Il-bejgħ tal-passaporti

Il-Gvern Malti qed jinsisti li hu biss għandu dritt li jiddeċiedi dwar iċ-ċittadinanza. Kull pajjiż għandu dan id-dritt. Dritt li hu rinfurzat bil-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà fit-trattati Ewropej. Prinċipju li fi kliem sempliċi jfisser li l-Unjoni Ewropeja m’għandha l-ebda jedd tindaħal u/jew tiddetta f’dawk l-oqsma li huma kompetenza tal-istati membri.

Dan hu kollu minnu. Imma ma jirriflettix l-istorja kollha.

It-trattati tal-Unjoni Ewropeja ma’ jagħtuniex biss drittijiet. Hemm ukoll dmirijiet.

Wieħed minn dawn id-dmirijiet huwa dak magħruf bħala l-prinċipju ta’ lealtà li t-trattati Ewopeja (Treaty of the EU article 4.3) jirreferu għalih bħala obbligu ta’ kooperazzjoni (principle of sincere cooperation). Ma’ jagħmilx sens li kulħadd jimxi għal rasu, b’mod partikolari f’dawk l-oqsma fejn deċiżjoni fi stat tista’ toħloq drittijiet fi stati oħra fl-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Il-ħruġ ta’ passaporti billi dawn jinxtraw kif qed jagħmel il-Gvern Malti jmur kontra dan il-prinċipju ta’ lealtà. Nafu li l-passaport Malti jagħti dritt ta’ moviment, dritt ta’ residenza u dritt ta’ xogħol f’kull rokna tal-Unjoni Ewropeja. Hemm impatt konsiderevoli fuq l-istati l-oħra membri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja. Għalhekk hemm l-obbligu tal-lealtà u l-kooperazzjoni.

Għalhekk il-Gvern Malti miexi ħażin. M’għandux jedd li jbiegħ il-passaporti, jgħid x’jgħid.

Dan mhux qed ngħidu illum. Ilni ngħidu 7 snin.

Tista’ jekk trid tara dan l-artiklu fuq dan il-blog:

Subsidiarity and loyalty : 25 ta’ Jannar 2014

Ma’ Reno Bugeja: lil hinn mill-bebbux

Reno ġurnalista b’esperjenza li għandi kull rispett lejh. Ikun ippreparat sewwa biex ikun jista’ jindirizza l-argument quddiemu.

L-intervista kienet iffukata fuq l-ADPD u l-futur tiegħu. X’inhi r-raġuni għall-fatt li minkejja dawn is-snin kollha għadna partit żgħir?

Tul l-intervista Reno, b’sengħa, kontinwament ipprovokani biex joħroġ l-argumenti u l-ispjegazzjonijiet tiegħi.

Il-ħin ma taraħx għaddej għax l-argumenti jintiżġu flimkien b’ħeffa kbira b’mod li sat-tmiem jidher quddiemek mużajk ta’ argumenti li jagħti stampa ċara.

Id-diffikultajiet li niffaċċjaw huma essenzjalment tnejn.

L-ewwel hemm sistema elettorali li tul is-snin fittxet dejjem li tikkonsolida l-ħakma ta’ żewġ partiti fuq il-pajjiż u l-istituzzjonijiet tiegħu.

It-tieni hemm il-frammentazzjoni. Dawk li jaħsbuha bħalna huma mifruxa. Tul is-snin dejjem kien hemm diffikulta biex ninġabru flimkien. L-għaqda bejn l-Alternattiva Demokratika u l-Partit Demokratiku f’dan is-sens kien pass kbir il-quddiem. Ovvjament hemm ħafna iktar xi jsir biex l-ilħna progressivi jinġabru flimkien.

L-intervista serviet biex nispjega ukoll il-kuntrast politiku tagħna ma dak tal-partiti l-oħra.

Tkellimt ftit dwar l-ambjent. Emfasizzajt li l-ambjent għalina jmur lil hinn mill-apprezzament tal-bebbux, id-dud u l-fjuri. L-apprezzament u l-ħarsien tal-ekoloġija huwa importanti ħafna f’ħidmietna. Imma l-ħarsien tal-ambjent ifisser ukoll il-ħarsien u t-titjib fil-kwalità tal-ħajja, tagħna u tal-ġenerazzjonijiet ta’ warajna.

Tkellimna fit-tul, madwar 40 minuta.

Issibu l-ħsibijiet dwar kif il-pajjiż qed isir dipendenti fuq l-evażjoni tat-taxxa. Nafferma għal darba oħra li l-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza mhiex aċċettabbli għalina. Hi prostituzzjoni tal-pajjiż.

Hemm ukoll kummenti dwar l-abort u kif dan fil-prattika diġa qed isir fl-isptar Mater Dei.

Il-ħidma politika tagħna tkompli. Pass pass nimxu l-quddiem.

Meta l-istat jinkoraġixxi l-evażjoni tat-taxxa

F’indirizz li għamlet nhar it-Tnejn liċ-Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Janet Yellen, Segretarju għat-Teżor tal-Istati Uniti, ippreżentat l-argument favur taxxa minima applikabbli għall-korporazzjonijiet multinazzjonali fuq livell globali, irrispettivament minn fejn huma bbażati.  Proposta ta’ din ix-xorta, kif rappurtat min-New York Times, ikollha s-saħħa li żżomm lil dawn il-kumpaniji milli jċaqilqu l-profitti tagħħom minn post għall-ieħor biex jevadu l-ħlas tat-taxxi dovuti minnhom.

Meta jitnaqqsu it-taxxi biex tinġbed l-industrija u n-negozju, emfasizzat  Ms Yellen, hemm is-sogru li mmissu l-qiegħ: fejn ser tieqaf? Ma nistgħux nibqgħu sejrin hekk. Il-kompetittività mhiex biss kif kumpanija tmur fil-konfront ta’ kumpaniji oħra.  Hi ukoll il-mod li bih nassiguraw  li l-gvernijiet ikollhom sistemi ta’ ġbir ta’ taxxa li jkunu stabbli b’mod li jistgħu jiġbru biżżejjed fondi x’jinvestu f’servizzi publiċi u jkunu f’posizzjoni li jirreaġixxu fi żmien ta’ kriżi. Hu meħtieġ li ċ-ċittadini bejniethom jerfgħu b’mod ġust il-piż tal-finanzjament tal-gvern.”

Din il-materja hi diġa fuq l-agenda tal-Unjoni Ewropeja. Hi opposta b’qawwa minn Malta, il-Lussimburgu, l-Irlanda u pajjiżi oħrajn.  L-argument dwar l-armonizzazzjoni tat-tassazzjoni hu parti integrali mill-ġlieda kontra l-evażjoni tat-taxxa u l-ħasil tal-flus.

Hu ta’ sfortuna li Malta (u pajjiżi oħrajn) repetutament abbużat mis-sovranità tagħha fuq materji ta’ taxxa. Huwa riżultat ta’ dan l-abbuż repetut li l-proposta dwar l-armonizzazzjoni tat-taxxa qabdet l-art b’mod li issa hi appoġġata ukoll mill-Istati Uniti tal-Amerka.  Malta rmiet il-vantaġġ kompetittiv tagħha billi abbużat minnu repetutament. Il-ħsara lir-reputazzjoni tal-pajjiż hi għaldaqstant awto-gol mill-kbar.

Malta ma tistax tkun kredibbli fil-ġlieda kontra l-evażjoni tat-taxxa u l-ħasil tal-flus jekk ser tibqa’ tiffaċilita l-evażjoni tat-taxxa fuq skala internazzjonali.  Xi snin ilu il-Grupp tal-Ħodor fil-Parlament Ewropew kien ippubblika studju intitolat Toxic Tax deals: when BASF’s tax structure is more about style than substance. Dan ir-rapport kien svela kif tul is -snin, il-kumpanija Ġermaniża ġgant tal-kimika BASF kien irnexxielha tevita u tiffranka l-ħlas ta’ biljun euro f’taxxi fuq 4 snin billi użat lill-Malta għal dan l-iskop. Dan sar billi kumpanija sussidjarja ġiet reġistrata f’Malta u t-taxxi dovuti, għax l-azzjonisti mhux residenti f’Malta, ħadu lura 6 euros minn kull 7 li kellhom iħallsu f’taxxa!

Il-każ tal-Korporazzjoni Amerikana Apple fl-Irlanda, kif nafu, wassal għall-evażjoni ta’ 13-il biljun euro f’taxxi. L-iskandlu Luxleaks fil-Lussimburgu ukoll wera kif dan il-pajjiż żgħir fost il-fundaturi tal-Unjoni Ewropeja ukoll kien qed jinkoraġixxi l-evażjoni tat-taxxa.

Dawn huma ftit mill-eżempji. Bla dubju hemm bosta oħra li s’issa huma moħbija mill-iskrutinju pubbliku. Bħala riżultat ta’ dan kollu madwarna għaddejja evażjoni ta’ biljuni ta’ euro ta’ taxxi, kontinwament. Malta, l-Irlanda, il-Lussimburgu u xi pajjiżi oħra jiġbru parti żgħira mit-taxxi dovuti bħala ħlas talli jippermettu din l-evażjoni ta’ taxxa fuq skala pjuttost kbira.

F’Malta dan kollu kien possibli bħala riżultant tal-hekk imsejjaħ “kunsens nazzjonali” bejn il-PLPN dwar il-qasam finanzjarju. “Kunsens” li ilu fis-seħħ numru ta’ snin. Il-ħsara lir-reputazzjoni ta’ Malta li seħħet u għad qed isseħħ bħala riżultat ta’ dan kollu, għaldaqstant, ma jġorriex il-Partit Laburista waħdu. Il-Partit Nazzjonalista ukoll għandu resposabbiltà xi jġorr. Għalhekk fuq dawn il-materji in-Nazzjonalisti u l-Labour dejjem iħokku dahar xulxin.  

Sfortunatament l-evażjoni tat-taxxa u l-ħasil tal-flus huma ħafna drabi konnessi. Bosta drabi fejn issib waħda issib l-oħra ukoll.

It-triq il-quddiem m’għandiex ikollha impatt fuq is-sovranità fil-qasam tat-tassazzjoni kif determinat mit-trattati Ewropej permezz tal-ħtieġa tal-unanimità f’materji konnessi mat-taxxa. Imma hemm bżonn urġenti li l-qasam tal-politika fiskali ukoll jinbena fuq prinċipji etiċi b’saħħithom. U mhux dan biss. Għandu jkun assigurat darba għal dejjem li Malta ma tibqax tiddependi minn dħul ġej mill-evażjoni tat-taxxa.

Għax id-dipendenza tal-ekonomija Maltija fuq l-evażjoni tat-taxxa (u l-bejgħ tal-passaporti) hi ta’ inkwiet kbir għall-pajjiż. L-industrija tal-evażjoni tat-taxxa hi sors ta’ dħul kif ukoll ta’ impiegi li it-tnejn li huma inevitabilment jintilfu fi żmien qasir. Wasal iż-żmien li nippjanaw għal futur nadif, futur li mhux iktar dipendenti fuq l-evażjoni tat-taxxa.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum: il-Ħadd 11 t’April 2021

When the state encourages tax evasion

In a speech delivered on Monday to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Janet Yellen, US Treasury Secretary, made the case for a global minimum tax applicable to multinational corporations irrespective of where they locate their headquarters. Such a proposal, reported the New York Times, would prevent companies from shifting profits to evade taxes.

Lowering tax rates to attract business, emphasised Ms Yellen, is a race to the bottom which has to be addressed. Competitiveness is not just how companies fare against other companies. It is also about making sure that governments have stable tax systems that raise sufficient revenue to invest in essential public goods and respond to crisis, and that all citizens fairly share the burden of financing government.

This issue is already on the agenda of the EU facing fierce opposition from Malta, Luxembourg, Ireland as well as others. The issue of tax harmonisation is an integral part of the fight against tax evasion and money laundering.

It is unfortunate that Malta (and others) have been repeatedly abusing its tax sovereignty. It is as a result of such repeated abuse that the proposal for tax harmonisation is gaining ground such that it now has the support of the United States of America too. As a result of greed Malta has squandered a competitive advantage by abusing it repeatedly and continuously. The resulting reputational damage is hence an own goal.

Malta (and the other countries) cannot be credible in the declared fight against tax evasion and money laundering if it keeps facilitating tax avoidance on an international scale. Some years back the Green Group in the European Parliament had published a study entitled Toxic Tax deals: when BASF’s tax structure is more about style than substance. This report reveals that over the years, the German chemical giant BASF used Malta to avoid the payment of one billion euros in taxes. This was done using the “legal” possibility to have tax refunds of up to six sevenths of the tax due in such cases where shareholders are not resident in the Maltese islands. Tax avoidance is tax evasion sanctioned by the state.

The Apple Corporation case in Ireland as a result of which another €13 billion in taxes were avoided is another example of tax evasion sanctioned by the state of Ireland. Luxleaks had also revealed countless of other examples as a result of which Luxembourg too embarked on state encouraged tax-evasion.

These are just some examples of many: the proverbial tip of the iceberg. There are undoubtedly countless of others, currently below the radar of public scrutiny, as a result of which the payment of billions of euros in taxes are being continuously avoided. Malta, Ireland, Luxembourg and other countries receive a small part of the actual tax due as a result of facilitating this state encouraged tax evasion.

Locally this scam is the result of the PNPL “national consensus” on financial institutions and fiscal policy in force for a number of years in Malta. The responsibility for the resulting reputational damage is thus not one to be shouldered by the Labour Party on its own, it has help from the PN which has continuously buttressed this abusive behaviour.

Unfortunately, tax evasion and money-laundering are inseparable twins!

The way forward need not impact the tax sovereignty afforded by the EU treaties through the unanimity rule on taxation issues. However, it necessitates ensuring that policy on all fiscal issues is also founded on sound ethical principles.

In addition to ensuring that fiscal policy is not in any way unethical it is about time that Malta does not any more, in any way, depend on tax avoidance.

The dependence of Malta’s economy on tax avoidance (and the sale of citizenship) is very worrying. The tax avoidance industry is a source of both revenue to the state and employment opportunities, both of which will be lost in the not-so-distant future. It is about time that we start planning for a cleaner future, a future that is, which is not dependent on the tax avoidance industry!

Published in the Malta Independent on Sunday : 11 April 2021

Kull qalb trid oħra

Bħalkom qrajt l-istorja dwar ir-rappurtaġġ fuq it-TV Franċiż. Dwar dawk li qalu li jiġbdu l-ispag biex jieħdu li jridu meta japplikaw biex klijenti tagħhom jixtru ċ-ċittadinanza Maltija.

Jidher li hemm doża qawwija ta’ ftaħir biex jimpressjonaw klijent, imma xejn ma nieħodha bi kbira li x’imkien hemm xi toqba, kbira jew żgħira. Hemm ir-regolatur li għandu l-għodda biex jinvestiga. Nifhem li għalhekk ġiet sospisa l-liċenzja temporanjament. Nistenna, ħa nara għandux il-kuraġġ jirrapporta xi ħaga!

L-istorja l-kbira imma, naħseb li mhiex dik tal-passaporti. Hi l-istorja l-oħra tan-negozjant li lmenta li ħallewh barra meta qassmu l-Bajja ta’ San Ġorg. Dan jidher li kellem lill-Ministru Cardona li wassal l-ilment lil sieħbu Konrad, il-Ministru tat-Turiżmu. Konrad ħakk rasu u qallu li l-bajja żgħira, ftit hemm post, imma ser jara x’jista’ jsir.

Sa hawnhekk xejn ġdid. Imma hemm iktar. Hu hemm fejn hu ta’ tħassib.

Ġie rrappurtat li Cardona bagħat messaġġ lil Konrad u qallu li lil din il-familja jeħtieġ li tingħata l-għajnuna għax “huma dejjem tawna l-għajnuna.”

Il-mistoqsija sempliċi hi “din, x’għajnuna hi?” Ma jidhirlix li rajt xi għajnuna finanzjarja minn din il-familja dikjarata fir-rapporti tad-donazzjonijiet. Mela allura x’tip ta’ għajnuna hi din?

Biex ma ninftiehemx ħażin mhux qed nilmenta li din il-familja tagħti għajnuna lil partit politiku. Imma qed niġbed l-attenzjoni li hemm limitu għal x’tip ta’ għajnuna tista’ tingħata. Din hi ukoll regolata bil-liġi.

Ikun tajjeb li dan ikun iċċarat. L-ebda investigazzjoni ma hi ser tasal biex tistabilixxi preċiżament x’inhu jiġri issa, imma xi darba xi ħadd jisparla u forsi jkun hemm xi indikazzjoni tan-natura tal-ġenerosità kbira ta’ din il-familja.

Għax kif qal Cardona lil Konrad kull qalb trid oħra. Anke fir-Repubblika tal-Banana.

Tgħid nitgħallmu mill-iżbalji?

Huwa ta’ sodisfazzjon li l-Gvern u l-Kummissjoni Ewropeja waslu għal ftehim dwar l-iskema ta’ ċittadinanza.

Il-bieraħ fil-għaxija tħabbar li wara diskussjonijiet kien hemm qbil li l-iskema ta’ ċittadinanza ser tkun emendata biex tinkludi l-obbligu ta’ residenza ta’ sena. Dan hu tibdil radikali għall-iskema u jagħmel l-iskema kompletament differenti.

Ser ikun hemm min jargumenta dwar jekk sena huwiex perjodu qasir. Bħal dejjem hemm argumenti validi li jiġġustifikaw attitudni bħal din. Ser jibqa’ min hu kontra l-iskema fil-prinċipju. L-istess bħalma hemm min hu tal-fehma li tul is-snin l-għoti taċ-ċittadinanza b’mod ġenerali illaxkat ħafna.

L-iżball fundamentali tal-Gvern fil-proċess kollu kien li għaġgel u dam biex fehem il-ħtieġa tal-konsultazzjoni. Il-ħin li jintuża fil-konsultazzjoni mhuwiex ħin moħli. Huwa ħin li fih tista’ tifhem aħjar kif jaħsibha ħaddieħor. Bil-konsultazzjoni, proposta tajba issir aħjar filwaqt li proposta ħażina jkollok ċans tibdilha.

Sfortunatament l-iżbalji li saru mill-Gvern u r-reazzjonijiet kultant sproporzjonati tal-Opposizzjoni, t-tnejn li huma, ser jissarfu inevitabilment fi ħsara lir-reputazzjoni ta’ Malta. Hemm bżonn li nitgħallmu minn dawn l-iżbalji.

Nistennew ħalli naraw id-dettalji tal-iskema kif emendata.

Il-gimmick ta’ Simon Busuttil

Il-ħsara lir-reputazzjoni ta’ Malta bl-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza imfassla minn Joseph Muscat u l-konsulenti tiegħu Henley and Partners hi waħda kbira.

Il-bieraħ Simon Busuttil kompla żied ma din il-ħsara billi ddikjara li ser imur il-Qorti u jippreżenta protest ġudizzjarju kontra l-Gvern u kontra Henley and Partners. F’dan il-protest ġudizzjarju Busuttil fi ħsiebu jibqa’ jemfasizza illi meta l-PN ikun fil-Gvern hu determinat illi lil dawk li jkunu xtraw iċ-ċittadinanza jeħodilhom lura.  Dikjarazzjoni ta’ din ix-xorta minn Simon Busuttil tfisser li l-PN taħt Simon Busuttil jiġi jaqa’ u jqum mid-drittijiet tal-bniedem. Simon Busuttil jaf li dak li qed jgħid ma jistax jagħmlu. Jaf li ma jistax b’daqqa ta’ pinna jħassar id-drittijiet akkwistati anke jekk għandu raġunijiet validi li minħabba fihom ma jaqbilx mal-liġi li ħolqot dawk id-drittijiet.

Din id-dikjarazzjoni ta’ Simon Busuttil hi tebgħa kerha fuq il-PN. Busuttil fil-ġimgħat li għaddew iġġustifika dan billi qal li għandu parir legali f’dan is-sens. Busuttil imissu jippubblika l-parir li qed jgħid li għandu kif diġa għamel il-Gvern meta ippubblika l-parir tal-Avukat tar-Repubblika.

Li Simon Busuttil jinsisti li l-Gvern ta’ Muscat jibdel drastikament l-iskema hu tajjeb. Li jikkompeti miegħu dwar min minnhom jagħmel l-iktar ħsara hu tal-biki.

Subsidiarity and loyalty

The Prime Minister has a generational transformation in sight which he wants to bankroll with the monies generated by his sale of citizenship scheme. His supporters see traitors everywhere as they cannot stomach any form of criticism.

Does any EU member state have the right to introduce and implement a sale of citizenship scheme?  Government spokesmen have repeatedly stated that the Malta Government has been advised that it is in line with EU legislation. In line with the subsidiarity principle, nationality issues, we were told, are the sole and exclusive competence of EU member states.

No one is contesting that nationality issues are a national competence. In fact even Commissioner Viviene Reding made this amply clear. There is however much more to it than state competence. There is the duty to be loyal to the Union and other member states. Article 4.3 of the European Union Treaty explains this as the principle of sincere cooperation, also referred to as the loyalty principle: loyalty, that is, towards the other European Union member states.

Government has opted to milk citizenship in order to generate finance so as to be in a position to implement its electoral programme. It has excluded taxation as an option. Moreover it has reduced income tax as part of its electoral strategy in order to outwit the former government, knowing full well that this necessitated alternative financial avenues. Never did it place its plans to put citizenship on sale before the electorate for its consideration. Ethically the Labour Party cannot claim to have an electoral mandate on the matter.

The local political debate has revealed diametrically opposed positions. Government’s position is dictated by its strategy of requiring cash in order to finance its political initiatives. Time is of essence in its strategy. It cannot afford to wait for would-be investors to take initiatives of their choice. There is no direct link between the prospective citizen and the manner in which the monies he pays are “invested”. It is in fact an exercise of selling citizenship with a commitment to use the proceeds in a specific manner. The funds generated are hypothecated. A residential criterion has so far been ruled out, most probably,  as this would only serve as a delaying factor. It would delay the flow of the monies required depending on how long the residential criterion runs.

The warning shot fired by the EU Parliament is not to be discarded as the EU Parliament is the only democratically elected EU institution. Nor is Commissioner Reding’s statement  one that could be ignored. Reding has stated that:

“While I am not calling for the Commission to receive legal power to determine what constitutes nationality or the rules granting it, the Commission nevertheless expects that Member States act in full awareness of the consequences of their decisions.

Our debate today shows the growing importance of these questions in a European Union where national decisions are in many instances not neutral vis-à-vis other Member States and the EU as a whole. It is a fact that the principle of sincere cooperation, which is inscribed in the EU Treaties (Article 4.3 of the Treaty on European Union), should lead Member States to take account of the impact of decisions in the field of nationality on other Member States and the Union as a whole.”

Clearly the competence of member states on issues of citizenship is not absolute. Given its impacts on all the other members of the Union in areas of national security, freedom of movement in the Schengen Area, rights to residence and employment, it stands to reason that both the EU as well as member states require consultation which apparently was not carried out.

The capping of the citizenship scheme at 1,800 passports for sale is certainly not enough. A residential condition of reasonable length is also  required as an additional and essential element. This would however be a sticking point as whilst it could render the proposed scheme less un-acceptable and in line with some of the practices elsewhere, it may fail to deliver what the Maltese Government requires on time.

It is with this in mind that the Greens in Malta have time and again called on Government to suspend the implementation of the scheme and concurrently to initiate a dialogue with Brussels. The problem at an EU level may eventually be resolved around the negotiating table. This would result in less reputational damage for Malta. A meeting called between the EU Commision and the Malta Government seems to be imminent. Hopefully matters will take a positive turn.

That would leave the political issue to be solved locally, either in Parliament or at the ballot box through a public consultation. The Prime Minister has already indicated that he is willing to submit the issue to a national consultation.  It is the decent way forward, part of our learning curve as a nation.

published in The Times of Malta, Saturday January 25, 2014

Tradituri?

Diskors li qed nisimgħu dan l-aħħar dwar tradituri ma jagħmel ġid lil ħadd.

Dan hu diskors li ġeneralment qed jingħad minn persuni viċin il-Gvern tal-lum u dan b’difiża għall-kritika li qed issir, f’Malta u barra, dwar l-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza.

Nifhem li l-kritika ddarras.  Pero’ min hu konvint minn dak li qed jagħmel m’għandux ħtieġa ta’ insulti, iżda hu kapaċi jwieġeb argument.

L-użu tal-kelma “tradituri” fil-konfront  tal-kritiċi tal-Gvern l-iktar li tagħmel il-ħsara hu lill-Gvern innifsu għax twassal il-messaġġ li dawk li jappoġġaw lill-Gvern (jew parti minnhom) huma intolleranti għall-kritika.

Fuq kollox għalkemm huwa l-Gvern (bis-saħħa tal-maġġoranza li għandu fil-Parlament) li jiddeċiedi, ma jfissirx li neċessarjament illi għandu raġun. In-numri jiddeterminaw min jiddeċiedi, mhux min għandu raġun.

Il-kritika lill-Gvern tal-lum saret u tibqa’ issir, bħalma saret lill-Gvern tal-bieraħ. Iċ-ċavetta biex nimxu l-quddiem hi li lkoll niftħu widnejna beraħ biex nisimgħu iktar. B’dan il-mod biss hemm iċ-ċans li jsiru inqas żbalji, mhux bl-insulti.

L-insulti huma l-għodda esklussiva ta’ min m’għandux fiduċja fir-raguni.

ippubblikat minn iNews it-Tnejn 20 ta’ Jannar 2014

L-iskema taċ-Ċittadinanza ta’ Joseph Muscat: il-kobba tkompli titħabbel

Il-kobba tal-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza qed tkompli titħabbel.

Il-Gvern iddeċieda. Ikkonsulta ruħu, prinċipalment wara li kien ġja ħa d-deċiżjonijiet.

Il-ħsieb li għandu l-Gvern hu wieħed ċar ħafna. Għandu bżonn il-flus biex jiffinanzja il-programm politiku tiegħu. Wara li rabat idejh li ma jżidx taxxi, kif ukoll wara li daħal fi sqaq billi naqqas it-taxxa tad-dħul meta l-pajjiż ma kienx ippreparat għal dan, ma kienx baqa’ wisq fejn idur. Iddeċieda li s-sors tal-finanzjament meħtieġ ser ikun id-dħul mill-bejgħ ta’ madwar 1,800 passaport. Dħul li hu ikkalkulat li jammonta għal madwar €1.20 biljun.

L-argumenti politiċi f’Malta instemgħu għal darba, tnejn u iktar. Kulħadd qal tiegħu, iżda l-Gvern wara li bidel xi dettalji tal-iskema, jidhirlu li għandu jibqa’ għaddej.

Mhux ċar jekk dan il-ħsieb dwar il-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza żviluppax mill-elezzjoni lil hawn jew inkella jekk ġiex ikkristalllizzat qabel l-elezzjoni ġenerali. Saru kitbiet diġa f’dan is-sens u hemm min spekula li l-pjan sar qabel l-elezzjoni, iżda nżamm mistur. Qed tiċċirkula l-ideja li l-Partit Laburista (u per konsegwenza l-Gvern iffurmat minnu) qiesu obbligat li jimplimenta din l-iskema. Qiesu jrid jonora xi ftehim milħuq. S’issa dan għadu mhux ċar għax ovvjament ħadd m’hu ser jikxef x’ġara, għalmenu għalissa.

Issa bdiet tiżviluppa fażi oħra tal-istorja. Il-mistoqsija hi dwar jekk il-Gvern Malti (u kwlaunkwe Gvern ieħor fl-Unjoni Ewropeja) għandux id-dritt assolut li jiddeċiedi dwar iċ-ċittadinanza. Minn dak li qalet il-Kummissarju Viviane Reding nhar il-Ħamis hi u tiftaħ id-dibattitu fil-Parlament Ewropew l-Unjoni Ewropeja hi tal-fehma li d-dritt li tkun irregolata ċ-ċittadinanza m’huwiex dritt assolut tal-istati membri. Reding qalet hekk:

“While I am not calling for the Commission to receive legal power to determine what constitutes nationality or the rules granting it, the Commission nevertheless expects that Member States act in full awareness of the consequences of their decisions.

Our debate today shows the growing importance of these questions in a European Union where national decisions are in many instances not neutral vis-à-vis other Member States and the EU as a whole. It is a fact that the principle of sincere cooperation, which is inscribed in the EU Treaties (Article 4.3 of the Treaty on European Union), should lead Member States to take account of the impact of decisions in the field of nationality on other Member States and the Union as a whole.”

Fi ftit kliem il-Kummissarju Reding qed tgħid li f’dak li nagħmlu bħala pajjiż irridu ta’ bil-fors nagħtu każ tal-impatti fuq il-pajjiżi l-oħra membri tal-Unjoni. Hi tirreferi għall-artiklu 4.3 tat-trattat dwar l-Unjoni u speċifikament dwar il-prinċipju ta’ kooperazzjoni sinċiera, xi drabi imsejjaħ ukoll il-prinċipju ta’ lejalta’. Dan kollu jfisser ħaġa waħda biss: li għandna d-dritt li niddeċiedu kif irridu sakemm ma neffettwaw lil ħadd. Jekk id-deċiżjoni tagħna bħala pajjiż teffettwa lil ħaddieħor għandna l-obbligu li nikkonsultaw. Iktar ma hu kbir l-impatt iktar irridu nikkonsultaw u allura iktar hu diffiċli li nikkonkludu kif irridu.

Iktar ċari minn hekk l-affarijiet ma jistgħux ikunu!

Issa hawn min qed isemmi skemi f’pajjiżi oħra li jixxiebħu mal-iskema tal-Gvern Malti. Euroactiv.com   iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa jirreferi għal dokument iċċirkulat fi Strasbourg mill-Gvern Malti li fih jirreferi għal skemi f’pajjiżi oħra dwar ċittadinanza : “Cyprus, Austria, Belgium and Portugal singled out” jgħidilna l-Euroactiv.com. L-iskemi l-oħra huma differenti, ghax prinċipalment huma ibbażati fuq residenza flimkien ma investiment sostanzjali. Tnejn mill-pajjiżi imsemmija (Ċipru u l-Portugall) għandhom ukoll problemi finanzjarji kbar.

S’issa jidher li l-Unjoni Ewropeja ma ikkummentatx dwar dan kollu imma jidher li issa ser tieħu passi. Il-każ ta’ Malta hu l-iktar sfaċċat imma l-każi l-oħra jixxiebħu u probabbilment li l-Unjoni  tikkummenta dwarhom ukoll.

Dan hu l-pass li jmiss. Minn kif tkellmet il-Kummissarju Reding jidher li d-diskusjsoni interna saret u l-ideat huma ċari. Ħames xhur oħra tiġi fi tmiemha l-ħajja tal-Kummissjuni preżenti u allura nistenna li fil-ġimgħat li ġejjin (ferm qabel ma jinbiegħ l-ewwel passaport),  inkunu nafu x’ser tagħmel il-Kummissjoni.

Il-Gvern jidher li ma kienx ippreparat għal dak li ġej. Kuntrarjament għal dak li qed jingħad il-vot tal-Parlament Ewropew għandu sinfikat kbir. Mhux biss huwa dikjarazzjoni politika qawwja. Imma jiftaħ għajnejn Muscat li l-unika appoġġ li għandu huwa ta’ politiċi bħal Marine Le Pen!