The Budget for 2024 was presented yesterday by Finance Minister Clyde Caruana.

The Budget for next year is aimed at keeping families afloat. But then one must point out that some of the social partners that issued their initial reactions to the Budget yesterday were not completely pleased with what emerged.

The UHM, among other things, was disappointed that the government didn’t accept the proposal not to tax the Cost of Living Adjustment, and this was indeed a disappointing decision. This measure could have helped out many people.

The Malta Chamber of Commerce commended the spending on the social aspect, but said that the expenditure on infrastructure is inadequate, and also said that “this budget was another missed opportunity at introducing concrete measures to disincentivise private car use in congested areas and during rush hours.”

The Malta Union of Teachers welcomed a commitment to conclude negotiations with MUT on a new Sectoral Agreement for educators, but feel the Budget fell short in providing new initiatives for the education sector.

What the Budget did d, is put a focus on the social aspect. It continues on with many measures to support families, and improves upon a number of them as well.

A major measure the government will continue to implement is the energy and fuel subsidies.

What is for sure is that without the energy subsidies, Malta would be in a very bad position. The subsidies have meant that families and businesses have been able to keep afloat, or at the very least have not ended up completely drowning as a result of the global inflation.

So the continuation of the subsidies - whether it is in general as the government has made it, or if in the future it will be changed in some way to ensure that people aren’t paying more than they are now unless they are wasting energy, as some have suggested - is extremely important for the country’s economy and the wellbeing of families.

Some other noteworthy measures are increasing pensions, the increase in the minimum wage, the increase in amount allocated to the home carers scheme, an increase in the first-time buyers scheme for UCA areas and the children’s allowance increase.

Given the current cost of living situation, it is understandable, and expected, that the government would focus on measures to help in this regard. But at the same time, one must wonder what more the government could have done had it been more careful with its finances in the past. The clear example of this would be with regards to the money spent on Vitals Global Healthcare and Steward Health Care. Perhaps removing the tax on COLA would have been possible?

One must also emphasise the need to ensure more transparency in government operations, the need to remove clientelism, the need to need for more oversight on government contracts.

In terms of ‘new’ economic sectors, the Budget does mention certain aims, such as wanting to try and create a Centre of Competence for Semiconductors, and expand aircraft leasing for instance. However, it could have done more in the way of plans to attract new economic niches.

As for the deficit situation, the government needs to be careful. Malta this year reduced the deficit by 0.7% and it stands at 5%. The plan, the finance minister had told the press, is to reduce it by 0.5% year on year now. This downward trend must continue, even in such a difficult time internationally. Over the next few years, the government will need to keep this in check.