MaltaToday previous editions

maltatoday, WEDNESDAY, 28 MAY 2014 7 News ise Coleiro Preca, whose first weeks in office were marked by clear pronouncements against prejudice and in fa- vour of inclusion. This was somewhat coun- terbalanced by agreements with a number of African states like Nigeria to deport migrants whose applications for asylum have been turned down during the past years. Moreover, although the PN opposed the plan to push back migrants and thus paid a political price, its stance was contradictory, as the same party had previously agreed with a similar policy prac- ticed by the Berlusconi government, before the European Court of Hu- man Rights concluded that this policy was illegal. Since then, the PN largely agreed with government in demanding more burden sharing, accusing the government of not do- ing enough in Europe to secure such an arrangement. But in the past months the party has not taken any leading role in confronting racism. Betting on Schulz But Labour's most significant shift on migration during the campaign was to ally itself with the European socialists on this issue. This was made clear during a campaign visit by Socialist candidate for the presi- dency of the European Commission Martin Schulz, who spoke of the need of a common European policy on migration and the creation of le- gal avenues through which asylum seekers would reach Europe with- out having to risk their lives while crossing. Labour's message to voters was clear: while still hyping migration as a national problem – thus reflecting the concerns of its own voters – the election of a Socialist President of the Commission would somewhat alleviate the burden from Malta. Surely this reflected a more sen- sible approach to migration on Muscat's part. In fact, as Alternat- tiva Demokratika noted in the fi- nal days of the campaign, following similar pronouncements by the EPP Presidential candidate Jean Claude Juncker in Malta, all three parties were converging on a common po- sition. What was left unsaid was that it is national governments of individual countries, not the Commission, who have accepted a common migration policy. Moreover, the chances of Schulz becoming the next President of the Commission already looked flimsy as the EPP was set to win a relative majority. Lowell's cousins in Europe Ironically, it is the triumph of Low- ell's distant and not-so-distant cous- ins in Europe, which makes it more difficult for the European govern- ment to accept a common migration policy which would see northern and central European governments taking more migrants from the central Mediterranean. With the National Front leading the polls in France and the UKIP winning elec- tions in the UK, it is highly unlikely for governments in these countries to willingly accept changes to EU treaties which would see them tak- ing more migrants. While political foresight demands that these coun- tries assume greater responsibility, electoral pressures may paralyze any attempt to revise Dublin 2 or to create legal avenues for migrants to enter Europe. Moreover, the result makes an EPP-led commission the most likely outcome of the elections after the socialists failed in their bid to displace the EPP as the biggest party in parliament. Despite Junck- er's intentions, an EPP-led Commis- sion may be more lukewarm to ad- dress this issue due to fear of losing more support to the far right. Ironi- cally, failure to act on the European front will only end up strengthening the far right in southern Europe. Moreover, after raising expecta- tions among his voters on a Euro- pean solution to Malta's migration problems, Muscat may find himself having little to offer on this front to supporters come the next general election. In reality, the only long-term ap- proach is that of pressing for in- cremental changes in Europe while starting to change perceptions on migrations at home. But after being given the impres- sion that the problem could vanish either through pushbacks or as a re- sult of electing Schulz, Labour vot- ers may feel disappointed. The Nazis in our midst Compared to the results of far right parties in other countries Nor- man Lowell's vote does not make for big news in Europe. Neither did Lowell's relative success have any bearing on the results. He did not even accomplish his elusive mis- sion of surpassing the Greens as the third force of Maltese politics. But 6,761 votes in highly bi-parti- san Malta – which has not elected a third party to parliament since 1962 – increases the significance of Low- ell's 2.7%. Moreover, the vote is relatively invisible, and it's also possible that a sizeable segment of Lowell's vot- ers do not share his most extreme views, though they may very well concur with his phobia of black mi- grants. One interesting phenome- non is the failure of opinion polls to register Lowell's support. This may indicate that IE voters may either be ashamed of declaring their vote or were registering a last-minute pro- test vote. The Lowell vote • where does it go? • In 2004, far-rightist Norman Lowell entered the first European elections. With a first-count vote of just over 1,600 votes. But he was eliminated early, on the third count, together with the other 'independent' candidates. In total, he commanded 53% of these 3,000-odd votes which were transferred to AD, PN, and PL. • In 2009 Lowell polled over 3,500 votes on the first count and stayed on until the 18th count, with just over 4,200 votes for transfer: this time, it was Labour who got the most votes. • In 2014 Lowell had 7,335 transferable votes: Labour candidates got 1,929, the PN got 1,031, and AD got 963 votes – 3,412 were non-transferable, which could either suggest a strong loyalty to Lowell but many of these votes were also for candidates that had already been eliminated, rendering them non- transferable. Compared to the results of far right parties in other countries, Norman Lowell's vote does not make for big news in Europe

• Cover