IIP: If we must have it, dialogue is better than a boycott

Prime Minister Robert Abela has “extended the hand of friendship” to the Opposition and invited it to take part in discussions on the ‘citizenship by investment’ scheme.

The Opposition Leader, Adrian Delia, quickly turned down the offer, telling the PM that the IIP scheme should be terminated with immediate effect, never to see the light of day again.

We have to say from the onset that we have always been against the principle of selling off our passports to ultra-rich individuals in what is nothing more than a way of making a quick buck.

Firstly, the concept of citizenship is not something that should be sold to the highest bidder (especially when other, less fortunate, people are denied protection) and secondly, the scheme has failed to live up to expectations, both when it comes to due diligence and also when it comes to the quality of some of the people we have attracted.

It is a known fact that many applicants are not even remotely interested in living – and investing – in this country. For them, a Maltese passport is just a piece of paper that that acts as a gateway into the EU. It is also a known fact that many of the rules, such as those relating to residency in Malta, are not being adhered to.

The only real contribution that several of the successful applicants have made is to throw €650,000 into the pot. It is nothing more than a cash transaction, with no other added value.

The fact is, however, that the IIP will remain, whether we like it or not. PM Robert Abela has made it very clear that the scheme is here to stay, but at least he is willing to make some changes to it.

So, the next best thing after scrapping the programme is making sure that it is fixed to acceptable standards. After the hard-headedness of the previous administration, it seems that there is finally an opportunity to do so.

We understand that the Opposition, which has been calling for the scheme to be eliminated, does not want to be accused of making a U-turn but we feel that, at this juncture, it would be more fruitful for everyone if the PN participates in the debate and in the effort to turn the IIP into something more morally acceptable.

On Friday, the Prime Minister said that he did not only want to consult the Opposition on the IIP regulator but on other aspects of the scheme, as well as other unrelated topics, such as judicial appointments and constitutional changes. Yet, the Opposition Leader was abdicating his duties, Abela said.

While we will not go as far as the PM, we feel that it would be better if the Opposition participates in a constructive dialogue rather than boycotting the process.

The Opposition could, for example, put forward its proposals and publish them for everyone to see. In this way, it can claim to have had an effect – should these proposals be taken up – and, in the event that the government ignores its recommendations, it can say that the government’s ‘hand of friendship’ was nothing but a farce.

The Chamber of Commerce, which has been very proactive and has come up with a document full of proposals for strengthening good governance, has not called for the termination of the IIP. Instead, it is saying that the scheme should be suspended to ascertain that any necessary investigations and due diligence are carried out and ensure that the high standards and requirements imposed under the IIP and other residence/citizenship laws are fully adhered to.

Chamber President David Xuereb said on Indepth this week that the Chamber will be holding a number of meetings with the government to discuss the aspects of the IIP that are controversial. He mentioned, in particular, the ‘in your face’ sales aspect of the scheme.

The Chamber believes that with its input, and that of other stakeholders, the IIP can be fixed.

The wider the consultation exercise, the bigger the chances are for the country to have a scheme that is closer to what it was originally intended to be: a scheme by which foreign nationals are granted citizenship not only because they can afford to do so but also because they can give something back to the country, live here and make a more meaningful contribution to our society.

PM Abela has publicly asked the Opposition to collaborate, saying that the country will achieve better results if this happens. Perhaps the Opposition should, like the Chamber, give the new PM a chance and take part in an exercise that could make things better. There will be a time, later on, to hold the government to its promises, and to account.

In the meantime, an opportunity for collaboration should not be missed.