The aftermath of a vote

Unfortunately the Labour Party is sending all the wrong messages to the very people who are most ready to offer Malta solidarity on themes like migration.

As a Maltese and European citizen and first and foremost a human being, I am not shamed by the resolution approved in the European parliament condemning the sale of citizenship, something which offends my dignity as a person who values citizenship not as a mark of national identity but an embodiment of the political rights and duties endowed to us as members of democratic societies. 

In many ways, I felt represented by speeches like the short speech made by French leftist MEP Marie-Christine Vergiat.

"While crocodile tears abound on the hundreds of deaths in the Mediterranean, while the gates of Fortress Europe slam shut ever more brutally to migrants who ruin themselves in their efforts to arrive on our shores, the selling of passports can only be abhorred by those who are committed to the values ​​of freedom, equality and solidarity. Obviously, commodification has no limits for some, and money has no odour."

My only disappointment was that the approved resolution failed to condemn discrimination between different categories of migrants; those who immediately accede to freedom of movement simply because they are rich and those denied basic rights like voting despite working and contributing to their countries for a number of years.

Neither did the specific mention of Malta offend me even if it was not so necessary to the cause.  It was our government which took ownership of the concept condemned by the European parliament, to the extent of claiming a role of leader in the business condemned by the resolution.

In a sense, the insistence on mentioning Malta offered the government the opportunity to label opponents of this scheme as traitors.  Still, I considered the mention of Malta as somewhat irrelevant in the sense that the resolution clearly condemned the policy of selling citizenship.  The whole point was that such practices go against the spirit of European treaties sanctioning the free movement of people.

Some have argued that some MEPs may well have been motivated by a fear of having their own country's citizenship by investment schemes undercut by Malta's scheme.  This may well be the case with some conservative pro-business MEPs but surely not with left-wing MEPs who abhor such schemes because they uphold the values of equality and solidarity. 

Moreover, Malta was truly a leader.  Its audacity in selling citizenship without any residence obligations has exposed a fundamental reality; either these schemes are brought in line through EU legislation or we will have a race to the bottom with countries undercutting each other, devaluing the value of citizenship in an auction of citizenship where even more concessions are offered to the rich migrants. 

Probably what we will see in the future is a slow and steady movement towards regulation.  I hope that the EPP MEPs who voted for this motion will not be the first to put obstacles to defend less abrasive but still questionable schemes.

Ultimately the debate has exposed the rift between the Labour Party and the European left.  Unfortunately the Labour Party is sending all the wrong messages to the very people who are most ready to offer Malta solidarity on themes like migration. 

This is truly sad because on a number of important issues like gay rights, social policy and education the Labour government is standing up for progressive values.  Unfortunately it is seeking to avoid fundamental fiscal realities by relying on revenue from a neo-liberal scheme which has turned our country in to a mini-pariah state.  

Moreover, by promoting the scheme as one which is more profitable then EU funds and one which comes with no strings attached, it not only risks creating the illusion of easy money but may well feed a latent euro skepticism which is already raising its head.  Combined with its hawkish stance on migration, the government defiance of the EU parliament may well create a toxic cocktail.

As regards to the PN, it has yet to prove whether its commitment to European values is skin deep or not.  On many issues it remains crippled by moral conservatism which is not so European. Moreover if it truly abhors the discrimination between rich and poor migrants, I would expect it to propose a revamp of citizenship laws to make naturalization a fairer process. 

Lets not forget that while previous Nationalist governments had facilitated citizenship for the descendents of Maltese migrants living in Australia and other countries, naturalisation for people who lived in Malta remained at the discretion of the Minister for Home Affairs and many are granted citizenship after as much as 17 years. 

Ultimately, Malta may well ignore the resolution approved by the vast majority of MEPs. But I find it hard to understand why Labour is making so much fuss about the forthcoming MEP elections. 

If the European Parliament can be ignored on such a basic issue, why bother campaigning under the banner of a European party which fundamentally disagrees with what has become one of the Labour party's main economic policies?   

avatar
The other schemes. Do the maths. The Maltese numbers proposed are very small compared to other countries' potential numbers. However as a percentage of the GDP the potential income for Malta is high. For others it is just a small addition to their revenue. The argument that the IIS is competing unfairly with the others is disingenuous.
avatar
What a hypocritical EU parliament.
avatar
ONE BIG QUESTION ~ Why was Malta isolated when other states have similar schemes .... and even more seem to be showing interest? @ Killing the competition? @ As for the P.N. , it's certainly not for the "Principle" of the thing, if it was, they would have spoken sooner...... ON OTHER STATES to the detriment of Malta! But the P.N. are known to always go PartisaN ...THE PARTY first and foremost AT ALL COSTS, even Malta's reputation!
avatar
ONE BIG QUESTION ~ Why was Malta isolated when other states have similar schemes .... and even more seem to be showing interest? @ Killing the competition? @ As for the P.N. , it's certainly not for the "Principle" of the thing, if it was, they would have spoken sooner...... ON OTHER STATES to the detriment of Malta! But the P.N. are known to always go PartisaN ...THE PARTY first and foremost AT ALL COSTS, even Malta's reputation!
avatar
Yes as an aftermath to this vote there are a number of lessons to learn. One is that the PL must put on their thinking hats and adjust and adopt a citizenship scheme closer to that of other EU member states who have visa and passport schemes. That way if we are singled out and taken before the ECJ we can claim discrimination and strike alliances with those member states who will inevitably be drawn in. Another lesson is that the PL must show distrust of the PN who are always ready to consort with the foreigner against our interest. Thus I think that the Prime Minister must nominate as president a well respected person from the Labour ranks to ensure that we have a President we can trust to serve the national interest,
avatar
Yes as an aftermath to this vote there are a number of lessons to learn. One is that the PL must put on their thinking hats and adjust and adopt a citizenship scheme closer to that of other EU member states who have visa and passport schemes. That way if we are singled out and taken before the ECJ we can claim discrimination and strike alliances with those member states who will inevitably be drawn in. Another lesson is that the PL must show distrust of the PN who are always ready to consort with the foreigner against our interest. Thus I think that the Prime Minister must nominate as president a well respected person from the Labour ranks to ensure that we have a President we can trust to serve the national interest,
avatar
Yes as an aftermath to this vote there are a number of lessons to learn. One is that the PL must put on their thinking hats and adjust and adopt a citizenship scheme closer to that of other EU member states who have visa and passport schemes. That way if we are singled out and taken before the ECJ we can claim discrimination and strike alliances with those member states who will inevitably be drawn in. Another lesson is that the PL must show distrust of the PN who are always ready to consort with the foreigner against our interest. Thus I think that the Prime Minister must nominate as president a well respected person from the Labour ranks to ensure that we have a President we can trust to serve the national interest,
avatar
tweeytbirdy il problemataf xieni il biza lisejrin tibqaw fl oppozizjonp ghal zmien twil u mela il valuri x valuri faxxisti issa ghoqod hemm halli li dr j muscat imexxi
avatar
The European parliament did what it had to do and our government will do what it has to do. And that leaves the PN in limbo.
avatar
What can one expect when one elects a morally corrupt government. In 25 years there has been no real change in the Labour camp. Hanzir taqtaghlu denbu, hanzir jibqa.
avatar
Agree James but we should go one better. For every citizenship we sell we should give three citizenships for free for asylum seekers.This will help them move along to mainland Europe were they originally intended to go. I wonder what the MEP's will think about such a scheme.
avatar
Malta Today published the list of those countries in Europe who have similar schemes to that of Malta. In the UK for example, most of the Chinese Russian African and South American Oligarchs are encouraged to 'invest' in the UK and the special perks with special passes for private runways and private planes without any custom clearance are never published James. The real perks and privileges for billionairs in the US and Europe and elsewhere, are never published and are a well kept secret. It is people like Simon Busutill who likes to spite and wash our linen in public. Likewise, those good doers who preach from Malta about the poor in Africa are also fakes: they should go there and help them at source.It is there where real help is needed, or at least, a journalist like you who wants a more just and fair trading system which is opposite to the greedy system we call capitalism, should join the local Communist party!
avatar
Dear James, Couldn't the money generated by this scheme be of benefit to the migrants so much to our hearts. The Maltese people are well-known for their generosity to those less fortunate than themselves. Although some may use language which seems harsh in respect of these poor souls, I'm sure that this is just due to the fact that they are unskilled in the art of expressing themselves. I have no doubt that they would not begrudge some of the wealth going towards bettering the migrants lot.
avatar
Please James quote to us the huge figures made available by these MEPs countries as per solidarity agreement re illegal/irregular immigration costs.
avatar
Frankly, I feel confused as well, is this a sign of weak leadership or of my stupid mind that does not comprehend the coherence of policies altogether?