The higher bus fares to be imposed on non-residents under the public transport reform would amount to institutionalised fleecing, the Malta Hoteliers and Restaurants Association said yesterday, a charge denied by the Transport Ministry.

The higher fares would cause “tremendous damage” to the tourism industry, sending a clear message that visitors were there “to be fleeced”, the MHRA said, calling on the government to reconsider its decision.

Transport Minister Austin Gatt said on Saturday when the new transport system started operating in July, holders of Maltese ID cards would be charged less than visitors. For locals, a day ticket will cost €1.50 and a seven-day ticket €6.50. Tourists and passengers without a Maltese ID card, however, will pay €2.60 and €12 for the same tickets.

It was ironic, the association said, that the same authorities that warned against the fleecing of bona fide tourists by bus drivers and other service providers now seemed to be institutionalising the practice themselves.

“The MHRA finds this decision discriminatory and offensive to visitors,” it said, adding it was still struggling to come to terms with the unexpected VAT increase, which would exacerbate the problems in the tourism market. In 2011, VAT on accommodation will increase by two percentage points.

The Transport Ministry, however, said tourists, who were used to higher rates back home, would not feel fleeced at all. The higher fares for tourists and non-residents were only a result of a discount being given to Maltese residents and, as such, did not break EU discrimination laws, it argued.

“Just because residents of Malta will be able to travel for less, it is not likely that tourists will feel that a €12 weekly ticket (or €2.60 for a day ticket) for unlimited transportation will amount to a rip-off by any stretch of the definition of that term,” the ministry said.

It said that in meetings organised by the MHRA itself for members during the tender process for the new public transport system, a higher weekly price of €14 was deemed as “perfectly reasonable and value for money for tourists”.

The MHRA, it charged, was making “hysterical comments” about the impact on the industry when the rates were cheaper than those it had agreed to.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.