenous Maltese.

Despite these concerns however, the overwhelming majority (91.7%) of the Maltese insist that illegal immigrants should be treated in the same way, regardless of nationality. Those who disagree do not hesitate to list which nationalities Malta should, in general, be wary of. And in this regard, Arab nationals are in the forefront of concern.

Linked to this, as captured in this study, is the existence of a lurking feeling of general dislike towards Arabs. That the Maltese have a general disdain against certain races has been confirmed by this study by as many as 70.3% of all those taking part, and of these as many as 66.8% mentioned 'Arab countries' as a group, while 5.2% and 4.3% specifically refer to Libyans and Iraq respectively in the same tone.

"That this is so in a traditionally very Christian society in which love of neighbour is projected as the most important precept should be a matter of concern," Professor Vassallo remarks. "In a way it is paradoxical how on the one hand many Maltese - it has been more than amply documented by this study - are more than prepared to extend equality and hospitality, and to show commiseration, to individual illegal migrants when they witness the throes that would have led them to this island's shores, but at the same time harbour this feeling of distrust against them as a group. The social roots of these problems need to be further studied and addressed, at all levels of societal activity if a future full of racial disharmony is to be pre-empted."

Significantly, the overwhelming majority of the Maltese (69.7%) declared that the Church should be involved in the problem of illegal immigrants. Of the rest, 28.3% do not believe that the Church should be involved in any way, while 2% did not answer this question.

Those who think the Church should be involved, when asked how the Church could help illegal immigrants, said that it should provide financial support. In fact, as many as 38% said that the "Church should collect money", 31.7% stated that "it should offer accommodation"; 2.3% stated that the Church should encourage people to prove accommodation for them, and 2% that "it should provide clothes for them". Very few (0.3%) spontaneously thought the Church should "actively attract these immigrants to Christianity".