Gatt unmoved by Busuttil’s call for bus fare review
Transport Minister Austin Gatt was unperturbed yesterday by Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil’s call for a rethink on the new bus fares as they could be illegal under EU law.
Dr Gatt’s ministry said Dr Busuttil’s comments had been “noted” but there were no plans to revise the fares established because the government had “contrasting” legal advice to the MEP’s and believed it was complying with the law.
“If it is not, there are means for that law to be enforced,” a spokesman for Dr Gatt said defiantly.
The fares, announced as part of the public transport reform planned for July, will be more expensive for non-residents who do not hold a Maltese identity card. Tourists will be charged €2.60 for a day ticket compared to €1.50 for residents. Week tickets will cost €6.50 for locals and €12 for non-residents.
Dr Busuttil said the fares should be reviewed, warning they could “well be illegal under EU law” because they discriminated against non-residents. The European Court of Justice, he said, had already rejected various arguments by other member states on similar lines.
He is not the first to hold that the fares could breach EU regulations because of discrimination with the hoteliers’ association making the argument vehemently in defence of the tourist industry.
But Dr Gatt argued that public transport services in a number of European countries charged different rates for residents and non-residents.
“Sticking to the most frequently known example of England, buses are free during off peak hours in England for anyone over 66, as long as they’re a resident of England. A Maltese tourist (or even a Scottish one for that matter) who otherwise satisfies all the eligibility criteria for the offer, is excluded on that basis,” a ministry spokesman said.
The Transport Ministry also supplied details of fares used in Estonia, Italy, Spain, Finland and Ireland.
In Tallinn (Estonia), public transport is cheaper “across the board” for residents of the city and this is done through the ID-ticket system, which uses national electronic cards to sell personalised fares. “A day card costs Kr45 for Tallinn residents and Kr55 for non-Tallinn residents when purchased through the ID-ticket system,” the spokesman said.
Student organisations last February protested against the new tariffs to the European Commission, claiming it discriminated against students from other parts of the country studying in Tallinn.
According to Estonian media, national organisation TÜÜL asked the Commission to take action against Estonia because of violation of EU regulations.
The ministry also pointed to the situation in Venice, where those who work, study or live in the region are eligible for discounted rates by buying a special card. Tourists can buy different transport cards depending on the duration of their stay.
Similar schemes are also used in Helsinki, in Finland, Ireland and Seville in Spain, according to the ministry.
Meanwhile, Malta’s Permanent Representative in Brussels, Richard Cachia Caruana said that while the EU prohibited discrimination on the basis of nationality, including indirect discrimination based on residence, the proposed measures could be acceptable due to “objective considerations and is proportionate to the legitimate aim of national provisions”.
“The government has clear objective considerations why residents should benefit from subsidised fares, namely the need to encourage people to leave their cars at home and take the bus where possible. These considerations are well known to everybody and we have seen a series of measures towards this end being rolled out over the past years. The subsidised public transport fares for residents are one of these measures. Each case needs to be assessed on its own merits in the light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice,” he said.
The European Commission is waiting for more information from the Maltese government before it takes a stand on the issue but Mr Cachia Caruana said there had so far been no correspondence with the Commission on the issue.
Writing in his weekly column today, Dr Busuttil compares the bus fares issue to a case Italy lost at the European Court of Justice for granting free admission to Italian elderly residents who visit municipal museums and monuments but charging elderly tourists.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Marsa murder - Police looking...
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
Update 4 - Eddie Fenech Adami stable...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
Updated - Two bodies, capsized boat,...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
In Discussion
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
Chinese company to study Malta-Gozo...
Updated - PM reacts to Labour anger on...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
No appeals board for first part of power...
Updated - PM comments as Franco Mercieca...
BBC site highlights illegal hunting in Malta
15 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
K.M. Fiorentino
Nov 18th 2010, 07:05
Even the idea of discrimination is wrong let alone the tariffs. And, ofcourse, we have to compare to other countries.... we do like they do... what a shame.
l fenech
Nov 18th 2010, 05:04
Issa anke poll popolari tah percentagg kontra. Imma issa drajna sa fejn jasal is-Sur Gatt u ser idabbar rasu wara dak kollu li jghamel ibda bil-BWSC u PAC dak improvement.
m. borg
Nov 17th 2010, 21:33
@ C. Sullivan
Whoever took the decision on the fares did his homework properly. It is right and proper to subsidise residents of Malta and Gozo to encourage them to get out of their car into the buses. It is not right to use taxpayer money to subsidise a market segment which is not price sensitive i.e. the decision of a non-resident on the use of public transport will not be determined on price.
Simon Busuttil is wrong to make an issue out of a straightforward decision. On the one hand, he campaigns to reduce dust in the air and on the other hand he seeks to undermine a legitimate decision aimed at reducing car traffic and pollution.
eric frendo
Nov 17th 2010, 19:22
it seems that we are never satisfied. people are complaining because we maltese are going to pay less than tourists. if the fares were made the same for everyone we still complain that we are not going to pay less
C Sullivan
Nov 17th 2010, 16:15
Sometimes it feels like our politicians do not do their HW well before announcing measures. Following the announcements, they are subsequently advised otherwise by EU officials, and what should have been presented as a well thought out decision, becomes a squabble played out in public. Pride gets in the way and discussions turn into power games. How's that for mature politics.
N.Calleja
Nov 17th 2010, 16:07
I simply cannot understand why all this crusade in favour of tourists that are being asked to pay a different kind of fare. This is much cheaper if a week ticket is bought. With 12 euro a week a tourist can roam round the island since setting foot at the airport to the time he returns to his country. For any tourist (if not a pauper himself) this is peanuts compared to what he pays in his country
Jon attard
Nov 17th 2010, 14:56
Yet another Gaffe by Malta's biggest gaffe-maker.
Well done Dr. Gatt; after all when the crap hits the fan you'll be long gone from politics and someone else will have to face it.
Shame on you and on all those who support you!
emanuel bajada
Nov 17th 2010, 14:07
on the same argument then there is discrimination having Maltese citizens - ( so that I will be understood I am meaning here citizens with G id, i.e.gozitans)- with an ID on a gozo addess pay cheaper fares on the ferry than other Maltese citezens and tourists who do not have an reside on Gozo. Does Simon Busutill MEP thinks that the ferry fare should be cheap euro1.15 for everyone - meaning the Gozo Channel take in large subsidy from the Government, or make the fare commercial for everyone, meaning even workers from Gozo who cross every day pay this commercial fare!
Joseph Galea
Nov 17th 2010, 14:04
The different pricing system for resdients and non-residents is, to say the least, bizarrre.
Benefit in pricing should be given to the more frequent users of the transprt system and not just to residents. If a tourist is here for a month and decides to buy a monthly pass then s/he should get reduced pricing. On the other hand a resident, who takes the occasional bus ride should pay the full fare.
The system should cater for:
1) a full fare for anyone buying a single ticket (and hopefully the practice of giving change on buses will be eliminated - drivers should not handle money.)
2) a slightly discounted price per ticket if a booklet of tickets or a set number of tokens is pre-purchased.
3) a more reduced price for a weekly pass; and
4) the lowest price possible for a monthly pass
5) students and senior citizens should continue to have their own special rates.
This is the only fair system and there are numerous such systems around the world that could be emulated. Discounts on the basis of residency is discriminatory and difficult to operate in practice.
Michael Darmanin
Nov 17th 2010, 13:00
I am pretty sure that this dual price system will be found illegal by the european courts. I live in Salzburg (which is a very touristy city) and one of the main attractions is the castle. The city gov introduced dual entrance fees for locals (free of charge) and tourists (have to pay) but one French tourist objected and took the town to court and won. Oh and by the way, the buses here cost the same for tourist and locals alike. I think Minister Gatt is poking a hornet's nest with this envisaged system. No tourist will accept this discrimination. Because that is what it is :DISCRIMINATION.
Joseph Calleja
Nov 17th 2010, 14:52
Isn't Minister Austin Gatt the one NOT running for re-election? Enough said.
Joe Scerri
Nov 17th 2010, 11:57
The fact that it happens does not mean it is legal, or indeed desirable. And we've heard this one before, at some point the subsidy will be removed, because subsidies are bad. So why put them there in the first place?
d reiling
Nov 17th 2010, 10:17
this seems to be being based on the fact that residents pay tax - non residents dont - however i am sure there are many non residents (non id car holders) residing here permanently and also have jobs some paying tax some not paying tax for whatever reason.
Is it not true that all EU member states also pay tax and many actually contribute via EU grants for all manner of things. The EU community globally taxes member states for belonging to the community and Malta is one of those states that gets a lot of help from it.
COME ON MALTA GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER AND STOP FINDING REASONS TO FLEECE TOURISTS - YOUR ONLY REAL SOURCE OF INCOME. TOURISTS ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH REASONS NOT TO COME HERE AND SPEND THEIR HARD EARNED... SO STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW.
A.Tanti
Nov 17th 2010, 13:50
"COME ON MALTA GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER AND STOP FINDING REASONS TO FLEECE TOURISTS - YOUR ONLY REAL SOURCE OF INCOME. TOURISTS ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH REASONS NOT TO COME HERE AND SPEND THEIR HARD EARNED... SO STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW."
I completely agree with this statement. For a country that is so dependent in a way on tourist dollars, you would never know it at how they seemingly continue to mistreat those while on vacation. Whether it be taking advantage, raising prices, taxes etc. One day maybe Malta will take their head out of their ass and realize we're in 2010 and realize what they are doing. But I'm sure I"ll be long and gone before that day comes to pass.
W Spencer
Nov 17th 2010, 22:06
A UK based Maltese gentleman suggested that the Maltese Governments decision making process is quite easy to understand. Firstly it is necessary for the Government to reject all the logical and constructive solutions to any problem / situation, until they reach the most illogical and unconstructive solution, which they will then try to implement, only to find that their decision, will be either unworkable or illegal !! Either way, costing the Maltese taxpayers a fortune.
Please choose the reason of your report below: