It would be the Government and not Henley & Partners that would have the final say on the granting of citizenship under the recently-announced scheme.

Introducing the debate in second reading of the Maltese Citizenship (Amendment) Act, Home Affairs Minister Emanuel Mallia said the Bill would provide for the granting of a certificate of naturalisation as a citizen of Malta to any person who made an extraordinary contribution under the individual investor programme, operated by Henley & Partners.

He said that when he first discussed the Government’s proposals in May, Opposition spokesman Jason Azzopardi had not been against the plans.

On a point of order, Dr Azzopardi said the talk at the time had been on the individual investor programme and there was no mention of citizenship.

Continuing, Dr Mallia repeated that, initially, the Opposition seemed to be on board but now its view was not clear albeit it seemed it had changed its stance. Did the Opposition agree with the principle of having such an individual investor programme or not?

The capital generated would be used in infrastructure, education, health and accommodation projects

Dr Mallia rejected charges by Opposition Deputy Leader Mario de Marco that the Government was selling Maltese citizenship because it was not capable of attracting investment. Investment from the right people would follow.

The capital generated would go towards the national development fund to be used in infrastructure, education, health and accommodation projects.

Foreign individuals would have different reasons why to acquire a different citizenship including benefiting from Malta’s taxation system and from the fact that the Maltese can travel to 136 nations without a visa.

There existed two forms of citizenship programmes. There were countries that demanded residency for a number of years prior to offering a certificate of citizenship. Others offered citizenship immediately and these schemes were successful and gradually on the increase.

Dr Mallia said the Opposition had no reason to claim that the Government would be selling Maltese citizenship. Citizenship was the State’s reserved domain and it was free to do what it wanted as to who could get citizenship and how to offer it.

The Government had referred to similar programmes used in Austria since 1986 and also made reference to other schemes in Canada, Cyprus, Romania and Bulgaria.

Moreover, the principle was one established and entrenched in the Dublin and Maastricht treaties.

Dr Mallia said citizenship would not be free and controls would be put into place.

It was not true that Henley & Partners would have a conflict of interest because the final approval for issuing the certificate of naturalisation would be the Government’s.

Turning to the fact that the names of applicants would not be published, the minister said there were reasons behind the decision to adopt the policy of anonymity.

The regulator would go through all applications and, therefore, anonymity did not necessarily mean that a criminal would come to Malta to escape his country of origin. There were strict criteria to abide by.

The regulator, who would be chosen after the Prime Minister consulted with the Leader of the Opposition, should be a judge or magistrate or a person who held the office of Attorney General, permanent secretary or who practised as a lawyer in Malta for a period of at least 12 years. The position was independent from any political or other influence.

The final decision on whether an applicant would be granted Maltese citizenship rested with the minister even though it would be recommended by Identity Malta and followed due diligence by Henley & Partners.

The international company had to ensure that the applicant had not acquired his funds from money laundering or from criminal activity and was never accused or found guilty of such activities. The Bill and the subsequent regulations ensured that verifications would be carried out by Interpol and by the local police to ensure that applicants conformed to the law.

Dr Mallia said the regulations were very strict and ensured that the applicants were people of repute.

He criticised the Opposition for trying to instil fear. It just wanted the Government to raise revenue through taxation and not through such programmes that were aimed at attracting investors from the US, the Middle East and Asia.

The amount of €650,000 to buy citizenship could be changed in the future. The minister said he was convinced the Opposition MPs he spoke to informally agreed with this investor programme.

Dr Mallia spoke on the credentials of Henley & Partners, which, he said, had given advice to the previous Nationalist Administration on residence schemes.

They were global leaders on residence and citizenship schemes for the last 20 years and had established international contacts with financial institutions and banks.

The company could appoint local agents as long as these had the correct requisites. The regulations, a copy of which the minister said had been given to the Opposition, showed that applicants had to pass through stringent tests.

Dr Azzopardi warned that the “citizenship for sale” scheme and the way it was already being promoted in Russia could seriously endanger the visa waiver agreement Malta had achieved with the US.

He said Malta was witnessing the privatisation of its citizenship. This was scraping the bottom in as far as Malta’s reputation was concerned.

His speech will be reported tomorrow.