Back in the 1950s, the prospect of Maltese integration wasn’t that far off from becoming a reality. Dom Mintoff, Malta’s PL leader at the time, famously pushed for “economic equivalence” where Maltese workers would benefit from British wages and social welfare systems.

However, the British government was baffled by the financial implications. As a result, this scheme for full integration gradually dissolved.

Had Malta become a country of the UK, Maltese households might tune into BBC and ITV to enjoy British news and entertainment instead of watching Maltese channels, if there would be even any in the first place.

Yet, the island’s strong Catholic identity might have caused friction with a Protestant UK. Just as Mintoff originally sought to separate the state and the church’s power in Malta.

In this alternate reality, the Maltese citizens would never have been subjected to the immigration restrictions that arose in post-war Britain, being classified instead as UK nationals. The number of Maltese living, studying and working in Britain would have flourished, as they would enjoy this right as other British citizens. Maltese students would have benefited from home student status at British universities, avoiding the hefty international fees imposed after independence.

At the same time, the UK citizenship status could have opened up further migration opportunities. Many Maltese might have emigrated to Australia, taking advantage of UK nationality. On the contrary, by the time immigration controls tightened, these opportunities might have become less accessible, opening a pandora’s box where Maltese nationality would be both a blessing and curse.

A part of the EU or Brexit?

As part of the UK, Malta would have likely joined the European Economic Community (EEC) alongside Britain in 1973, though it might have debated its role within the union, just as the Faroe Islands did when Denmark joined.

Fast forward to 2016, Malta would have probably voted against Brexit. Like Gibraltar, London and Scotland, the island could have been another voice, with its MPs voting at Westminster to prevent the UK’s departure from the EU. The question remains: how would those votes from Maltese MPs have impacted the final result?

Perhaps, if Malta stayed, the margin for Leave would have narrowed, leaving the British government even more divided.

On a more everyday level, Maltese postboxes might still carry the Queen’s cypher, untouched by the scrapping that occurred after independence. Postage to and from Malta would be charged at the inland UK rate, and British civil services might remain fixed in Malta.

Interestingly, red phone boxes, British pounds sterling, double-decker buses and even English being predominantly the language spoken, might have become more iconic showing that Malta never truly parted ways with its colonial past.

Malta’s independence has allowed it to create its own path, first as a member of the Commonwealth, and later, as an independent state in the European Union.

Would the Maltese today feel the same sense of pride in their nation if had they remained part of the UK? Or would they be wrestling with an identity crisis felt by other small territories in the British sphere?

And of course, the real question remains: would pastizzi and kinnie still be a thing under British rule? We’ll never know!