When this year’s State of the Nation conference published its opinion survey, the answer that attracted perhaps the most media attention was the question of multiculturalism.

It was not a simple question, however. The report reveals that people were not asked, “How much do you agree with multiculturalism?” That is the report’s section title. People were actually asked: “Are you comfortable with the mix [taħlit] of cultures in our society?” It is hardly the same thing.

‘Multiculturalism’ is the name given to a policy. It is most often used to refer to an integration policy based on giving some degree of cultural autonomy to different ethnic and religious groups. However, it can also be used as a generic name for all possible policies of cultural integration, including those that oppose any kind of pluralism of public morality and values.

But the survey did not ask about agreement with this or that policy. How could it? Malta has none. Successive governments have promised a policy of cultural integration going back almost two decades but none has delivered.

Instead of asking people to assess a single policy, the survey asked about the “the mix of cultures in our society”. This phrase, however, is open to various reasonable interpretations.

It could be understood to be asking about how people would feel if Malta became more of a melting pot. Or how they feel about the actual status quo: the increasing number of foreigners working and living here.

“Mix”, too, is a word with several shades of meaning. In Maltese, taħlit can carry both negative and neutral connotations. A “mix of cultures” could mean many things: a greater ethnic diversity in neighbourhoods; more cosmopolitan social spaces in the public sphere; a melting pot, where diversity has a foundation of common core values; or a pluralism of norms and values.

Each of those meanings has different implications for what kind of society we get. We cannot be sure which meaning led 37 per cent of respondents to report feeling very or somewhat uncomfortable about “cultural mixing”.

It could be discomfort with a particular policy, not all. Likewise, we cannot be sure that the 29 per cent who said they felt very or somewhat comfortable with cultural mixing would agree with all policies.

It’s difficult to interpret the answers unequivocally since some are surprising. The unemployed registered comfort with cultural mixing and agreed that foreign workers are needed to grow the economy.

It is not surprising that the two youngest age groups (16-35) are the most comfortable with cultural mixing. But the 26-35 age group is also the group that most believes that foreign workers are not necessary to grow the economy. We need to know more.

We should resist the temptation to call the respondents confused.

We should not expect consistency of public attitudes before we have consistent leadership on the issue and public debate of specific policies.

It is debate that leads to greater convergence over what the issues are. If there is laissez-faire instead of policy, we should not be surprised if that is reflected in widely divergent understandings of what ‘multiculturalism’ and its consequences are. People are not necessarily debating the same thing.

For a coherent debate, we first need a coherent policy framework and political leaders who understand the issues and are ready to discuss them. Anything else puts the cart before the horse.