Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1031063
25 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 23 SEPTEMBER 2018 OPINION @rvassallo Ralph Cassar, Secretary General AD and local councillor in Attard ralph.cassar@alternattiva.org.mt and 'impartiality'. The judge in question is married to Labour MEP Marlene Mizzi... and as Busuttil's lawyer, Jason Azzopardi, argued in court: "[Marlene Mizzi] had repeat- edly made political arguments in favour of the Prime Min- ister and hit out at Busuttil, referring to him with the derogatory acronym 'LOO' (Leader of the Opposition)." Two quick observations: one, if I were Azzopardi, I would have made the same point without dragging the 'LOO' detail (which inevitably became the main headline). I had never heard that acronym before, and now that I have... I can't even picture the for- mer 'LOO' without instantly cracking up. In fact I've been chuckling about it all morning. Seriously, though: if Azzopardi thought that would generate sympathy for his client, he ought to know the only thing it is likely to generate is a tsunami of un- flattering memes. 'Nuff said. The second point, however, is that... huh? What? How the heck are we even supposed to make head or tail of this one? OK, let's give it a shot. So Judge Antonio Mizzi is considered 'biased', because his wife (not himself) made disparaging remarks about Simon Busuttil, and praised Joseph Muscat. But Sven Giegold and Roberta Metsola are considered 'politically neutral'... even though they have both passed disparaging remarks about the govern- ment they are supposedly 'assessing', and are both (for obvious reasons, in Metsola's case) openly sympathetic towards the people complain- ing about it. Clearly, something doesn't quite work out in the equa- tion. It should be obvious that those two statements are entirely incompatible and antithetical; yet both are simultaneously made by the same side in this debate, without appearing to be even remotely conscious of the contradiction. And the best part of it is... this is the delegation which will 'impartially' and 'dispas- sionately' assess the rule of law situation in Malta. Well, I just can't wait to read their 'unbiased', 'objective' report. It's been a while since I read a good fantasy novel... IN an interview on the Labour Party's radio station one Sunday in September, reported faithfully and uncritically by the media, the Prime Minister solemnly and proudly declared that 80% of us Maltese are 'au- tomatically richer' because we own a house or a flat, and the value of property is on the rise. This is a very common but fallacious argument. De- bunked again and again, but popular with some politicians, not least our dear politicians from PL and PN. They are so in love with the construction lobby that they spare no time in peddling these and other myths. The only people getting richer are property specula- tors, who build, own and trade hundreds upon hundreds of properties, from tiny flats to maisonettes, to so called 'villas' or towers for the multimil- lionaires. Some even get public land for peanuts – just ask the db Group. The fact is you do not get rich by owning the one and only house or flat you live in. Yes, if you sell that house or flat, you would probably cash-in more than you spent, but first of all, you are probably paying a home loan, so a big chunk will go towards paying the bank. What's more, since prices are going up, the new flat, or if you can afford it, house, you'll buy will probably be either of the same type, or more prob- ably a downgrade. You'll end up spending more money for less. As for the renting option, forget it. If you do not have the 10% deposit for your own flat – which 10% is getting higher and higher – you're in deep shit. I know someone making a 430-euros-a-month loan repayment on a small flat bought around 10 years ago. Similar tiny flats in the same area are being rented out for anything between 700 to 1000 euros a month. Crazy. In this sense, yes, the owner is 'richer' – safe from the fluctuations of the market and paying a stable 'rent' to the bank over a period of time. Such owners, own- ing only the place they live in, would be crazy to try to 'enter the market' and sell. With prices going up thanks to Muscat's laissez-faire and neoliberal attitude, not much different from that of the previous pro-speculator PN government, home loans are becoming more expensive to maintain. However, for normal median wage Maltese em- ployees, renting is even more expensive. Buying a flat or house is a major financial decision, giving people peace of mind. Cultur- ally, emotionally and practi- cally, the sense of owning the place you live in is important to most of us. But you are not investing in the financial sense of the term, unless you are a multi-property owning specu- lator with loads of capital. Let's for argument's sake say that property prices increase at the rate of inflation (in fact figures show that the increase is much bigger). If nannu and nanna bought a house for 6,000 euros 50 years ago, that was a huge sum of money for them. Let's say it now appreciated to a value of 200,000 euros. If you inherit the house and already own your own place, all well and good, any profit on the sale is yours. However, nannu and nanna did not get richer. If you had to buy the house, you probably wouldn't afford it. If you just move into nannu and nanna's house, again you are not getting any richer. A house or flat has a more important primary pur- pose than the Prime Minister so simplistically put it. The primary purpose is that of providing shelter and a sense of security. When you make an investment, one of the more important aspects is controlling when you can buy and sell, say stocks and shares, to maximise your returns. But if the property you own is your primary residence, you don't have such control. You cannot just sell. Selling a house is highly disruptive. You'll still need somewhere else to live. Basically a house cannot be an investment if you never plan to sell it. Most of us, Prime Minister, are not specu- lators. What's more, owning a house, is a financial com- mitment. Probably, as stated earlier, a safer commitment than renting but apart from monthly mortgage payments, homeowners insurance and utilities, you also have to main- tain the property – paying for repairs and maintenance regu- larly. Some pay yearly ground rent, and a yearly contribution to the owners association to maintain the common areas of a block of flats. So, Prime Minister, stop bending over backwards to please the construction lobby. Just stop. And by the way, the average wage may be going up, but when even those with relatively good salaries work- ing in the gaming industry have to share tiny flats, then something is wrong. Let us not forget that living at the mercy of the market and having to move when the village or town you lived in becomes unaf- fordable also has a detrimental effect on community cohesion. Stop giving away public land for peanuts for the building of isolated, gated communities. As for the 80% who are home owners, especially those paying a home loan and struggling to live decently, ignore the Prime Minister. Don't think of your house as an investment. Enjoy living in your house or flat and appreci- ate the peace of mind it brings in knowing that had you rent- ed you'd probably be paying at least twice your mortgage a month. Laissez-faire capitalism sucks, ask anyone who rents. Ralph Cassar Judging by the latest EP 'rule of law' delegation to Malta, these people seem to suddenly think of themselves as 'objective' and 'unbiased'... even if they all owe their very parliamentary positions to a political system that is itself inherently based on bias and prejudice The only people getting richer are property speculators, who build, own and trade hundreds upon hundreds of properties, from tiny flats to maisonettes, to so called 'villas' or towers for the multimillionaires No, Prime Minister, owning the only house we live in does not make us any richer