Category: News

German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended a United Nations agreement on migration in a passionate speech to parliament on Wednesday, accusing its opponents of “nationalism in its purest form.”

The UN pact, to regulate the treatment of migrants worldwide, was approved in July by all 193 member states except the United States and is to be signed in Morocco next month.

But Australia on Wednesday said it would not sign up to the pact, joining nations including Israel, Hungary and Austria who have said it would compromise immigration policy.

In an appeal to embrace a multilateral approach to the migrant issue, Merkel made a thinly veiled attack on U.S. President Donald Trump and her far-right opponents at home.

“There are people who say they can solve everything themselves and don’t have to think about anyone else, that is nationalism in its purest form,” she told the Bundestag lower house of parliament in an unusually passionate address.

Merkel, whose 13-year chancellorship has been marked by her open-door migrant policy, said the UN pact was in Germany’s interests and would not infringe on national sovereignty.

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration is a framework for co-operation and aims to reduce illegal migration, help integrate migrants and return them to their home countries. It asks backers to use detention only as a last resort. Impetus for the pact followed Europe’s biggest influx of refugees and migrants since World War Two.

Some of Merkel’s conservatives, notably Health Minister Jens Spahn who is standing to succeed her as head of the Christian Democrat party (CDU), have called for a broader debate before Germany signs up to the pact. Far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) lawmakers oppose it.

“This pact for migration, like the refugee pact, is the right attempt to find solutions for global problems internationally, together,” Merkel said to heckles from the AfD.

She said in 2015 Germany realized that the problem of flight and migration had to be tackled at an international level, that “no one country can do it alone.”

“The debate about a global pact for migration, for orderly, legal migration in a world where there are 222 violent conflicts … 68.5 million refugees, 52 per cent of whom are children, this organization plays a central role,” she said.

Pact ‘would compromise Australia’s interest’

In Australia, newly installed prime minister Scott Morrison said the UN agreement would jeopardize national security.

“The global compact on migration would compromise Australia’s interest,” Morrison told 2GB Radio. “It doesn’t distinguish between those who illegally enter Australia and those who come the right way.”

Under Canberra’s tough immigration policy, which has bipartisan support, asylum seekers arriving by boat are told they will never be allowed to settle in Australia.

They are then detained in two detention centres on remote South Pacific islands until they are accepted by another nation or agree to return home. The camps have been widely criticized by the United Nations and human rights groups for their conditions.

“Australia is a textbook case of how not to treat boat arrivals, by sending them offshore to endure abysmal conditions for years and trying to shirk its international responsibilities onto less-developed countries,” said Elaine Pearson, Human Rights Watch’s Australia director.

Australia has an annual immigration cap of 190,000 places. Morrison said this week his government would likely reduce that threshold, a policy that is popular with voters.

Morrison’s government said in October it would restrict new immigrants from living in Australia’s largest cities — Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane — for up to five years.

Although likely to win favour with many voters — Australia is due to hold an election in 2019 — critics argued such a policy could lead to labour shortages.

The Swiss government said Wednesday the country won’t attend the UN conference next month because it wants to wait for parliamentary debates at home before giving its final blessing.

Switzerland’s governing Federal Council said in October it planned to adopt the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, but would put it to parliament or consultation as required by law.

The Federal Council reiterated that it believes the pact is “consistent with Switzerland’s interests.”

The conference will be held in Marrakech, Morocco on Dec. 10-11.

 

Source: cbc.ca

The Morrison government has confirmed it will not sign up to the United Nation’s migration pact, claiming it will undermine Australia’s harsh policies to deter asylum seekers despite Australia’s role in helping to draft it.

The Refugee Council of Australia and advocates have strongly rejected the government’s claim, citing the fact the compact is non-binding and has a provision stating that countries retain sovereignty over their migration programs.

Labor offered a mixed reaction to the announcement, with defence spokesman Richard Marles suggesting Labor would “work with the global community” on migration, while opposition leader Bill Shorten said he was “not fussed” about the decision and would decide after taking advice in government.

In July the Coalition signalled it would refuse to sign the agreement, because the final draft of the compact said that migration detention should only be used “as a measure of last resort” and states should work towards alternatives.

After failing to secure changes addressing its concerns, the Morrison government confirmed on Wednesday that Australia will not sign, joining the United States, Israel and a group of Eastern European countries that have also refused.

The announcement comes after Scott Morrison signalled that Australia will reduce its migration cap from 190,000, all but confirming on Wednesday the 2019 budget will reduce the cap.

The global compact aims to address migration issues in a “safe, orderly and regular” way through a “collective commitment to improving cooperation on international migration”.

The final draft includes a commitment to review legislation and policies to ensure “migrants are not detained arbitrarily, that decisions to detain are based on law, are proportionate, have a legitimate purpose, and are taken on an individual basis, in full compliance with due process and procedural safeguards, and that immigration detention is not promoted as a deterrent or used as a form of cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment to migrants, in accordance with international human rights law”.

It states that refugees and migrants “are entitled to the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, which must be respected, protected and fulfilled at all times”.

The compact nevertheless “reaffirms the sovereign right of states to determine their national migration policy … in conformity with international law”.

Australia runs offshore detention facilities on Manus Island and Nauru designed to deter people from coming to Australia by boat to claim asylum and turns back boats at sea, a practice the UN has said is illegal under international law and “may intentionally put lives at risk”.

In a joint statement prime minister Scott Morrison, home affairs minister Peter Dutton and foreign affairs minister Marise Payne said the government believed the compact is “inconsistent with our well-established policies and not in Australia’s interest”.

The trio said Australia “already achieves” the goals of safe, orderly and regular migration and the compact would “directly conflict with important principles that have underpinned our successful approach”.

They warned the compact would “risk encouraging illegal entry to Australia and reverse Australia’s hard-won successes in combating the people-smuggling trade”.

“The compact fails to adequately distinguish between people who enter Australia illegally and those who come to Australia the right way, particularly with respect to the provision of welfare and other benefits.”

Refugee Council of Australia chief executive Paul Power said the compact recognised both the rights of migrants and the right of sovereign states to set their own policy.

He noted that the Australian government had “been very active, having considerable influence over the wording of the global compact”.

“In refusing to sign the compact, Australia will join a small group of governments which are each trying to appeal to or appease minority far-right political movements within their countries,” Power said.

“It is hard to see the Australian government’s decision as anything other than posturing for some political gain, as the facts do not align with the prime minister’s claims.”

Carolina Gottardo, the director of Jesuit Refugee Service Australia who participated in negotiations of the compact as a member of the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network, told Guardian Australia that Australia helped water down the compact.

Gottardo accused the Morrison government of “misinformation” and a “political game” for having argued for stronger protections of sovereignty, only to refuse to sign the non-binding compact on the grounds it harmed sovereignty.

“The final compact is a major achievement, it is measured and constructive.

“It’s a non-binding agreement of great normative importance that does not threaten border protection or efforts to stop people smuggling.”

Save the Children director of policy and international programs Mat Tinkler called on the government to “work toward global solutions” to the migration crisis.

Dutton told Sky News that the Coalition government had “stopped drownings at sea and boat arrivals”.

“And we’re not going to surrender that – we want our sovereignty to stay intact,” he said.

“We’re concerned about the way in which [the compact] might be interpreted by the courts here.

“We’re concerned about whether or not it starves us … of the ability to decide the way in which we can return people. Under the compact certain obligations could be imposed where we needed to support people once they’d been returned to a country of origin.”

Both Morrison and Dutton ruled out Australia withdrawing from a separate UN refugee compact.

Morrison told 2GB Radio the government had announced “a fair-dinkum process” to review Australia’s migration levels in consultation with the states and territories.

“The migration program is set a year in advance,” he said. “This year’s program is already set.

Source: theguardian.com

Ministers should introduce electronic identity cards stating the right to live, work, claim benefits and use public services in Britain to address the concerns of leave voters about immigration in the event of a second referendum, a study has suggested.

The report from the Global Future thinktank, backed by the remainer peer Andrew Adonis, claimed the cards could be a key plank of any future campaign to persuade anxious voters that the UK did not have to leave the EU.

Under the proposal, electronic ID cards would be compulsory for anyone staying in the UK for more than 90 days. They would be used to claim entitlements and access public services, but could restrict those without the right to do so.

The government could then use the data to target extra funding for areas experiencing increases in immigration, although the report acknowledged there may be some privacy concerns and said the information must be anonymised and protected from abuse.

The thinktank also suggested setting up a “strengthening communities fund” underpinned by a £2bn-a-year investment in services and infrastructure to address the impacts of immigration, including increasing language provision and integration.

It called for a fairer labour market with Swiss-style enforcement squads to target unscrupulous businesses, and new protections for British workers, including rules to ensure they had the first chance to apply for new jobs.

Lord Adonis, who has visited the 100 constituencies with the highest proportion of leave voters, said: “These policies are practical, actionable solutions to immigration that are already being deployed across Europe.

“I believe strongly that they will help to persuade voters that the best way to take back control is to stay in the EU and get serious about immigration and welfare enforcement – so let’s do that instead of trashing our economy on the basis of a false choice.”

Theresa May interpreted the result of the Brexit vote as a clear instruction to end free movement, making it one of her red lines. The Global Future report suggested the public was more concerned about keeping out criminals and those who did not play their part in British society than ending all immigration.

The public also wanted to ensure jobs were protected and public services did not suffer as a result of growth in numbers, according to the report. The UK is the only EU member state not to have some form of identity card system.

Peter Starkings, the managing director of Global Future, said: “Free movement has been good for Britain – it’s boosted our economy, created jobs and helped millions of Brits live, work and study across Europe. Throwing it all away is terrible mistake that will damage Britain and deepen the very burning injustices the prime minister has promised to address.

“This report sets out a better way – control free movement so that it works for Britain, addressing public concerns and allowing us to maintain the close trading relationship with Europe that people want.”

 

Source: theguardian.com

Authorities in Saudi Arabia have arrested or deported an unprecedented 2.1 million foreigners since November 2017, accused of residing in the country in violation of residency and labour regulations, according to the latest tranche of statistics from the Saudi government.

Almost 100,000 arrests have been reported in the past week alone. Officials confirmed that 541,087 people have been deported from the country since November 2017, according to official figures from the Directorate General of Passports (Jawazat) in Riyadh.

The government’s uncompromising campaign, which is run under the banner of the Nation Free of Illegal Expats, was launched last year and is overseen by the Interior Ministry and the Jawazat. The Saudi government, whose de facto leader is the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, is seeking to increase employment among Saudi nationals.

According to Saudi officials, more than 1.6 million illegal expatriates were arrested for violating their terms of residency, 323,435 for violating the labor regulations and 150,418 for breaching border security. A backlog of 301,018 are awaiting travel documents to leave the country.

The Jawazat’s latest statistics claim that 1,673 foreign residents were arrested attempting to leave the country illegally.

Jobless in Jeddah
Riyadh’s crackdown comes as conditions for expat workers worsen across the GCC. The new tranche of statistics was published a week after Saudi officials terminated 71% of expat contracts in government jobs.

Fellow GCC member Kuwait is planning to cull 1.5 million expats from payrolls over the next seven years, as reported this week by International Investment.

 

Source: internationalinvestment.net

In an attempt to further boost its booming real estate sector and attract foreign investment, Egypt will grant residency permits to foreigners who invest at least $100,000 in the country’s property market.

The growth rate of Egypt’s property market stands at 133 percent in 2018. This has been fueled by strong demand for housing, along with the sporadic launch of residential construction projects.
The minimum investment required to obtain a residency permit is $100,000. A three-year residency is on offer for those who invest $200,000, and five years for those who purchase property worth $400,000. The offer also applies to properties that are still under construction.

Khaled Abbas, the deputy minister of housing, said the procedures for the scheme are being set up in consultation with the Passport, Immigration and Nationality Administration.

To begin the process for obtaining Egyptian residency, a preliminary contract must be agreed between the property owner and the foreign investor, and then signed by an authorized body, such the Urban Communities Authority, the Tourism Development Authority or the governorate in which the property is located. Bank statements must also be provided confirming that the money has been transferred from overseas. The passport office will then approve the period of residence.

Members of the House of Representatives welcomed the announcement as a positive move for Egypt and an incentive for foreign investment, which it is hoped will create jobs and economic opportunities.

Whether the public will be so keen remains to be seen.
“This might be a bit problematic,” said Aly Salem, a resident of Cairo. “The housing demand in Egypt is already high, with the surging youth population and more and more people looking to get married each year. Where will they stay, if foreigners start swooping in and acquiring both residency and a huge housing unit with just $100,000?”

Offering further details, Gen. Kamel Amer, the head of the Parliament’s Defense and National Security Committee, said foreigners will not have any political rights for the first five years of residency and they will not be eligible to vote for 10 years. He also said spouses and children of investors will not be granted residency unless they live in Egypt.

Spain and Portugal have implemented similar programs in an attempt to boost their property markets. Previously, a foreigner had to live in Egypt for 10 consecutive years to be eligible for naturalization.

The new residency law is part of the efforts to repair the damage to Egypt’s economy caused by severe austerity measures imposed after the $12 billion loan package from the International Monetary Fund in 2016.

The cost and size of properties in Egypt, which are often large and lavish apartments, compare favorably to those in many other countries. Despite this, few Egyptians can afford to pay for a house upfront, but some private property developers are offering 10-year, interest-free installment plans.

 

Source: arabnews.com

Jonathan Cardona, CEO of the Malta Individual Investor Programme Agency, discusses what the programme offers to investors and to the country

 

 

Source: europeanceo.com

The Cabinet on Monday amended conditions set in February this year to grant investors Jordanian nationality or residency, a Cabinet statement said. 

The new rules entailed changes to several previous instructions, allowing, for example, investors who have been present in the country to apply and obtain the same privileges as new peers. 

Investors are offered a list of scenarios, each of which makes them eligible for citizenship, including a zero-interest, five-year $1.5 million deposit at the Central Bank of Jordan (CBJ), or buying Treasury bonds valued at the same amount with an interest rate to be decided by CBJ and for a period no less than 10 years.

The third option for the investor is to buy securities, also at $1.5 million, from an active investment portfolio, while he/she can invest $1 million in SMEs for three years (instead of five years previously) at least to become a Jordanian national. The stakes will be locked against sale for the said period. 

The fifth scenario is a $2 million investment in any location in the country, or $1.5 million if the project is registered in any governorate other than Amman, provided such a project creates at least 20 job opportunities and remains operational for at least three years. Successful applicants will be given a temporary passport valid for three years and will be treated as full citizens minus political rights and the status will be changed into full citizenship with full rights after the three-year active operation of the project. 

In the other set of conditions, permanent residency has been replaced with a five-year residency. Eligibility is achieved when a non-Jordanian buys a property worth no less than JD200,000, provided that the Department of Land and Survey confirms the value.

Based on the two points above, any investor who obtains any of the said two statuses will have the right to obtain a similar status for his wife, unmarried, widowed or divorced daughter, son who is below 18 years old and parent if the investor was their sole supporter.

The criteria will be applied to 500 cases annually after a security clearance and checking on financial adequacy, and in case of violations to any of the conditions, the citizenship will be revoked and residency cancelled.

As for investors already residing in Jordan, the amendments stipulated other conditions allowing them to obtain residency and citizenship, in the case they owned shares in projects or venture partnerships with Jordanian investors.

To be eligible for citizenship under this criteria, each shareholder in the partnership — based in Amman — must hold no less than $2 million in stakes, while overall providing at least 20 job opportunities as entailed in previous amendments.

In other governorates, the minimum stake must not be less than $1.5 million per partner.

 

Source: jordantimes.com

A draft report by MEPs calling for the ‘phasing out’ of Citizenship by Investment schemes has been presented to a EU Parliamentary Committee.

The draft report prepared by Co-rapporteurs Jeppe Kofod and Luděk Niedermayer from the Financial Crimes, Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance (TAX3) committee in the European Parliament was presented to the public today. The Committee will now proceed to discuss the issue, before taking a vote on it in the future. Following that, the EU Parliament will also take as vote.  The report deals with tax related issues, and money laundering legislation across the EU as well.

The report could have serious repercussions on Malta, given that it proposes doing away with Citizenship by Investment schemes. The IIP scheme has become a major source of income for the Maltese government, and while the planned 2019 surplus is not wholly based on the income from this scheme, government did admit that it partly was.

Paragraph 90 of the draft report reads that the MEPs are concerned that according to the OECD, Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes could be misused to undermine the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution. The MEPs note that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10% on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme. They note that they are “concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS.”

Maltese Finance Minister Edward Scicluna had previously addressed the OECD report, saying that “Malta’s listing in an OECD report is a result of a misunderstanding” 

Paragraph 91 of the draft report continues on the issue, and calls for the phasing out of all golden visa schemes.

“(91) Concludes that the potential economic benefits of Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced Customer Due Diligence on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, as required by the Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD5); calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State.”

Paragraph 92 of the draft report would see the MEPs call on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, “which might arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence.”

Henley and Partners could be affected by this, should the EU pass implement said report provisions.

The whole report includes over 200 articles, and it is unclear what, if it is passed through as is, the possible implications on Malta’s tax system currently are.

The report also makes reference to assassinated journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, and urges the Maltese authorities to make progress in identifying the instigator of her murder.

The Chair of the committee, Petr Jezek, was present at a press conference on the draft report today. He said that the committee’s mandate is to build and complement the work of the previous work in this area by past committees, including the PANA committee.

“We started our work on 22 March,” he said, adding that they will vote on the final report in February 2019.

He said that the EU, together with member states, are tightening the screws on money laundering, tax evasion and money laundering.

Co-Rapporteur Jeppe Kofod highlighted that the report includes 208 articles, with strong language on tax evasion and money laundering. “We have seen that the executive power in EU member states have failed fundamentally in the fight against money laundering and in the fight to close loopholes in corporate tax Systems which have enabled high levels of corporate tax evasion.”

He said that the majority of profits from multi-national corporations are shifted artificially to low tax jurisdictions. The report, he said, concludes the need for much stronger cooperation between authorities within different member states.

During the press conference, one EU journalist said that there are good rules in place but are not enforced properly. She asked if there is “something more from member states that needs to be done, and can they be trusted? The example I am thinking of at the moment is Pilatus bank, where the authorities in Malta did not seem to be doing their job properly, and the situation was kicked up to the European Banking Authority. Do you want to see EU regulatory body taking a clearer role and greater responsibility to ensure regulations are implemented?

The other co-rapporteur, Luděk Niedermayer,  responded  that the overall system in the EU is only as strong as the weakest point is weak.” It is not enough for 90% of member states to do an excellent job in tackling money laundering and the rest not. The minimal standard must be sufficient” he said, while adding that he does not believe centralisation is always the solution. He said that it is local work to look after the concrete situation.

“Sometimes the problem is not that the rules are bad, but that they are different, and that is the core stone of profit shifting and tax avoidance. Sometimes it is very important to agree that we have the same rules.”

Asked about the Golden Visas, and other programs, Niedermayer said that “the question on golden visas and other programmes on getting residence permits was one new things in our report. We looked at it in terms of tax competition as well as in a broader concept. For EU society and values, it is not good to have possibility to buy into the society by paying an amount and becoming an EU resident, even a citizen. That is not good.”

He said that such programmes have risks, as the people would have Schengen priviledges.

The full draft report can be read here.

PN MEP Francis Zammit Dimech, in reaction to the report, said: “Concerns related to proper lack of due diligence as regards to persons buying the passport of a European Member State and in the process acquire also EU citizenship with freedom of movement all across the EU means in practice that we are also facing totally unnecessary security risks. This is why we shall keep on insisting on the full and clear disclosure of the names of all persons acquiring citizenship and not try to hide those names from public attention and scrutiny.”

 

Source: independent.com.mt

 

President Donald Trump has claimed that the provision of birthright citizenship has created an entire industry of birth tourism in the US with Chinese people benefitting a lot from this “crazy, lunatic policy”.

Birth tourism refers to the practice of people travelling to another country solely to give birth there. Most leave for their home countries right after.

In his latest hardline immigration rhetoric, the US President on Tuesday expressed his intention to take the path of an executive order to deny automatic citizenship to children born of non-American parents in the US.

“This policy (birthright citizenship) has even created an entire industry. It’s called birth tourism, where pregnant mothers from all over the world travel to America to make their children instant lifelong citizens with guaranteed everything,” Trump told his supporters at an election rally in Columbia, Missouri.

Trump alleged that the opposition Democrats want to continue giving automatic birthright citizenship to every child born to an illegal alien. “Even if they’ve been on our soil for a mere matter of seconds,” he said

“Hundreds of thousands of children born to illegal immigrants are made automatic citizens of the United States every year because of this crazy, lunatic policy that we can end,” he said amidst applause from his supporters.

“We need support, but we can do it. They’re all made instantly eligible for every privilege and benefit of American citizenship. You get nothing more than they do. They’re full citizens,” he said.

This is costing US many billions of dollars a year. “You don’t realise what a big industry — it’s an industry. Many come from China. You’ll be surprised. China now is number one. We’re not talking just South America, Latin America. We’re talking about China, parts of Asia. It’s crazy,” he said.

“Think of it. You’re an enemy of our country. You’re a general with war on your mind. You’re a dictator who we hate and who’s against us. And that dictator has his wife have a baby on American soil. Congratulations. Your son or daughter is now an American citizen. Does anybody think this makes sense?” he asked the audience.

“It’s crazy. But we’re getting it all worked out,” he said assuring his supporters that he will work to end birthright citizenship.Birthright citizens in turn can then bring their entire extended family into the country through chain migration. Trump wants to end chain migration too.

“You come into the country, you’re like two months old, and you’re going to take your brother and your sister and your mother and your father. You’re going to bring them all, aunts and uncles and grandfathers, and lots of people,” he said.

“It’s a disgrace. We have got to change our laws. The Democrats refuse to do it. And it’s not because they don’t know right from wrong. They think it’s good politically for them to make us all go through hell to get those laws changed. We’re going to get them changed,” Trump said.

Opponents say that Trump cannot sign an executive order. Any changes in citizenship requires a constitutional amendment. Trump argues that he is empowered to make changes with an executive order.

“It is not covered by the 14th Amendment because of the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Many legal scholars agree…,” Trump has said.

The 14th Amendment, added after the US Civil War, grants citizenship to anyone born on the US soil and was intended to give constitutional protection to former slaves. But Republicans such as Trump say it creates an incentive for people to come to the country illegally to have children.

The president asserted that the US is the only country granting birthright citizenship. However, about 30 others, including America’s neighbours Canada and Mexico, also grant birthright citizenship.

 

Source: theweek.in

The New Democratic Party (NDP) is undeterred in its plan to introduce a Citizenship By Investment (CBI) program for St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) should they form government.

“No one has said that these programs are in any way illegal or illicit,” President of the NDP and Leader of the Opposition Dr Godwin Friday said on Wednesday while being interviewed on the OMG morning show on Boom 106.9 FM by Dwight ‘Bing’ Joseph.

Friday said many countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and some European Union countries have similar programs.

The opposition leader was commenting following the blacklisting by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) of 21 countries, including six in the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) for their “golden passport” schemes which are said to “threaten international efforts to combat tax evasion.”

But Friday said if these programs are properly administered, there are unlikely to be problems.

“You have to make sure the administration of them is done with the utmost integrity and transparency. I think that is one of the things they criticized for the OECS countries that the selection process and the granting of the citizenship … was too opaque, and it needs to be more transparent. I don’t have any problem with that because any program that we administer here in St Vincent and the Grenadines will meet those standards,” the NDP president said.

He said when problems occur and people slip through the cracks, corrective action must be taken.

“I think when administrations in the OECD countries and the US see that you are doing that, they recognize that you are serious in making sure that the program meets the very highest standards, that is what we intend to do.”

Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St Lucia, and St Kitts and Nevis are the five independent OECS nations on the blacklist, while the other Caribbean nations and territories named are The Bahamas, Barbados, Turks and Caicos and Montserrat.

Friday cited the benefits that Dominica and St Kitts and Nevis have derived from CBI programs.

In 2017, St Kitts and Nevis achieved reduced its public debt by 13 per cent, to achieve a 60 per cent debt to GDP, while the economy grew by 9 per cent since 2014.

During his 2018/2019 budget speech delivered in July, Prime Minister of Dominica Roosevelt Skerrit said his government expects revenues related to the country’s CBI program to account for nearly 52 per cent (EC$406.6 million) of total government revenue in the upcoming fiscal year.

Friday said funds raised from such programs should not be used to fund the current account operations of government.

“Those should be targeted for capital projects so that you can use them to develop certain areas of the economy, … so that you do not rely on them to pay your civil servants and that sort of stuff, because then it becomes too dependent a position. You use them … for strategic economic development programs and capital projects that will generate growth for the country so that you don’t have a situation where you are continuously dependent.

“…You don’t have to keep taxing Vincentians for everything the government needs,” Friday said, adding that when there is no revenue from other sources, government increases taxes.

“When you keep squeezing people, by increasing VAT and putting taxes on the hotels and so on, that cannot bear them, that eventually grinds the economy into the dust,” he said.

Friday said under an NDP government, the program will be administered with the highest international standards and for the benefit of SVG.

Dr Ralph Gonsalves, the prime minister of SVG has remained steadfastly opposed to citizenship by investment programmes (CIP), even in tough economic times. Describing them as a “race to the bottom”, he has said such programmes bring with them national security challenges. Successive leaders of the opposition New Democratic Party (NDP) have stated their support for CIP programmes and their intention to introduce them here should they win government.

 

Source: searchlight.vc