Updated 2.08pm - The new bed tax on tourist beds will be introduced on June 20, Tourism Minister Edward Zammit Lewis announced this afternoon. The tax, formally known as an eco-contribution, is a 50c per night levy that tourists are meant to pay when visiting the island.
The minister made the announcement at a press conference shortly after a court revoked an order prohibiting the government from implementing the law to collect the eco contribution from providers of accommodation.
The court found that applicants had no prima facie right that merited protection.
Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon delivered the judgment following an application for a warrant of prohibitory injunction was filed by the Federation of English Language Teaching of Malta, the Federated Association of Travel and Tourism Agents, the Professional Diving School Association, the Malta Association of Hotel Executives, Joseph Attard, Divesystems W S Limited, Toro Co Ltd and the Chamber of Commerce and the Ministries for Sustainable Development, the Environment and Climate Change, for Finance and Tourism.
The application was provisionally upheld on May 30.
In this morning's judgment the court heard that applicants were basing their claim on the grounds that they had not been involved in the consultation process as required by law. The Chamber of Commerce said that when legislation was proposed which would affect a particular sector, there had to be an effective process of consultation with all the stakeholders.
In this case, according to the Chamber of Commerce, the Tourism Ministry had consulted only with the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association on grounds that it was hotels which would collect the eco contribution.
But, this was not the case since there were other operators in this sector, such as host families for English language students, who would be obliged to collect this tax and who had not been consulted.
A representative for the Tourism Ministry told the court that the MHRA represented 66 per cent of the operators in this sector and this is why the government had chosen to consult with this organisation.
Mr Justice Zammit McKeon said that in order for a warrant of prohibitory injunction to be issued against the government a number of criteria had to be fulfilled, including that the applicant had a prima facie right that merited protection.
When examining the evidence produced in this case the court concluded that applicants did not have such a right.
Applicants were basing their claim on their right to be consulted as they were stakeholders in the industry of providing accommodation.
The law governing Small and Medium Businesses provided that a government department, government entity or government agency had to consult with the stakeholders prior to the implementation of a new law.
Applicants had filed their application against government ministries and not against a department, entity or agency.
Furthermore, the law governing consultation with the stakeholders specifically excluded its application to fiscal legislation.
There was no doubt, said the court, that the two legal notices were of a fiscal nature.
The court therefore overturned its previous provisional ruling and dismissed applicants' request for the issue of the warrant.
In his press conference the tourism minister welcomed the court's decision and denied that there was a lack of consultation or that there was confusion in the preparations for the introduction of the tax.
Times of Malta reported this morning that the move to block the collection
of the bed tax has already cost the island €140,000 in its first week.
The tax was meant to come into force last Wednesday having already been previously postponed.
In its own reaction, the Chamber of Commerce again complained of selective consultation, saying the government has a skewed view of the effect the proposed implementation of the tourism tax will have on the sector
"The Chamber and the associations maintain their reservations on the situation which remain and are as real as ever. The proposed implementation of the tourism tax will not only create an administrative nightmare but will also have a negative commercial effect on the industry especially with those tourists coming over on prepaid packages. It will also have a negative effect on the host family sector, which has been included in the collection of this tax, to the detriment of the English Language Teaching sector," the chamber said.
"The fact that the court’s decision was based on a strict interpretation of the law which has resulted in the negation of the spirit of the Small Business Act will only make the Chamber even more convinced on the need to protect the right of meaningful consultation to ensure that the business sector, which underpins the national economic performance, has the best possible operating environment so it can continue to grow and compete in the global market," the chamber added.