Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1179886
REMEMBER how, just a few weeks ago, Malta awoke to news that European ministers had brokered a 'deal' on a new 'migrant disembarkation and relocation system'? I guess not, huh. Well, it happened; and here is how it was announced on 23 Septem- ber: "An agreement on a set of 'predictable and structural' arrangements for the disem- barkation and relocation of migrants has been reached between four countries on the frontline of the Mediterra- nean migration […] "Born out of a Ministerial Meeting on Migration held in Malta, the agreement sees four frontline countries; Malta, Italy, France, and Germany, agree on a common paper on the issue of the dis- embarkation and relocation of migrants rescued at sea…" I thought I'd remind you all, because some of the estimated 1,200 asylum seekers current- ly residing at the Hal Far tent village – where last Sunday's riots broke out – arrived in Malta after that announce- ment was made: and there- fore, by rights, should have been among the migrants already 'relocated' under this new system. But… um… we can all see that they're still here. Just as we can all see how not a single one of the asylum seekers cur- rently in Malta – regardless when or how they got here – has been relocated to any other EU member state since September 23. Not, mind you, that we really needed such trifling details, to work out that this celebrated 'deal' was all along nothing but a figment of certain Euro- pean ministers' imagination. Barely two weeks later – on 8 October – Malta awoke to a very different announce- ment. According to press reports: "An attempt by four countries, including Malta, to encourage other EU mem- ber states to take a share of migrants rescued from the Central Mediterranean has so far failed to reach agree- ment…" You will surely notice a small change in the wording now used to describe this celebrat- ed 'deal'. Two weeks earlier, it had been presented as an agreement that had already been reached. German inte- rior minister Horst Seehofer had said: "I am very satisfied that we have indeed reached a regulation agreement for emergency rescue…" His French counterpart Christophe Castaner added: "Today we have reached an agreement – this is just the first stop but it is an agree- ment which collected our four countries concerned with im- mediate solutions." And our very own Joseph Muscat had tweeted: "The #MaltaMigrationMeeting achieved progress with a blueprint that can serve as basis for redistribution of #migrants…" Fast forward a few weeks, and it is pitifully obvious that, in reality, no 'progress' at all has been achieved towards a new relocation system for migrants. The same 8 October article continues: "Despite a marathon three-hour lunch on Tuesday…" Wait, let me repeat that: "Despite a marathon three- hour LUNCH on Tuesday, during which the crisis was discussed, no other country signed up to the temporary scheme mooted by Malta, Italy, Germany and France […] "Portugal, Ireland, Luxem- bourg and Finland are report- edly considering it but only if others sign on and as long as it does not include quotas for how many migrants each country would host. "Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Hungary and the Netherlands are opposed or extremely re- luctant to join the scheme…" And there you have it. In- stead of finally taking action on an issue that has already cost thousands of human lives in the Mediterranean, and which now threatens to spill out into further bloodshed lo- cally (one African immigrant has already been murdered in cold blood, in case we've all forgotten)… Europe's Interior Ministers were all stuffing their faces at a 'three-hour marathon lunch'. And while they were collec- tively pigging out at a restau- rant somewhere in Brussels… asylum seekers detained in at least one European state were busy setting fire to their mat- tresses and throwing stones at the police – which later escalated to torching cars and buildings – in protest against the conditions of their deten- tion (which, as previous riots have indicated, also includes food quality.) In other words, what Eu- ropean interior ministers actually agreed on in Brus- sels was not a 'deal' at all… but a 'meal'. For themselves. At the European taxpayer's expense… Well, what can I say? I hope they ate well, at least. I hope Europe's Interior Ministers feasted to their hearts' con- tent on oysters and caviar, all washed down with the finest of French wines. And I sup- pose they must have, too… given that they clearly had their mouths far too full to actually discuss anything of any substance at all. It almost reminds me of those old Italian pasta ads on TV: 'Silenzio, parla Agnesi.' When the food is good, and the wine flowing… one doesn't work up much of an appetite to discuss serious 24 OPINION maltatoday | SUNDAY • 27 OCTOBER 2019 Raphael Vassallo Did you say 'deal' on migration? ... or was it 'meal'? Some of those asylum seekers would already have been relocated elsewhere, if European ministers actually bothered themselves with 'deals' instead of 'meals'