Austin Gatt accuses Joseph Muscat of wanting higher bus fares for residents

Opposition leader's comments on Park and Ride 'irresponsible' - transport minister Austin Gatt.

11 November 2010, 12:00am
by Raphael Vassallo

2 min read

Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt has accused Opposition leader Joseph Muscat of demanding higher public transport prices for Maltese residents, after widespread criticism of his ministry’s proposal to introduce a scheme involving separate fares for non-residents.

In a statement characterised by capitalisation and multiple exclamation marks, Gatt argued that the PL leader's doubts regarding the legality of this proposal according to European law “MEANS THAT JOSEPH MUSCAT WANTS TO LOWER THE FARES FOR NON-RESIDENTS WHILE RAISING IT FOR THOSE WHO RESIDE IN MALTA” [sic].

The Investment Minister added that “If you lower the fare for one category of person, you have to increase it for another!!” Similar schemes already exist in other parts of Europe, the minister claimed.

“Joseph Muscat has a vast experience in the European Union, but even without any experience he could always have run a search on the internet, where he would have found that discount systems for residents exist in, among others, Helsinki (Finland), Seville (Spain), Tallinn (Estonia), Venice (Italy), in the Republic of Ireland, in London, In Northern Ireland and in England in the United Kingdom.”

Separately, Gatt described as “irresponsible” Muscat’s comments about the introduction of payment for the Park and Ride scheme: “Park and Ride in Floriana was free for the first few years in order to overcome scepticism regarding all forms of group transport… (scepticism) that was engendered by the Labour Party itself," Gatt said.

"Now that the concept has been accepted, it is only fair that those who choose not to use higher quality public transport should pay for their choice to continue using their cars.”

The proposed reform of the bus ticketing system has come under intense fire over the past week, especially from the local tourism lobby which fears it might impact arrival figures.

The Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association lambasted the scheme as a case of “blatant discrimination”, while the European Commission has confirmed it will be looking into the legality of the proposed move.

The ministry has however put up a fierce defence of its plans, describing the MHRA’s reaction as “hysterical” and dismissing all suggestions of non-conformity to EU law.

More from Raphael Vassallo

•

an interesting comment Mr K Mifsud we would be very pleased to speak to you please feel free to contact us as [email protected]

•

"A service or product must be charged its price, we have to understand that!" this being true then the price has to be the same for everyone not just the Non Maltese EU Nationals.....

•

Of course the scheme is illegal! I am a specialist EU lawyer. I provide here a legal explanation for everyone's benefit: The European Court of Justice has specified countless times that it is not only discrimination on the basis of nationality that is illegal under the EU Treaties, but also discrimination on the basis of residence. The Court consistently considers the latter to constitute illegal indirect discrimination. I do not think I can explain the law more clearly than by quoting the European Court of Justice itself: "It is also clear from the Court's case-law ... that the principle of equal treatment ... prohibits not only overt discrimination by reason of nationality but also all covert forms of discrimination which, by the application of other criteria of differentiation, lead in fact to the same result. That is true, in particular, of a measure under which a distinction is drawn on the basis of residence, in that that requirement is liable to operate mainly to the detriment of nationals of other Member States, since non-residents are in the majority of cases foreigners (see, inter alia, Case C-224/97 Ciola [1999] ECR I-2517, paragraph 14)." - Source: Case C-388/01, paras 13-14, available on the EU Court of Justice's website at {http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Rechercher&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-388/01&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100} (click near "Judgement"). You may also want to see paragraphs 27-30 of Case C-350/96, available at {http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=61996J0350}. The most basic bit of legal research by Mr. Gatt's staff would have revealed that this measure would not have the proverbial a snowball's chance in hell of being upheld in the EU courts. The other schemes quoted by the ministry (Helsinki, Finland; Seville, Spain; etc.) are irrelevant because those schemes are entirely different to the Maltese scheme. Those schemes either give better prices to the elderly, to students, or to residents of economically remote regions (think cheaper prices for Gozitan residents on Gozo channel). Such targetted schemes can be permitted under EU law under the Court's so-called "objective justification" exceptions. But the situation is quite obviously entirely different for a scheme that gives preferential treatment to ALL residents of a country over the ENTIRE national territory. So the Maltese measure is quite different in legal terms. But even if the schemes were comparable (and they are not), one illegal scheme could not in any case justify another.

Alfred Galea •

KZD, can you please enlighten us on Austin's good work?? Doesn't take balls to spend millions and millions of taxpayers' euros....if he HAD balls he would've done it a lot earlier and for a lot less money. But the best example of his balls was when the bus drivers paralyzed Malta and this weasel spent 150,000,000 euros to pacify them. By the way, it's L-O-S-I-N-G. And E-T-H-I-C-A-L.

•

Dear CitizenX How do you think writing vulgarly drives your point? I'd rather say you are loosing your subject like that, not less your etical manners! Whilst to Hon. Austin Gatt, keep up the good work. If only we had more ministers with balls we wouldn't have all the country debts tied to our necks because they want to please the god and the devil. A service or product must be charged its price, we have to understand that!

•

And what did i tell you - told you that PN cohorts were discussing the windfall this would create for them. RIDE AND PARK will not be free - austin gatt is contradicting himself. And they will FORCE YOU to use it. You will pay for the priviledge of using a car instead of the SUPERIOR public transport. Austin Gatt - ara veru qahba tat-trieq, libsa ta ragel, u taparsi ministru tat toqba ta gobni!

•

Kij jghid il-Malta. Il-Qahba milli jkolla itiek. Prosit Sur 'blow it our your ass' Austin Gatt.

•

Austin Walker Gatt - you are an inspiration for birth control.

•

Austin Gatt: il-ministru li jifhem f'kollox, ahjar minn kulhadd u li hadd ma jpoggielu bzieq fuq imnihhru. Kieku gismu (persunthu) kbir proporjonalment daqs rasu, kieku akbar minn tal-ggant tal-palazz.

•

Bmin trid tidhaq Dr Austin Gatt twahhal f Joseph Muscat mela dejjem int ghandek RAGUN mhux ta bxejn qied taghmel il BSATEN biex il PAC ma jismax ix xhieda tad dbaswir li hawwat fil kaz tal power station ma hawnx min huwa ARROGANTI daqsek

•

Never ascribe to malice what Austin Gatt f...ks up; his actions are adequately explained by incompetence.

Alfred Galea •

The weasel have a very bad habit of accusing others for his incompetence. As for the residents having to pay more....they are already, a single fare went up from 47 cents to 1.30 euros. Weasel.