‘Racists and xenophobes’

This is what the prime minister called those who aired their views following the unfortunate death of a young lad in Paceville. It is exactly what most Leavers were labelled by some Remainers ahead of the Brexit vote.

I n hindsight, and thanks to a number of highly reliable studies, it is now abundantly clear that migration was the main driving force behind Brexit, with loss of national sovereignty a distant second. While strong arguments were made highlighting potential threats to the British economy, they failed to counter concerns over migration or, rather, the sense of anxiety felt by the vast majority of Britons, particularly those who felt ‘left behind’.

So why did they vote to leave the bloc? Those who felt left behind were not bothered about the economic risks involved. They were struggling for recognition some, perhaps, felt they had nothing to lose. These anxieties did not appear on the British Isles the minute former Prime Minister David Cameron announced the Brexit referendum. This sentiment had been festering far longer, exacerbated by an economic crisis that led to austerity measures. Britain has traditionally been known for its welcoming approach towards migrant workers and students. London, in fact, has long been a magnet for highly qualified workers.

This situation changed drastically when the 2008 financial crisis began to bite and thousands lost their job. A near collapse of a reckless banking system made spending tighter. As the crisis spilled over into the industrious North and Midlands, jobs were shed by the manufacturing industry and related services, which relocated to places where labour was cheaper. What happened next was not entirely predictable but should serve as a lesson, as the same thing could very well happen in Malta.

EU and third-country workers in Britain remained there both during and after the crisis. This was, in part, due to the readiness of migrants to do odd jobs at very low wages, come what may. But a lack of planning and investment in education during the growth years had left Britain with a limited talent pool, be it professional or otherwise. As a quick fix to this problem, labour was aggressively imported from around the globe, filling every stratum and sector of the labour market, from highly paid positions to the low-wage menial jobs. The British, unable to compete with their foreign counterparts, remained on the dole. Hatred towards ‘the others’ increased drastically as the British found themselves unemployed while the foreigners were employed with highly competitive wages/conditions. To add insult to injury, the so-called establishment labelled them “bigots and racists.” Sound familiar?

It is all well and good for Malta to welcome foreign workers, but this can only be done with proper planning and a careful consideration for the labour rights of the Maltese. It is quite clear that Maltese employers need foreigners and the government is addressing this challenge by attracting foreign workers. This in itself is commendable but what will happen if, or when, economic growth begins to slow?

We have been told that there are 40,000 foreigners working in Malta now and it seems that figure is set to rise in the short term, but are we looking at the medium and long term? What will happen if the economy shrinks and the number of available jobs shrinks with it? Will the Maltese be squeezed out of the labour market between high-earning and low-earning foreigners? Do we have a plan for this?

And in the here and now, where will these incoming people live? Will rent continue to rise? Is adequate infrastructure in place to accommodate the needs of more people? Are the state services, ranging from welfare to health to social care to education, ready to cope with an ever-growing influx? According to the European Commission’s latest report, the answer is no. Where does that leave us in terms of the services we are getting today?

Clyde Caruana, the executive chair of Jobsplus, said on TimesTalk that only last January 2018, there were 2,000 applications for single permits (work permits) from third-country nationals. And this does not include the uncertain state of affairs of illegal/irregular workers in villages across Malta and Gozo. In real terms, this is equivalent to the total population of a medium-sized village in Gozo.

Migration, in its different forms, featured prominently in all the recent general elections around Europe – Austria, Italy, France, the Netherlands, you name it. Malta’s economy has grown rapidly and it is good that we are attracting foreigners, but this does not come without risks.

When people raise such concerns, they can’t simply be dismissed as racists, as the threat to their already appallingly low income is real and so is their fear of losing their national identity.

Progress yes, but not at any cost.