MP demands clarification on eligibility to participate in sports

Nationalist MP Robert Arrigo has complained in Parliament that while Maltese passport holders having dual citizenship enjoy all the rights granted by the EU to its citizens, some sports associations in Malta are not allowing them to play like any other Maltese.

Speaking during the debate on the Citizenship Act (amendment) Bill, Mr Arrigo said dual citizenship holders of Maltese ancestry were successfully representing Malta in athletics, rugby, handball and other disciplines and doing Malta proud. Holders of dual citizenship were also allowed to participate in waterpolo, but not football.

Should the right to represent Malta depend on the decision of a sports association's council or its president? Some, he said, wanted to take this issue right up to the European Court. Indeed, was some arrangement or legislation needed not to deny these people this right?

Interjecting, Home Affairs Minister Tonio Borg said that in the case of the government, possession of a Maltese passport was sufficient evidence for the holder to be considered Maltese. In the case of sports associations, one could not describe Maltese passport holders as not being Maltese, but their participation might be regulated by the associations' statute.

Mr Arrigo said the issue was whether, in so doing, such associations were breaking the law and, if that was the case, what could be done about it. One should consider having sports activities covered in this law because there were many Maltese who practiced sports and who could place Malta on the map.

Earlier in the debate, Labour MP Evarist Bartolo welcomed this Bill as a means to strengthen the links between Malta and the children of emigrants.

It would be a shame to weaken the links between Malta and the new generations of Maltese abroad. To weaken these links would be weakening the country's identity. The identities of countries were not built through isolation from other peoples, and many immigrants played a role in the development of such identities, including in Malta.

Mr Bartolo reiterated calls for migration to be given greater importance in the teaching of Maltese history.

A lot more should be done in this sector. There were countries where responsibility for emigrants was part of the responsibility of a particular ministry, such as the Foreign Affairs Ministry in Italy.

There were universities in Australia which were interested in offering Maltese studies as a subject but not enough was done to assist them.

Malta could also develop the links with migrants for its economic benefit. For example, migrants could help Malta develop new export markets. Migrants could also be encouraged to invest in Malta.

Labour MP George Vella welcomed the fact that measures and proposals made by the 1996 Labour government in favour of stronger links with migrants had continued to be followed up, even if Labour's role was not acknowledged.

Dr Vella recalled his experiences when he visited migrants as Foreign Minister in 1997. Citizenship had dominated conversations wherever he went.

Among Labour's initiatives was the publication of a White Paper which included a proposal to extend eligibility for dual citizenship. Citizenship had then been broadened through legislation by the present government in the year 2000 and again through the Bill currently before the House.

Migrants, including their descendants, were rightly being considered part of Maltese society and they were being given what was theirs by right.

Dr Vella said that then, as now, he also wanted to see more regular transport between Malta and the migrants' countries, better consular services for Maltese communities and closer communication.

Labour had also had plans for a big jamboree for the millennium bringing together Maltese emigrants in Malta. This had to be a celebration of the success of Maltese communities abroad featuring prominent Maltese who had made a name for themselves abroad.

A migrants' convention was held in 2000 but, sadly, he was not invited to speak and was only invited with the other guests. Several resolutions were approved during that convention but, as far as he knew, there had been no follow-up.

Dr Vella said he agreed with what was being proposed in the Bill, but was it enough to give these people citizenship and stop there?

The Maltese in Australia must not continue to feel as if they had been forgotten. What was the government doing to give migrants a true feeling that the Maltese in Malta really cared; that they were doing their utmost to keep in contact with them?

Dr Vella said that there was now an added value to Maltese citizenship as Malta was a member of the EU and Maltese passport holders could gain freedom of movement within the EU. They would be getting these benefits free of charge with their passport while the Maltese in Malta were paying for them through their taxes.

Nationalist MP Joe Falzon said that the Bill was important as it was giving recognition, as Maltese, to many migrants and enabling them to form part of Maltese society.

After tracing the history of the citizenship laws, Mr Falzon said these amendments would also make it possible for the spouses of any citizen of Malta who gave an exceptional contribution to Malta or to humanity to be granted citizenship without the need to reside here. This amendment was also welcome.