Mario Mifsud  

The statement by Deputy Prime Minister Louis Grech (Friday 15 November) that the names of persons granted Maltese citizenship by the Individual Investor Programme will be published, has allayed the concerns of those who feared that the Maltese Passport will become a passport of convenience granted to persons who wish to evade justice from their country by taking up Maltese citizenship.

Public perception on this issue was concerned that irrespective of the many safeguards of due diligence introduced by Government, this scheme - as originally proposed -  would have been open to abuse which would have impacted negatively on the reputation of Malta as a country enjoying political stability, due to its system of good governance. Such a negative public perception abroad would harm our financial services and tourism industries. Another objection to the Act is that the Government has some pre-set plan for Malta, which it is not willing to divulge and that it will not amend the Citizenship Act at all, has also been shown to be false.

The two principal remaining objections to the act are that the granting of citizenship is not conditioned by clauses of residence and investment, so that Malta may conform with similar legislation in other EU member states.

Let us not forget that many other EU member states have schemes of Citizenship by Registration, but none of these schemes grant citizenship solely on the receipt of a substantial sum of money and after a due diligence process. On Sunday 17 November, the Government invited the Opposition for talks leading to an agreement where these two and other objections may be discussed. It is important that our political and social forces resolve their differences and are united on issues relating to foreign relations so that Malta may nip in the bud any speculative attacks on our reputation as a financial Centre, which would benefit our competitors in Europe mainly Luxembourg, Ireland and the UK, but which would be to our detriment.

We may very well possibly have to face sanctions from other EU member states who may feel aggrieved by this legislation, if we do not amend IIP. There is also the tourism industry to be considered which would also be adversely affected by negative publicity.

This, after all, is what consultation is all about – in that compromise is found in our society and prolongation of conflict which may lead to separateness and division is avoided - while at the same time satisfying the needs and aspirations of both the majority and the minority.

Malta’s history is rich in such compromises of Consensual Government which is the key to  political stability and which  we have generally  enjoyed  since independence. This political stability in turn makes  a scheme such as the Individual Investor Programme attractive to serious-minded  foreigners who would be willing to invest and reside in Malta, provided they are reassured that what they bargain for today will be honoured tomorrow.

On the other hand, if  we do not find an equitable  solution to our differences, the prolongation of conflict  may very well degenerate  into division and separateness - as happened  for example in  Cyprus – another Mediterranean island -  where  ethnic differences have resulted in the division of the country into two distinct entities for the past 39 years.