The recent drowning in the Mediterranean of 900 people is the direct result of British government policy, says Dan Hodges in a powerful piece on the Telegraph website, which I would urge you to read. He certainly makes a case that if the British government had not withdrawn funding for search and rescue missions, then these 900 refugees would be alive today.
Meanwhile, over at the Guardian, there is a strong piece from Richard Ackland, which describes the Australian way of handling the problem of boat people. This is to intercept boats, tow them to somewhere away from Australia, and imprison the migrants in Australian financed camps, with a view to resettlement outside Australia.
Both policies have one thing in common: they aim to “discourage” migrants or refugees. If the journey is dangerous and there is no hope of rescue, then perhaps they will not come. If they have no real hope of ever seeing Australia, perhaps they will think twice about attempting entry. And yet, both in the Mediterranean and in Australia, still they come. And across the border from Mexico into the United States too, still they come. Whatever they are trying to get away from is so frightful that the risk of drowning or imprisonment or dying of thirst in the desert is, in their eyes, worth taking.
So, what is to be done? What, one might ask, is the position of the Catholic Church on this matter? What does the Church teach?
Certain bishops’ conferences have produced documents on this matter (such as the bishops of Florida) Our own bishops have this to say in their recent letter about the forthcoming General Election:
Violence and conflict have led to the massive displacement of people, many of whom seek asylum or refuge. There are also workers and students from overseas who contribute much to the common good of our country. Indeed, most people who settle in this country find work in order to bring up their families and contribute to society’s well-being. Immigration is a highly emotive issue and every country needs a policy to control immigration, as well as a positive commitment to policies that facilitate the integration of migrants into the mainstream of society. There is a great danger of blaming immigrants for the ills of society. We support policies which fairly regulate immigration and uphold the human rights of all, recognising the rights, dignity and protection of refugees and migrants.
This is interesting for what it says, and for what it does not say.
First of all, it is saying that the British Government is entitled to control immigration. And it is not saying that desperate people from Africa and elsewhere are entitled to come to Britain. But it does use the language of rights to remind us that refugees and immigrants must have their rights and dignity respected.
From a moral point of view the Church is in a dilemma which most people would share: we cannot allow in everyone who wants to come here. At the same time, we cannot carry on as at present, allowing people to drown. Neither would most of us want to go down the Australian route.
It is a question of balance: the needs of the refugees crossing the Mediterranean balanced against the needs of those who are already here in Britain, which is a relatively small and overcrowded island. Or to put it more dramatically: the needs of those drowning off the coast of Malta, and the needs of the people of Malta, one of the world’s smallest and most densely populated countries. It is simply not possible for Malta to absorb thousands of new arrivals. It can’t be done. Similarly, it is unlikely that Britain could absorb all the people who wanted to come here, if they were to come. No one can deny that the situation in Syria is catastrophic, but the influx of millions of refugees from there and elsewhere might well be catastrophic for Europe too.
Nor is this alarmist. The influx of Palestinian refugees into Lebanon was a major contributing factor to the Civil War that devastated that country. The amount of refugees in countries that neighbour Syria and Iraq today, such as Jordan, is potentially destabilising.
One thing, though, ought to be clear. The Fortress Europe policy is not working; or, if it were to be made to work, the price would be too high. At the same time, few governments are ever going to admit to their electorates what is blindingly obvious, namely that we must take immigration out of the hands of people smugglers and open up a more generous path to legal entry into Europe.
Does this mean open borders? In all honesty, yes it does, but, and here is the rub, that is what we seem to have already, in that hardly any illegal immigrant is ever deported. A proper guest worker system would be better than the present method of entry through the back door without papers, which is what the clandestini, who number millions, have done in Italy. Moreover, legalisation and proper enforceable controls would also mean that the immigrants and refugees could be spread more evenly round the continent. At present the burden on a place like Malta is intolerable, as the new arrivals there are forbidden from travelling onwards into the rest of Europe.
At present we have the worst of all possible worlds. Illegal immigration needs to end. The only possible solution is legal immigration, controlled and regulated.
This page is available to subscribers. Click here to sign in or get access.
Areas of Catholic Herald business are still recovering post-pandemic.
However, we are reaching out to the Catholic community and readership, that has been so loyal to the Catholic Herald. Please join us on our 135 year mission by supporting us.
We are raising £250,000 to safeguard the Herald as a world-leading voice in Catholic journalism and teaching.
We have been a bold and influential voice in the church since 1888, standing up for traditional Catholic culture and values. Please consider donating.