Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/278185
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 16 MARCH 2014 Interview 14 You brought up the fact that the minister is not a doctor. Does some- one in the ministry of justice need to be a lawyer? The point is – and a lot has been written on this – that I believe that it is a matter of where we want to take the sector and that is not necessarily dependent on who the minister is. It is a matter of all the stakeholders needed for this sector. We don't need to beat around the bush. For example things written in John Dalli's report were considered too forceful by some. But I would say that that's a good thing. They set the ball rolling by making the situation public. I'm more interested in where we want to go rather than who is directing the sector. Did you regret being so critical of MPs' honoraria increase? The fact is that some ministers and yourself have salaries that do not match up to their responsibilities. I do not regret it. We had tasked the Ombudsman, the Chief Electoral Commissioner and the Auditor Gen- eral to examine these salaries. I see no reason why these salaries should be adjusted in the legislature. When the time comes, we will publicly dis- cuss this and everyone can make his or her position clear. Are you bothered by the fact that there are CEOs and people appointed by the government who earn more than the prime minister and the ministers? If I were interested in making money, I would not have become a politician. Let's talk about referenda. There may be a call for a referendum on hunting. You supported the referendum on divorce. How do you view the principle of referenda as a democratic process? Well it depends what the referen- dum is about. I do not feel comfort- able with a referendum being called on such subjects as human rights. This type of action shook up the Swiss referendum process recently. As a concept, the idea of the refer- endum is a good one but it depends how it is used – a double-edged sword. I agree with the concept but one must be responsible in its use. The environment is another point this government has been criticized on. Where in other sectors it takes a liberal position, such as on gender and LGBT issues and the separation of church and state, when it comes to the environment, the perception is that the government's pro- business stance comes at the cost of environmental protection. When you are faced with these issues, the government says that is pro-business. But that is not the full answer. I have no problem in saying we are the most pro-business party in Malta. However, there are other is- sues including that of credibility. There was voracious criticism from environmental groups in 2006 when development zones were expanded. However an Opposition which al- lowed such expansion has no cred- ibility when it attacks us on the same issues. The government's policy is that development zones do not increase. There may be adjust- ments but these will be minor and there will be compensation in that other zones will not be developed. My point is that while other governments have expanded the development zone, we have no intention to keep expanding it. That is what counts. We are being accused in this way because the decision-making process has become more robust, taking decisions where in the past decisions were not taken at all, giving the impression that the envi- ronment was actively be- ing safeguarded, which is untrue. We found many instances of decisions not having been taken. An example is when an outline for develop- ment remains pending for years because no one has the political guts to take a decision that needs to be taken. Of course once that decision is taken – after having been pending for so long – we look like the bad guys. On to the issue of vacant dwellings, which Astrid Vella brought up last Monday during Gvern li Jisma. Va- cant dwellings exist and we need to ensure that new development does not create new buildings but uses that which is already there. On the other hand, people are not chick- ens. Many of the new buildings that lie vacant are crammed. They were built in a time when permits were issued for crammed buildings and no one wants to live there. We need schemes that allow for these places to be torn down and rebuilt to bet- ter standards. That statistic (40,000 empty vacant buildings) does not mean that further development is not needed. What do you think about the possibility of a bridge or an airport between Malta and Gozo? I agree that there should be a bet- ter connection between the islands. I would need to look at what the most feasible option would be – whether it is an underground tunnel or a bridge – but one of those needs to be im- plemented. With regards to an airport, I agree with that. That is something I said before the election. The study into this possibility has begun. We also need to take into consideration a green field type of runway – as op- posed to tarmac – that is more envi- ronmentally sustainable. Before this happens we will need to study the sustainability of an air connection with fixed wing planes. Are you against the Environmental Impact Assessment (on the gas power station) being discussed further in parliament? No. In fact we are proposing par- liamentary discussion. However, the decisions on certain projects are not taken in parliament. They are taken by MEPA. If we want to change the system by which these decisions are made – i.e. handing them to parlia- ment – we would have problems with the EU. Another question on the environment. There are accusations that those behind the decision to pursue natural gas as an energy source were financiers of the Labour party. I refer to the comment by the CEO of Gasol. "The success of the project depends on the recent landslide victory of the Labour party who came to power in March". This comment that can be interpreted in different ways. How do you react to the accusation that a deal was struck with Gas Oil before the election? It is simply not true. I interpret that comment to mean that if the Labour Party were not elected, there would not be a party in government that was reducing electricity and water bills by means of such a project. If the Prime Minister had to come to a decision between a pristine valley and a development that would bring in €100 million, what would your response be? The valley. On to the matter of citizenship. Of course only time will tell how this political gamble will play out. When you began thinking about this scheme – quite soon after the election in fact – did you anticipate such an aggressive reaction to this proposal? Yes. I knew that there would be strong reactions. I did not think that the Opposition would let its partisan sentiments become overwhelmed so dramatically. I anticipated an adverse reaction from countries that would be our competitors. I was led to believe, af- ter talks between our party and the Opposition, that a consensus would be reached in some way. There seemed to be some self- inflicted damage in this situation, perhaps damage you did not expect. No, I did in fact expect it. When you do something innovative, you cannot expect everyone to accept it immedi- ately. Our position now is, more or less, the position we wanted to be in. You cannot approach negotiations with only your final position. This type of citizenship scheme is based on an important premise: once you enter into the scheme, you will have enormous tax advantages. I disagree. If that is not the reason – a reason I believe is important – is it the access to Europe? I think that Europe, despite its cur- rent economic problems, has a very attractive lifestyle. Along with its culture, it is the idea of living in Eu- rope that makes it so appealing. We as a country can maximize on that and Europe as a continent should maximize on that. Despite troubles in industry and other areas, the idea of European citizenship is highly attractive. It is not a matter of taxes but of talent. The way these people (potential applicants to the scheme) think of themselves as international citizens is perhaps difficult to grasp immedi- ately. I think that once more people come in and mix with Maltese soci- ety, this will offer a very rewarding learning experience. I am told that there are a number of French nationals interested in this scheme. These already have EU citizenship and are interested in Malta purely because of tax reasons. Do these represent the majority of applicants? Absolutely not. Does your conscience prickle when people who have lived here for years – some having fled conflict in Bosnia and Serbia, others from Africa – have never been given the opportunity to become citizens? These people who have given back to society and deserve to become Maltese. They have spent years living here and continue being treated like outsiders. I would like to make a statement that you might not agree with. To me, the crucial question is how one came to enter the country. If one enters legitimately and spends the amount of time required by law, I have no problem with granting that person citizenship. In fact I think we should do more to welcome these people because they are assets to us. What I do not agree with is granting citizenship to someone who entered the country illegally. The president-designate talked about the fearful way the Maltese regard immigrants. I agree with her. But I think that just because there are issues that arise from such situations does not mean that there is hatred towards an entire race. I think that is a stere- otype, putting people into boxes. It is not about that. I have concerns about security. One of the things Coleiro Preca and I have talked about is my concern about our detention policy, particularly when it comes to mi- nors. Do you think that, as a father, I do not worry about such things? But on the other hand we cannot condone a situation where we do not know who is entering the country. We have had reports from intelli- gence services saying that there are people who use this route to infil- trate Europe. In the face of this in- formation, we cannot risk not having the detention policy as a buffer. I think we can find a better balance, in particular with regards to minors. But we must also keep the country's security at the fore. UNJONI EWROPEA MALTA PASSAPORT On the citizenship scheme: "When you do something innovative, you cannot expect everyone to accept it immediately. Our position [on it] now is, more or less, the position we wanted to be in" On the possibility of a bridge between Malta and Gozo: "There should be a better connection between the islands. I would need to look at what the most feasible option would be"