[WATCH] Updated | Opposition wants rise in value of state-owned ODZ land

Video is unavailable at this time.

The Nationalist Party is the first part in Opposition to launch a pre-budget document which it says should serve as a discussion point for civil society and the constituted bodies in the run-up the Budget 2016.

In his introduction to the pre-budget vision, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said the PN’s document – part-diagnosis of Labour’s economic performance, part-analysis of necessary solutions – is a critical examination of the country’s redistribution of wealth.

“The economic wealth being generated is not percolating to all sectors of society. As a result, the number of people at risk of poverty is increasing. It is of little consolation to these people that our country is experiencing GDP growth. Thousands of families in a number of localities are not feeling safe at home… the Opposition is suggesting alternative solutions,” Busuttil said.

Busuttil also said that while Joseph Muscat is quick to say that the main success story of Labour has been the economy, this success did not come without his forebears’ sacrifice.

“Muscat would have us believe that the economic sun started shining on this country in March 2013. The truth is that while some sectors of the economy continued to perform well, there are areas of concern. The way government is acting may imping negative on the long-term economic sustainability of our country.”

The PN has also proposed that the value of government-owned land outside development zones must be at least equal to the value of land in prime development zones.

"The Prime Minister said that ODZ land at Zonqor was chosen for the American University project because the land was cheap," PN deputy leader Mario de Marco told a press conference at Parliament. "To avoid this temptation, the government should increase the value of its ODZ land so that it costs at least as much as its land in prime development zones."

Shadow finance minster Mario de Marco said the Opposition wanted to discuss indicators that were pointing to issues of fiscal and economic sustainability.

“Economic indicators are the thermometer of an economy. They shed light on the state of health of an economy… while government is keen to discuss and push those indicators that point towards a healthy economy, it seems to give little or no importance to those indicators that point in the opposite direction.”   

In a reaction, the government attacked the PN’s pre-budget document as being “negative”, saying it contained “obvious, factual and interpretative” errors.

Labour reaction

The government claimed that Busuttil’s proposal for free school lunches for children coming from families at risk of poverty “would add to the social pressure on them from being identified as hailing from vulnerable families.”

It also criticised the PN’s proposal to reduce petrol prices to ease traffic had a “logic difficult to understand” and said the government had already reduced fuel prices in the past.

It said that Busuttil wanted energy prices to further decrease beyond a 25% cut “after having for years claimed they could not be reduced”.

The government said it disagreed with introducing a system where energy prices fall and rise according to the price of oil. “We disagree with introducing such uncertainty… what Busuttil does not say is from where Enemalta’s debts will be paid,” in a reference to demands for Enemalta’s savings to be passed on to consumers.

It also hit out at the introduction of a second-pillar pension, saying this would only increase employers’ and employees’ contributions and reduce business competitiveness and salaries. “Muscat’s government wants a pension reform that does not increase expenses for businesses and workers.”

The government also said that a VAT exemption for self-employed whose incomes are less than €7,000, part of the PN’s demands in their pre-budget doc, already existed. “The only difference is that the self-employed must register that they do not require a tax return. The present system prevents evasion and does not add to the bureaucratic burden for the self-employed. One asks why Busuttil wants to introduce an exemption that is already in force?”