With one blow, the Labour government felled Malta’s international reputation. Unless the situation is remedied quickly, we can experience very adverse possible repercussions for Malta. This is what rashness brings.
On October 9, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat defended the passport scheme, claiming that such a scheme was also allowed in other countries, such as Austria. He added: “This was the difference between having a prehistoric economy and one which was forward-looking.”
In Parliament while defending the Budget, Muscat accused Opposition leader Simon Busuttil of causing panic by criticising it. He also published the opinions of the Attorney General and the Dean of the Faculty of Law regarding Busuttil’s promise that he would withdraw all citizenships handed out once elected to government.
During the Budget debate, the Prime Minister advised all and sundry that his government never announced an initiative before planning it well. He stressed that his government “planned everything”.
The citizenship law amendments were steamrollered through Parliament. But the secrecy clause protecting those who purchased Maltese citizenship was rolled back singlehandedly by Muscat while in Sri Lanka. By November 19, the scheme was suspended indefinitely.
Belatedly, consultations were started with the Opposition, previously labelled panicmongers.
Last week, the scheme was prominently criticised by the Financial Times – and this carries very weighty international opinion and influence. The newspaper’s opening salvo says that UK ministers are under growing pressure to intervene against plans by Malta to sell EU passports for €650,000, allowing buyers immediate rights of residency in all member states without requiring them even to reside in Malta.
The citizenship scheme was also given prominence in many newspapers all over the world. But the Financial Times is one of the globe’s most influential newspapers, particularly with international investors and leading decision-makers, hence its greater impact.
Leading politicians in the UK and the EU are asking serious questions about visa policies that allow the Maltese to travel to hundreds of destinations without a visa and Schengen that allows us to travel in many European countries unfettered by passport control.
The situation got even worse, if it were possible. We will now have to suffer the embarrassment of Malta being at the centre of a European Parliament debate under the heading of EU Citizenship for Sale. Even as I write this piece, I struggle to believe that we have reached such a low point with such rapidity.
We risk isolation again. We risk losing out to our competitors on investment
Dangerously, the scheme may result in the re-imposition of visa control on the Maltese, particularly those wishing to travel to the US. The situation may be aggravated if the scheme causes turbulence with our Schengen partners.
So here we are, back to square one under Labour, in more ways than one. We risk isolation again. We risk losing out to our competitors on investment. Malta is back to the age when ill-thought initiatives were baked at night and announced during the morning rush hour. Welcome back to the age of unthinking rashness. I trust and hope that our policy makers realise that what they have done is causing tremors throughout the financial sector. I’m sure this is not the earthquake Muscat had promised us.
So much for good planning. The question on everyone’s lips is: “Who carries political responsibility for this debacle?”
Last week the floodlights turned on Finance Minister Edward Scicluna, who denounced the scheme before the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee. Citizens are flabbergasted by his candid admission “that if he was an MEP, he would not accept the situation”.
Was this a case of amnesia? Perhaps Scicluna forgot for a brief but important moment that he was a member of the Cabinet and not an MEP?
Not surprisingly, this case of auto-denouncement has left many people scratching their heads. Placing the blame on Scicluna may only protect the real culprit of this political debacle. Few believe that Scicluna’s admission sprung from political naivety. It was more like a deliberate act of taking the heat off the actual initiator of the scheme. Somebody must, however, take political responsibility for this debacle of unprecedented proportions.
There is no longer any doubt that this incident has tarnished Malta’s image. It will take a lot in terms of time and effort to repair it. The government must start this long process by coming to terms with its mistakes and admitting as much during the discussions with the Opposition. Only then can we start to slowly recover ground, which we so rapidly lost.
Stefano Mallia is a PN candidate for the European Parliament elections.