We told you so

A leading member of the local Eurosceptic brigade exclaimed in a local newspaper how the number of illegal immigrants seeking to come to Malta had increased since Malta joined the EU! Well, of course, EU membership is bound to increase Malta's attractiveness all round.

You see, had Malta joined some other community of states, something like the Warsaw Pact of Communist days, no one would be risking life and limb to make it here. The Maltese would probably be scheming to desert the islands in big numbers. Haven't you heard of Cuba?

Thus the European Movement (Malta) is flattered indeed by the Euro sceptics' high opinion of the attractiveness of the EU. We hope that this factor is also influencing foreign investors.

But in the run-up to last year's referendum and election the Eurosceptics were also saying that it would be the Sicilians who would invade us, you know, those same stock of Homo sapiens from whom we Maltese are probably descended. (Sorry, did not mean to insult anyone here). That prediction did not materialise. And probably it will never do. So the Euro-sceptic calculator seems to be as defiantly faulty as their reasoning.

Maltese Eurosceptics have listed so many bad things about the EU that any negative development which happens from here on is bound to be singled out as having been predicted by them: "You see, we told you it would happen!"

The European Movement (Malta) recognises that illegal immigration poses a serious problem particularly to a small island community such as ours. However we do wish to underline a couple of reasonable parameters within which to discuss the issue. We would like to do this by posing a few reasonable questions.

First, how can it be proved that the alleged increase in the number of immigrants landing here is caused directly by Malta's EU membership and not by something else such as a surge of illegal immigration throughout the region when compared to last year's flows?

How can we be certain that something independent of membership has not caused the increase in the number of boat people - for example, smugglers becoming more organised and sophisticated? Say increased strife in problem regions outside Europe? How can it be proved that had we stayed out of the EU we would not have experienced the same amount of migratory flows?

We ask these questions not to minimise the issue but simply to set people thinking along productive lines. It is not what one thinks or believes about problems that matters, nor cheap propaganda. The important thing is to understand the root-cause of the problem by asking the important questions. Only then can we prescribe remedies.

The European Movement (Malta) believes that one way of resolving illegal immigration is to bring stability to the countries from where these migrants are risking their lives to escape.

The EU has the means to help them, is doing so already and should multiply its aid. The EU also encourages countries to unite and share sovereignty as we have done in Europe in order to encourage economic growth in a stable political and regional environment. The European Movement (Malta) believes that no country can face the illegal immigration challenge on its own and the solution lies in a joint European effort.

Now what would the Maltese Euro-sceptic prescription be for illegal immigration? What will they tell the poor countries from where the immigrants originate? If we take a leaf from what they have been lavishly writing over the years it would probably sound something like this: Divide and sub-divide. Compete among yourselves more ferociously. Every man for himself. Turn a blind eye. Malta can face the challenge on its own.

The developing countries from which the boat people come have already put these policy proposals into practice and look at the result.