All in all the budget could be described as a budget focusing its attention on lowering taxation for the population in general and further enhance a number of social measures such as children's allowance, increase in the minimum wage and pensions. However, bold decisions had to be taken and these were not. The party in government had the opportunity to respond to popular sentiment and address the issues currently facing live-ability conditions in Malta.

Indication that employment numbers will continue to increase and so population numbers

One of the major concerns currently facing Malta is the year in year out increase in the number of foreign workers and its effect on the local infrastructure, and other services. I do not have all the information in hand as the minister does, but from the figures presented in the budget, I am pretty sure that the current economic model will persist for the coming and following years. To sustain this argument, the following may be pointed out:

• Employment figures are expected to grow by 4.1% in 2025. This growth in employment numbers will in all probability be sustained by the importation of foreign workers; and
• The budget indicates an increase in social security contributions of circa €111m in year 2025, an increase in line with what was experienced in the previous year (€119m increase in year 2024). Social security contributions are paid on employees' salaries and on profits by the self-employed. There is a minimum and maximum rate of payment. So an increase in output does not necessarily mean an increase in social security contributions. Social security contributions depend a lot on the number of workers.

These two points clearly indicate that, despite the budget theme being "quality of life" , the economic model of an increase in population numbers will persist. Obviously this will continue to negatively impact traffic, transport issues, air quality, environmental considerations, infrastructure issues, health issues, etc. Unfortunately, it looks like the population in general and the party in government have a different meaning to what quality of life stands for.

Capital expenditure increase is necessary but no increase in capital expenditure

Infrastructure is not up to standard. Despite the fact that population numbers will continue to rise, capital expenditure is projected to decrease next year. I think it's widely believed that the current infrastructure falls well short of the quality we should expect. Therefore, I cannot understand why the government is decreasing its budget when it is clear to everyone that the infrastructure, the health sector, the environment and other services all need a significant investment especially if a larger influx of foreign workers is expected.

Malta attractiveness both in economic and quality of life terms

Recent surveys by EY, Chamber of SMEs and other corporate and social bodies are all showing that Malta is falling behind in a number of sectors. Malta's appeal as a business destination is declining. Problems such as traffic, infrastructure and high cost of living are continuously mentioned. In the Minister of Finance's own words, all these negative factors are impacting the good and high value sectors such as the financial sector.

In addition, most international surveys which have a correlation with the quality of life in Malta all show a negative trend. This is worrying and I believe that the budget and the budgetary measures announced should have targeted these issues. In my opinion it did not. The budget failed to provide the required corrective measures needed to address the shortcomings mentioned in these surveys.

Vision for an economic model that truly improves quality of life

Besides announcing social and fiscal incentives, the budget should have laid down the long-term economic vision for the country. It looks like we will have to wait for another year.