It is only an incompetent government that changes something three times and not before it dented Malta’s reputation with Europe, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil charged yesterday.
In an initial reaction to the government’s announcement of the agreement it has struck with the European Commission over the Individual Investor Programme, Dr Busuttil said the government had “backtracked” on its original proposal and was changing the controversial scheme for the third time.
Following talks with the Commission, the government was now introducing a one-year residency requirement in the scheme’s terms and conditions.
He said the talks between the government and Opposition on the scheme had failed precisely because of the government’s resistance to introducing a residency requirement.
“The government backtracked and now had to introduce something which the Opposition had proposed from day one. Had he listened to us, Malta’s name wouldn’t have been tarnished in the way it was,” he said.
This new position proved how the Nationalist Party had been right on this issue from the outset, he added.
Dr Busuttil said he was reserving his final position on the changes to the scheme until the full details of the amendments were published, noting that there were differences between what Dr Muscat had said and the Commission’s statement.
The Commission said in its statement that the amendments included genuine links with Malta through the introduction of “an effective residence status” prior to the possibility of acquiring citizenship.
“No certificate of naturalisation [citizenship] will be issued unless the applicant provides proof that he/she has resided in Malta for a period of at least 12 months immediately preceding the day of issuing of the certificate of naturalisation,” the Commission said.
But in his press conference earlier, Dr Muscat had said the applicants would not need to have spent 365 days on the island, although neither did it mean they could stay away completely.
In view of this discrepancy, Dr Busuttil said more clarifications were needed. “There’s a difference between what [Dr] Muscat the salesman is trying to sell and what the Commission said. We will wait and see.”
When asked whether he would withdraw the judicial protest and the parliamentary motion challenging the IIP Legal Notice, Dr Busuttil said it all depended on these clarifications.
Asked whether he believed his legal position of withdrawing citizenships was still valid following declarations by Henley and Partners, the scheme’s concessionaires, that it was illegal, Dr Busuttil said whatever the firm said had to be taken “with a pinch of salt” as they stood to gain “at least €200 million in commissions”.
In a reaction, the Labour Party said no one could understand Dr Busuttil as he first tried to hinder the scheme, then tried to incite the European Commission against Malta and now ended up without a position on the scheme.
Meanwhile, Alternattiva Demokratika welcomed the introduction of a residency requirement which “eliminates any breaches to the EU Treaties”. Party leader Arnold Cassola deplored the “childish and obstinate behaviour” of the political leaders “who have caused serious damage to our country’s reputation during the past three months”.