Former Finance Minister Tonio Fenech has described the Citizenship Bill as the Government’s only initiative so far for job creation, economic activity and investment.
But it was a bad one because it promised a Maltese passport for a simple donation, without any insistence on any form of investment, residence or other consideration to make one an investor.
“It’s just about money,” he told Parliament yesterday.
The only semblance of consultation there had been so far had been forced on the Government by the Opposition – and the Government had not been very interested in listening. It had said it had no time to make a list of desirable investments because it was time-consuming.
Anyone with money could buy Maltese citizenship and then not even visit the country
There was a “serious difference” between how serious developing countries looked at such schemes in contrast with other countries that Malta would not like to be associated with.
Initially, the proceeds from the scheme were meant to have gone into a fund for investment, which had not yet been set up. But on Monday the Finance Minister had let on that they would go into the Consolidated Fund.
Mr Fenech said a Bloomberg report on the scheme had equated Malta with European countries in financial difficulties with similar schemes. They had described it as “the cheapest way to buy a passport”.
In its present form the scheme would help anyone wanting to flee one’s homeland with an easy ticket. Anyone with money could buy Maltese citizenship and then not even visit the country. And if it was a family of three, it would work out at just €250,000 per head.
“We are fast becoming the cheapest, not the best as Joseph Muscat repeatedly promised,” said Mr Fenech. For €15 million a year the Government was ready to jeopardise the foreign investment that laid the golden eggs.
The Government should insist that anyone buying Maltese citizenship must reside in Malta for a number of years as proof of their commitment to the country. If badly administered the scheme could bring undesirable characters to Malta. Anybody without a conduct certificate from their own national police could not be wanted in their countries.
If Malta lost its hard-earned reputation as a solid financial services centre there would be “tears all around”. Some countries could even withdraw from treaties with Malta.
Just as both sides had always worked together in the financial services sector, so they should do on the scheme. If it was done well the Opposition would be ready to join the Government in selling it.
Mr Fenech said that if the scheme did not attract the desired numbers, the Government would be sure to mount pressure on its agents, creating greater conflicts of interest. When Finance Malta had been created, creditable Maltese service providers had been roped in for the job. The scheme should have sought the services of the MFSA and other good performers.
The intention of keeping the identities of new Maltese citizens secret, as well as ministerial discretion, was shameful. So was the fact that the Government’s “due diligence” had not found out about Shiv Nair’s blacklisting. No wonder it had lost the self-confidence to rely on itself for due diligence.
If the Government wanted to show its seriousness, it should step back and change the scheme to one of real investment with residence, no secrecy and no scandalous ministerial discretion, Mr Fenech concluded.