Opposition spokesman on finance Karmenu Vella said it was not enough to vote in favour of eurozone motions but also to follow them up on a national level.
It was essential for follow-ups to be held after each decision, he said, especially once Malta gave its share through the European Stability Mechanism.
The eurozone scenario was changing every day and the Ministry of Finance had a duty to provide updates before important decisions were taken as well as to inform Parliament if other countries had reservations and how these were dealt with.
Mr Vella complained that explanations concerning Malta’s financial difficulties were “few and far in between”. The national debt had increased by €480 million while Malta’s gross national debt amounted to nearly €5 billion.
The Central Bank of Malta had warned that deficit targets for this year would not be met if the situation was allowed to carry on unchecked. Had these considerations been noted or ignored?
The national debt in 2011 was 72 per cent of GDP. In 2012 the Government had to reduce this percentage by increasing the GDP and controlling the deficit – but it had failed drastically on both. It was now a possibility, he said, that the debt would rise to 75 per cent of GDP rather than go down.
It was true that national borrowing was internal but its amount had increased exponentially and should still be considered serious. The Government’s focus should always be on limiting these loans.
Rather than the amount of debt Malta had run up, the question was whether it was being invested or wasted. The Government should be careful what the borrowed funds were being used for, Mr Vella said, adding that he wished the authorities would be more transparent on such matters.
Winding up the debate, Finance Minister Tonio Fenech said that while he understood Dr Alfred Sant when he stated this discussion was a case of putting the cart before the horse, this process had been agreed upon because it was urgent for Malta to sign the agreement. The two debates were held separately following a request by the Opposition.
The Government was not against but in principle in favour of the EU seeking further integration. There were aspects to watch out for, he said, as it was not always a case of “one size fits all”.
In principle the Government was not against an element of supervision by the EU but it was a question of how this translated into practice. The Government had made its position clear. While it agreed with supervision in the case of systemic banks, this should continue to fall under local supervisors and the European Central Bank should be in a position to intervene.
Replying to issues raised by Mr Vella, the minister said it was important that as far as possible debt remained local and that its purpose was known. Debt had accumulated because of capital investment made in the country, which was not always the case in the past.
The Government remained committed to reducing the deficit and was confident it would be close to reaching the aims it had set out, thereby showing more signs of stability.