Justice Minister Owen Bonnici told the House Public Accounts Committee that Henley and Partners had wanted many more clauses in the Individual Investment Programme contract to be blacked out, but the government refused as it wanted to give as much information as possible without giving any ideas to Malta’s competitors.
Dr Bonnici, who was replying to questions put by committee chairman Tonio Fenech and Nationalist MP Mario de Marco, said that only 14 out of 206 clauses had been blacked out because of their commercial sensitivity.
He said the government did not want to give the ingredients of the programme on a silver platter to its competitors when there were countries like Cyprus which did not even require residential status.
Malta’s programme was the only one endorsed by the European Commission, he said, adding that the contract had to be interpreted within the context of the Legal Notice and the remarks made by the commission.
Asked by Mr Fenech about remarks by Identity Malta’s CEO Jonathan Cardona to Bloomberg as reported in the press, Minister Bonnici replied that Mr Cardona was right in saying one could not expect millionaires to spend 365 days in Malta.
These people, said Dr Bonnici, travelled a lot following their investments. It did not mean, however, that they would not spend a day in Malta. What was important was that applicants had to build a genuine link with the country.
He emphasised that Identity Malta was increasing its responsibilities in the four-tier due diligence process, which included vetting by an international independent company on the scrutiny of Henley and Partners. He said that Henley were protective of their good reputation in the sector.
At the start of proceedings, the chairman’s motion – saying that the committee was dissatisfied with the minister’s justifications for the failure to divulge further information – was defeated by four votes to three.
In reply to Dr Bonnici’s argument that further information would favour Malta’s competitors, Mr Fenech said the government was not being transparent on the matter.
Dr Bonnici rejected this criticism as unacceptable because the government had published all the information it could divulge.
Dr de Marco asked whether Henley and Partners were precluded from giving similar advice to Malta’s competitors in promoting a similar scheme.
The minister replied that this question had to be put to Identity Malta officials, who would appear before the Committee in future sittings.
Replying to questions from Dr de Marco, Dr Bonnici said performance targets were also commercially sensitive, adding that Henley and Partners would not be given other fees by the government other than the four per cent mentioned in the contract if the targets were reached. This did not mean that Henley could not charge the applicants.