Friends of the Earth Malta (FoEM) expressed concern over what it described as a right-wing approach towards third-country nationals (TCNs) in a statement reacting to Budget 2027, arguing that several measures disproportionately affect people who are already at a social and economic disadvantage.

FoEM welcomed several environmental measures but warned that the budget failed to address Malta's pressing environmental, social and economic challenges.

FoEM said climate action and renewable energy were notably absent from the budget's discussion, despite the ongoing climate crisis and the environmental challenges facing Malta.

Among the measures it welcomed were an increase in the eco-tax, particularly the tax imposed on tourists visiting Comino, and annual increases in taxes on leisure yachts. The organisation said the latter aligned with concerns raised through its recent Save Our Shores campaign.

However, it called for greater transparency over how the additional tax revenue would be spent, asking whether the funds would contribute to improving waste management, protecting Comino as a Natura 2000 site, restoring damaged natural habitats and safeguarding the environment.

FoEM also renewed its call for an urgent revision of Malta's energy and fuel subsidies, advocating a system that protects people experiencing energy poverty while reducing reliance on fossil fuels.

It said that the Budget continues to subsidise fossil-fuel energy and consumption, encouraging private car use rather than promoting more sustainable alternatives.

The organisation said the Budget lacked a clear plan to phase out fossil fuels and their subsidies, calling instead for a more progressive energy policy.

A major source of concern for FoEM was the treatment of third-country nationals under the budget's proposed measures.

The NGO highlighted measures affecting TCNs, including a monthly fee of €83 to retain their driving licences, charges for childcare for those who have lived in Malta for less than five years, and work permit fees that have increased by at least €200.

FoEM said that these measures would not resolve Malta's traffic congestion and infrastructure problems and could instead increase reliance on privately owned cars.

It called for a more comprehensive transport strategy centred on safe cycling lanes, dedicated bus lanes and increased public transport capacity.

The organisation also criticised the differing treatment of foreign residents, pointing out that the measures it highlighted do not apply to expatriates from EU member states or British nationals who arrived before Brexit regulations.

Describing the approach as colonialist in principle, FoEM said the measures were particularly troubling given Malta's own history under British colonial rule.

The NGO had previously joined Moviment Graffitti, Rota and Solidarjetà in issuing a joint statement opposing what they described as the unjust treatment of TCNs in relation to public transport.

FoEM also questioned the budget's wider economic priorities, particularly in light of the planned reduction in corporation tax from 35% to 25%.

While acknowledging that small and medium-sized enterprises operate under different circumstances from major multinational corporations, the organisation argued that the measures raised questions about how different groups are treated and whether the budget serves the wider public interest.

It said that the measures targeting TCNs would not deliver meaningful economic benefits in the long term, while offering limited support to working-class individuals and families.

In its assessment, Budget 2027 risks scapegoating a specific demographic group instead of addressing the structural problems affecting Malta's economy, society and environment.

FoEM also highlighted what it described as a contradiction between the government's measures and the Labour Party's socialist roots, arguing that its approach increasingly resembles far-right politics.

The organisation concluded that Malta needs an economic model that combines social justice with environmental sustainability, rather than policies that place a disproportionate burden on vulnerable groups while failing to deliver meaningful progress on climate action.