Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/212250
23 Opinion maltatoday, SUNDAY, 17 NOVEMBER 2013 Michael Falzon Psst… want a Maltese passport? I t is hardly a surprise that the most controversial aspect of this year's budget has turned out to be the so called Individual Investors Programme (IIP), newspeak for a scheme that caters for the selling of Maltese citizenship to rich foreigners. According to a survey published by this newspaper last Sunday, the majority (53.1%) are against this scheme while the majority (52.6%) look at the Budget in a positive way. Obviously many are ignoring the fact that the 'good budget' with which the citizens of Malta have been regaled depends on the sale of Maltese citizenship to foreigners: without the income from this scheme, the budget would go bust, and the Minister of Finance would never be able to make ends meet. The argument against the scheme is more emotional than logical. It questions the value of Maltese citizenship as if one can put a price on it. The comparison with prostitution, in the general meaning of the word, is perhaps justified. Speaking last Monday in reply to the budget speech, Simon Busuttil made two points against the scheme: how do we value our hard-earned citizenship – which should be a reflection of our national pride – and why should the list of those 'customers' who become citizens by paying some €650,000 be kept secret? The argument behind the first issue is emotional while that behind the secrecy issue is political. If citizenship is just a commodity, then it can be sold without any qualms, but citizenship, according to Busuttil, impinges on our national identity. He is right of course, but this is a vague emotional issue because it centres on the pride of being Maltese. The implication is that those who buy Maltese citizenship for practical purposes (i.e. unobstructed access into the EU) do not share this pride. Naturalised citizens who obtain their citizenship after a period of time residing in Malta or who marry a Maltese spouse would have developed some affinity to the fatherland before being given citizenship. Fake marriages made solely so that a foreigner becomes a Maltese citizen also exist, and apart from them being null and void and illegal, it is only natural for genuine Maltese to resent those who go through this phoney procedure to attain Maltese citizenship. Here again this resentment is a matter of emotion, not logic. I think Busuttil made quite a good appeal to our emotions when denigrating the scheme, although I also think that the gimmick of his waving a Maltese passport in front of the TV cameras was way over the top. It reminded me of Mabel Strickland waving the British Dependencies passport during a political programme on television 50 years ago, when she was trying to persuade the natives not to The fact that the Maltese passport has now become a source of revenue for independent Malta is an ironic – and fascinating – historical twist! opt for political independence as this would mean the tragic loss of that passport. The fact that the Maltese passport has now become a source of revenue for independent Malta is an ironic – and fascinating – historical twist! Being quite younger than me and not having been around 50 years ago, Busuttil missed this ironic twist of fate, but he still pitched for the pride of being Maltese – a pride that could be nurtured and developed only after Malta became independent in 1964. The sorest point in all this is that the names of those who attain Maltese citizenship will not be published and will be kept secret – a state secret, so to speak! People of all sorts of political affiliations or inclinations smell a rat here. The same MaltaToday survey mentioned above shows that the absolute majority of 71.1% feel that the list of people who are granted citizenship through the scheme should be in the public domain. This is a majority that crosses across all political beliefs and annihilates the very existence of the movement that Joseph Muscat touted to get the landslide victory that he got last March. Yet, while attempting to gloss over the emotional aspect of the scheme by saying that it will attract the world's best brains and entrepreneurs to Malta – a half truth, at best – when he replied to Busuttil last Tuesday, the Prime Minister ignored completely the issue of the secrecy condition that is irking every Pepp and Grezz in this country. On Tuesday, he had the chance to justify this provision but he did not. He did not because this is a dangerous double-edged blade that he must think as better ignored than handled. So what is the real reason behind this secrecy condition? It should be obvious. Today there are rich people who are wary of the political situation in their country and would be prepared to pay €650,000 for a Maltese passport that would become handy on a rainy day. Their decision to become Maltese citizens would not be a reflection of Malta's goodness or of their desire to invest in Malta, but of their need for a safe getaway card when they sense political turmoil brewing, as this could lead to their applecart being upset in no small way. The 'investment' would be in their future, of course, not in Malta. In their circumstances, they would not want their own government to know that they have obtained Maltese citizenship as otherwise they could land in trouble today, rather than tomorrow. Hence, the attraction of the secrecy clause. As a good salesman, Muscat has opted for the secrecy condition but he cannot say why he did it because he would be diving deeper in a quandary of his own making. Justifying the secrecy clause would create problems for his government in its relations with governments of countries whose rich citizens feel safer with a secretly issued Maltese passport at their disposal. This is dangerous territory, with Muscat tiptoeing around the issue while ignoring the elephant that he himself has invited in his parlour. Is it worth it? Would the number of people paying for a Maltese passport be drastically less without the secrecy clause? Should Malta take the risk? I think it should not. *** A tale of two speeches This week produced what were probably the best speeches ever delivered by the Prime Minister, Joseph Muscat and by the Leader of the Opposition, Simon Busuttil. The occasion, of course, was the Opposition's reply to the budget speech on Monday and the Prime Minister's rejoinder on Tuesday. As far as I can recall these were the first fully televised speeches from Parliament for both leaders in their current political responsibilities. It was a first for Simon Busuttil while Joseph Muscat has taken part in such debates from the other side of the fence as Leader of the Opposition during the previous legislature. Irrespective of the accuracy of the contents, I must admit that I was pleasantly surprised by both speeches: they were delivered in a well-mannered fashion, but also in a fiery way that I had thought was passé. The new generation of Maltese politicians have come of age. Michael Falzon is Chairman of the Malta Developers Association and a former Nationalist infrastructure minister (micfal@maltanet.net) CHECK OUT MICHAEL FALZON'S LATEST COLUMNS ON http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/blogs