Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1545479
9 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 21 JUNE 2026 ANALYSIS side of EU's migration fault line Nationalist MEPs effectively align with the EPP, conservative right, and far-right bloc backing tougher migration against Serracino Inglott—known for his role as an ideologue in PN circles— warned that the Euro- pean People's Party's election gains did not represent a victo- ry for Christian democ- racy, but rather a re- duction of its core values in favour of conservative forces. Surely, the current stance of the EPP di- verges from the Christian demo- cratic emphasis on the dignity of every hu- man being. In contrast to the PN and the EPP, the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Union (COMECE) warned that the regulation raises "serious ethical and hu- manitarian questions," par- ticularly regarding detention practices, externalisation of re- sponsibility, and the weakening of safeguards for those facing removal. It reiterated that mi- grants should not be treated as abstractions or statistics, but as individuals whose dignity must remain central to EU policy. The Vatican-aligned position also cau- tioned against expand- ed detention regimes and re- duced access to effective legal remedies, while reaffirming the need for responses grounded in solidarity and human dignity. This sentiment was echoed by Caritas Europa, which warned that the EU Return Regulation reflects a shift towards a more enforcement-driven migration model focused on returns and externalisation. The leading Catholic organisation strong- ly warned that the new rules "will normalise coercive meas- ures and detention–including of children and families–while severely restricting legal safe- guards and rights and creating return hubs outside Europe." Caritas Europa also warned that under the updated rules, authorities can now legally hold entire families with children in pre-deportation detention cen- tres. The new fault line of EU politics Taken together, the political and institutional reactions un- derline a widening structural tension in EU migration gov- ernance. On one side, a consol- idating centre-right–far right axis is increasingly comfortable with stricter enforcement and deportation narratives. On the other, socialists and allied civ- il society and religious actors warn that such convergence risks shifting the EU's norma- tive baseline towards deter- rence-driven policy. The risk is that migrants held in return hubs in third coun- tries in north Africa or the Bal- kans would lack the same legal protection accorded to them by EU member states. The deeper question raised by the vote is therefore not only about legislative content, but about trajectory. It is whether the EPP's adoption of tougher migration language reflects a strategic response to political pressure, or whether it con- tributes to the gradual normal- isation of right-wing framing within mainstream EU policy. For Malta, the significance lies in both major parties now appearing, on this issue, to sit within that broader alignment of parties who treat migration as a threat. Curiously both parties do so while accepting an economic model which de- pends on thousands of foreign workers 'legally' imported from outside the EU. Normalising the far-right Taken together, the vote sug- gests that the political centre of gravity in EU migration policy is shifting in ways that go be- yond tactical responses to pub- lic concern. What is emerging is not simply an attempt by the EPP to contain the far right, but a gradual convergence around its language and policy instincts on enforcement and deporta- tions. Apologists for this new conver- gence argue that m a i n s t r e a m p o l i t i c i a n s can no longer ignore pub- lic sentiment on this issue. Otherwise, the right-wing drift will be unstoppa- ble. The political risk is that, rath- er than drawing a line against the far right, this convergence helps normalise its framing of migration as primarily a prob- lem of removal and deterrence. No reference is made to com- batting illegal immigration by providing safe and legal alter- natives for entry which would address Europe's demographic challenges. And while one can- not ignore the fact that the ar- rival of unregulated boats has been a trigger for the far right, this problem can be addressed by absorbing this flow into legal channels. Once embedded across the mainstream centre-right, that language ceases to be excep- tional and becomes institution- al common sense—narrowing the space for alternative ap- proaches and hardening the policy baseline, thus wetting the appetite of the far right for even harsher measures. The greatest fear is that of a slippery slope, one in which governments increasingly rely on deportations and the erosion of established rights to address a problem that involves real hu- man beings. Many of these peo- ple, despite their irregular sta- tus, have built families, raised children and put down roots. Sending them "back home" can mean sending them away from the only home they and their children have truly known. Europe's alignment towards a tough, security-based approach to migration over which all Maltese MEPs agree, even if for the three (Photo: Christian Creutz/EP) This raises questions for the PN, led by a leader who recently emphasised the party's Christian democratic identity when opposing the construction of a mosque. Yet, the party has shown no comparable hesitation in diverging from church positions on migration policy matters Peter Agius David Casa