Opposition spokesman on Justice Josè Herrera claimed in Parliament that some people who had received income tax assessments for past years were "deceived and trapped" in paying taxation on revenue which was legally prescribed.
He was speaking during the debate on the Budgetary Measures Implementation Bill and said it was the opposition's duty to scrutinise government expenditure.
The government had to take risks and inject stimulus in the construction industry to counter the economic crisis. Developers had hoped that EU membership would result in a construction boom and attract new foreign investment in this sector.
There were over 50,000 vacant dwellings which were aimed at the foreign investor. He expected the Prime Minister to indicate clearly the government policy on attracting investment in the construction sector.
The government had lost all sense of direction and it concerted its efforts in remaining in power.
Dr Herrera requested the government to declare what funds would be used for City Gate and other projects because there was no indication on this expenditure in the appropriation vote. The country and the capital city were in a state of neglect.
Instead of using capital investment to stimulate the economy, the government was continually pointing to the international situation and making excuses for its negative performance. The government had no plans on how to alleviate hardship and relative poverty.
Gino Cauchi (PL) said that if the past is a reflection of the future then Malta was being led into trouble as the Budget was full of rhetoric and a far cry from reality. It indicated a government that was detached from the people.
He criticised the introduction of new water and electricity tariffs as a stand-alone measure rather than a budgetary measure. Although this measure would have the most significant consequences on the economic and social sectors and despite the implementation of these tariffs as of the January, the government has not issued the relative legal notice.
The government had failed to learn from past experience where the previous increase in tariffs shook all sectors of society. Rather than address these burdens, the government had shied away from addressing them.
It had deceived the social partners by not consulting them and only started discussion with them after the date the measures started being implemented.
The Budget was unrealistic and one that did not address current realities.
Referring to the latest Eurostat statistics, Mr Cauchi said that in 2008, 15 per cent of the Maltese population was already living at risk of falling under the poverty line, and this at a time when the increase in services tariffs had not yet been introduced. What could one expect after the introduction of the new increases? Surely, the Budget was not looking after the wellbeing of society.
The introduction of the new energy tariffs had already brought about heavy loss of employment and companies had either sought government aid or asked employees to surrender their working conditions including cuts in salaries. Unemployment in Malta would soon reach 8,000 - and this was a crisis.
He referred to the introduction of the 50 cent bed tax, describing it as 'rotten all over'.
Mr Cauchi questioned why the Budget had failed to address the position of those students who, due to financial difficulties, were unable to further their studies, and the never ending waiting lists in the health sector.
In 2008 the government had used the provision of subsidies and the closure of the dockyards as an excuse for the increase in the deficit, but these reasons could not be used as justifications for 2009.