Jason Azzopardi said the scheme would damage Malta’s reputation. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi

Opposition spokesman on Home Affairs, Jason Azzopardi, has urged Home Affairs Minister Manuel Mallia to publish the agreement which the Government entered into with Henley & Partners, the international group which will operate the new citizenship programme.

Dr Azzopardi said the scheme was endangering Malta’s financial services. Henley & Partners were already spreading the word that a visa-free entry to the US would be given following Maltese citizenship, while they also mentioned that a fast-track system would be set into motion.

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

Answering Dr Mallia’s piloting of the Bill amending the Citizenship Act, Dr Azzopardi claimed that the Government was tarnishing Malta’s international reputation by transmitting the message that Malta was for sale.

He accused the Government of knowing the price of everything but not the value. This was shameful, declared Dr Azzopardi.

Applicants were being asked to give a donation of €650,000 for citizenship, rather than investing in Malta.

Dr Azzopardi waived his parliamentary privilege in declaring that Henley & Partners would receive a commission of €140,000 for each citizenship acquired and a further €100,000 from each applicant, a claim the ministry later denied.

The Opposition was against the principle of selling citizenship but favoured a serious and transparent investment programme built on serious diligence.

He accused the Government of double talk and said the Bill was a “farce” as it rendered Malta similar to countries in the Caribbean which were tax havens and attracted money laundering from drug trafficking in the United States.

He said that Malta was sponsoring a conference in Miami to promote the scheme with the participation of the Prime Minister of St Kitts and the Antigua Financial Minister.

Dr Azzopardi gave his version of events when the minister invited him to receive a briefing on the scheme, which was still in embryonic stage. The minister had only announced an investment programme and provided him with a timeline for the call for expression of interest. The Government had not given further information to the Opposition until the beginning of October.

He said this was in sharp contrast with how the Nationalist Government had treated Opposition spokesmen before the publication of any Bill. This particular piece of legislation was sent to the Opposition through an e-mail a day or two before its publication.

Interjecting, Parliamentary Secretary Owen Bonnici said that he had sent the e-mail to the party whips only, but this e-mail was given for public consumption on a website. Opposition whip David Agius denied having forwarded this e-mail to anyone.

Continuing, Dr Azzopardi said a meeting with the Government consultants had been arranged at the request of the Opposition. He said that the chief consultant had told them that he had strongly advised the Government to peg the programme with investment, adding that the Government was in a rush to pass the Bill.

Although the Bill had not yet been approved by Parliament, Henley & Partners were already promoting Malta as a tax haven on their website. This conduct was not ethical and did not reflect the due diligence which the company should be promoting.

The company had also sent a Russian-language presentation, through an e-mail, to potential clients in Russia promoting visa-free travel to the US through a Maltese passport. This could jeopardise Malta’s visa waiver agreement with the United States and could have big repercussions on local businesses.

In addition, Henley & Partners were also offering a fast track option to Maltese citizenship under additional payment of 50 per cent over the normal fee. This reeked of corruption and was a travesty to due diligence.

No country in the world had placed citizenship in the hands of a foreign company and it was utterly irresponsible and shocking that the Government had chosen this route as it was playing Russian Roulette with Malta’s future.

The arrogant attitude of the company had also been evident during a meeting with Maltese financial services practitioners last week who were asked to leave if they were not in agreement.

It was also unacceptable that Identity Malta had been set up on the quiet through a legal notice of which not even the directors were made aware of.

On a point of order, Dr Mallia said that through his claims, Dr Azzopardi was misleading the House. He said that Henley & Partners had been promoting Malta’s economy and the services they offered.

The Speaker asked Dr Azzopardi to lay the email in question on the Table of the house.

Turning back to the Bill, Dr Azzopardi said that it was humiliating that all applications were to be made to the concessionaire, in this case a private company, instead of the Government.

In the case of false statements, the Bill stated that an application may be declined. Dr Azzopardi suggested that in such cases, applications should not be considered and should be declined straight away.

In cases where a certificate from the police was not obtainable, the applicant could present a sworn affidavit before a lawyer or notary to declare a clean record. Dr Azzopardi said this was indeed reckless and could lead to corruption and abuse.

Malta, he said, should not prostitute itself. The Government should reconsider because the damage to the country would ultimately be higher than the €30 million in revenue which it was planning to make from this quick buck. This amounted to a contribution of only 0.5 per cent and not the multiplier effect which the Government was boasting about.

The Bill did not provide a capping and did not include clauses to control the number of citizenships. Furthermore, the minister was being given the discretion to approve citizenship on a case by case basis. This was too wide a description which provided no limits.

Although the Government had said that citizenship would be controlled through the strictest regulations in the world, the Bill included a clause that said that, if Identity Malta considered an applicant’s due diligence to be negative but believed he was still worthy to be considered, the case could be passed to the minister.