The shadow minister of finance, Mario de Marco, this evening said the government needed to account for its over-spending of €160 million from the Budget estimates, more so when it was done in circumstances where there was no major international economic crisis as experienced in the last administration.
"What does the government have to show for its spending?" Dr de Marco said during the debate in Parliament on the Budget Implementation Bill.
"It would have been fine had money been invested in better roads, more schools, or more centres for the elderly, but where did the money go?"
He insisted that an in-depth analysis of the 2016 budget overrun was needed.
Any serious business would normally do such an analysis, more so as it was crystal-clear that these increases were not on capital projects but on recurrent expenditure.
He said that during the past three years, the budget had always been overspent. The finance minister was not holding the expenditure reins but was leaving everything in the hands of ministries, as pointed out by the Audit Office.
Was the sharp increase in recurrent expenditure sustainable? The Opposition was not convinced that it was.
It was not enough to argue in the context of the ratio to economic growth. What would happen when growth slowed, even because of circumstances over which Malta had no control?
Piloting the Bill last week, Finance Minister Edward Scicluna mentioned that the PN administration had also overspent heavily in 2008 and 2009 but, Dr de Marco said, the minister was unfair because he failed to say that those were times when the world was passing through the worst financial crisis in a decade or more. Money had been spent to keep factories going.
In 2009, the government had assisted industry, tourism and the manufacturing sector to maintain their competitiveness at the oil price soared to $150 a barrel.
Under the present government, the debt component increased from $4.8 billion to €5.8 billion last year. This was not because of investment in projects but party through high salaries to persons of trust.
Dr de Marco said he was very concerned about manufacturing industry and also by the fact that Malta’s industrial production last November dropped to minus one per cent when the EU average was plus 3.1 per cent.
The retail sector was facing difficulties not only from e-commerce. Commercial centres in Ħamrun, Paola, Qormi and Birkirkara were dying a natural death.
The government eroded competitiveness by increasing fuel prices. This was affecting one and all.
Unemployment was down, but how?
The cost of living was raising its head and many minimum wage earners were finding it difficult to cope. The same could be said of pensioners. When in opposition, Dr Muscat had promised to eradicate poverty but the number of people in poverty had increased.
It was not true that the government had given something to everybody without taking anything. This was a government that took all.
Concluding, Dr deMarco said he wished the government would have announced its vision for the future. This was the stark reality of a government with a unique raison d’être – that of lining its pockets and those of its henchmen.