B’daqshekk x’ġara? M’għandux dritt bħal ħaddieħor jew?
Chris Cardona qed jiċħad l-istorja.
Jidher li fl-aħħar verament Malta l-aqwa fl-Ewropa. L-aqwa Kabinett fl-Ewropa! Mhux unur kbir jew għall-Kabinett tal-Ministri ta’ Joseph Muscat li jkollhom kollega bħal Chris Cardona? Kulħadd b’xortih! Wara Konrad Mizzi, Chris Cardona kien jonqsu l-Partit Laburista.
Mela l-Allied Newspapers Limited u Adrian Hillman ftehmu. It-Times tgħidlna li laħqu ftehim u li bħala riżultat ta’ dan il-ftehim ġie fi tmiemu t-tilwim (u kawżi) li kien hemm bejniethom.
X’fih il-ftehim ma nafux għax din l-informazzjoni nżammet kunfidenzjali.
Dan il-ftehim waslu għalih wara diskussjonijiet fid-dawl tal-investigazzjoni li mexxa l-Imħallef Emeritu Giovanni Bonello u dan wara numru ta’ stejjer b’allegazzjonijiet gravi dwar l-istess Adrian Hillman, Keith il-Kasco Schembri kif ukoll il-kuntrattur Pierre Sladden.
Fl-istejjer kienu issemmew kumpaniji diversi li kien intqal li kienu ġew użati biex jaħbu attivitá illegali diversa.
X’irriżulta mill-investigazzjoni mhux magħruf għax il-kumpanija Allied Newspapers Limited s’issa żammet kollox mistur.
Ma naħsibx li hemm xi obbligu legali li l-Allied Newspapers Limited tippubblika r-rapport tal-inkjesta. Imma żgur li hemm obbligu ta’ xorta oħra: hu obbligu etiku. Għax kif tista’ l-Allied Newspapers Limited tkun kredibbli, mil-lum il-quddiem, meta permezz tal-gazzetti tagħha it-Times of Malta u s-Sunday Times of Malta jintalab aċċess għal informazzjoni minn sorsi tal-istat u anke minn sorsi oħra privati fil-kors tal-ġurnaliżmu investigattiv meta hi stess qed iżżomm mistur dak li irriżulta mill-investigazzjoni interna tagħha?
Il-pubbliku għandu dritt li jkun jaf dwar jekk irriżultax li kien hemm it-tixħim u l-korruzzjoni kif ukoll dwar jekk irriżultax jew le li kienet kompromessa l-linja editorjali tal-gazzetti li tippubblika l-Allied Newspapers Limited. Iċ–ċaħdiet ġenerali naħseb li ma jikkonvinċu lil ħadd.
Bla dubju l-Allied Newspapers Limited taħseb li bil-kunfidenzjalitá tista’ tipproteġi r-reputazzjoni tal-gazzetti tagħha. Wisq nibża’li dan mhux il-kaz.
The linear model of our economy follows a take-make-use-waste path as a result of which we extract resources from the earth which we use and subsequently throw away. In contrast to this cradle-to-grave trajectory, the circular economy seeks cyclical sustainability.
In a circular economy, the management of waste is paramount. It seeks to retain the resources used in our products in the economic loop as it is considered that they can be re-used to form other products. William McDonough and Michael Braungart describe this as a cradle-to-cradle process in their seminal book Cradle to Cradle. Remaking the way we make things. This is in contrast to the throw-away society which follows a cradle-to-grave path.
This is not only makes environmental sense, it also makes economic sense. Malta’s Waste Management Plan for the period 2014-2020 tentatively points in this direction by establishing a zero waste target that is to be achieved by 2050. Thirty-three years may seem to be too far away but, in reality, it may be just enough to change our mindset. A lot of hard work is involved but, at the end of the day, it will also be rewarding.
It involves the application of what is known as the waste hierarchy to different waste streams. Waste minimisation or prevention is always the preferred option. Ideally we should aim to prevent the generation of waste and in a number of cases this can easily be done. For example, we can prevent the generation of a substantial portion of organic waste by giving more thought to the food intake in our homes. We can also reduce the amount of food packaging by opting for more fresh food which is generally local.
Obviously, most of us have very little time to think about the consequences of our large number of small decisions which end up generating a lot of waste. Convenience generally wins the day, as we often opt for packaged and processed food. As a result, we not only generate avoidable waste but also end up eating less healthy food.
A pilot project related to organic waste is currently under way in 8 localities in Malta and Gozo. It has been going on for some time and although information as to the manner in which the localities involved have reacted is not publicly available, it is known through the grapevine that this has been varied but is improving.
Collecting the organic waste part of domestic waste, if carried out successfully, may well reduce the amount going to landfill by around 50 percent. There is also an added benefit: when the organic part of our waste is processed in a waste recycling plant, the resulting gases are used to produce electricity instead of adding to greenhouse gas emissions. This is surely a win-win situation.
Reducing 50 percent of our waste through the responsible management of just one part of it is very good policy. However, this requires much more investment in environmental education in our localities. Wasteserve, being ultimately responsible for waste management in the Maltese Islands, has taken a lot of initiatives in this respect, but much more needs to be done. It is never enough.
Waste is a collection of discarded resources and realising the value that we throw away is, in reality, what the circular economy is all about – hence the target of a zero waste society.
published in The Independent on Sunday : 29 January 2017
Għamel tajjeb il-Partit Nazzjonalista li tkellem dwar l-abbuż ta’ Luciano Busuttil dwar l-isticker il-blu biex ikollu parking ipprivileġġjat.
Peró mhux ipokrezija li l-isticker il-blu tathom f’għajnhom u l-iskandlu taż–żejt ma xammewx? Kellhom jieħdu passi għax tkellem dwaru ħaddieħor. Mhux xi qaddisin kien dawk li tkellmu imma dawk li kienu nqarsu!
Il-Partit Nazzjonalista fl-Opposizzjoni jipprietka l-onestá, imma fil-Gvern wara ftit jitlef il-vista u ħafna affarijiet ma jarahomx!
Titħassru lil Jason, l-Onorevoli, li qed jħossu intimidat minn ġurnalisti li qed jiġru warajh għal spjegazzjonijiet dwar dak li ġara fid-Dipartimenti li għalihom kien responsabbli bħala Ministru matul l-2012 u l-2013. Bi tlett rapporti tal-Awditur Ġenerali li jikkritikaw l-operat ta’ dak li kien il-Ministeru tiegħu, Jason l-Onorevoli għad għandu ħafna xi jwieġeb. S’issa ħarab milli jwieġeb.
Jeħtieġ li jwieġeb dwar in-nuqqas ta’ tmexxija tajba da parti tiegħu (good governance), li dwarha, l-Onorevoli jipprietka ħafna, imma mill-bqija, kif ngħidu, brodu.
Għall-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni din ukoll hi siegħa tal-prova. Għax kif jippretendi li jitwemmen li jrid imexxi Gvern serju, jekk l-anqas mill-Opposizzjoni ma hu kapaċi jassigura li l-Membri Parlamentari tal-partit tiegħu jagħtu kont ta’ egħmilhom?
The Lowenbrau saga has raised another issue as to the extent that revolving door recruitment should be regulated. By revolving door recruitment I am referring to the movement from government service to private sector lobbying and vice-versa of holders of political office as well as of senior civil servants. As a result of such recruitment, an investment is being made in the access to the decision-taking process which is purchased or offered for sale.
Last Sunday, The Malta Independent on Sunday understandably raised the issue with reference to former Minister John Dalli in the article Revolving doors: John Dalli denies conflict of interest in Lowenbrau deal (TMIS 22 January). However, the issue is much wider. It is a matter which is of concern in respect of the manner of operation of lobbying which in this country is largely unregulated. It has already happened not just in Mr Dalli’s recruitment with the Marsovin Group but also when the Corinthia Group recruited both Mr Dalli as well as current EU Commissioner Karmenu Vella.
It concerns both holders of political office as well as senior civil servants, including senior officers of authorities exercising executive authority.
There is much to learn from foreign jurisdictions as to the manner in which such recruitment should be regulated. A recent example which made the international headlines was the recruitment by Goldman Sachs of Josè Manuel Barroso, former President of the European Commission. An ethics panel had described Mr Barroso’s behaviour as morally reprehensible even though it concluded that he was not in breach of the EU Integrity code.
Corporate Europe Observatory had then commented that the Barroso recruitment had “catapulted the EU’s revolving door problem onto the political agenda, causing widespread jaw-dropping and reactions of disbelief, making it a symbol of excessive corporate influence at the highest levels of the EU.” Corporate Europe Observatory had also referred to the recruitment of other former European Commissioners by various corporations and emphasised that it is hard to avoid the conclusion that as a result of this behaviour European politicians are seen to be acting for private interests over the public interest.
This is the real significance of revolving door recruitment: it needs to be ascertained that the potential abuse by holders of political office of milking public office for private gain is regulated. It is not just another layer of regulation or unnecessary bureaucracy.
The issue is however more complex than the recruitment of holders of political office at the end of their political appointment. It is also of relevance even when such holders of political office are appointed to such office from the private sector as can be ascertained through the current hearings by the US Senate of the Trump administration nominees. It is also applicable to senior civil servants from the wider public sector.
Parliament is currently debating a Standards in Public Life Bill, which at this point in time is pending examination at Committee stage. Unfortunately, revolving door recruitment as well as lobbying have not been considered by the legislator! Revolving door recruitment is an exercise in selling and purchasing access to the decision-taking process. It is high time that it is placed under a continuous spotlight.
published in The Malta Independent: Wednesday 25 January 2017
The Lowenbrau saga is developing further, much beyond its original obvious intent. The new twist is whether, and to what extent, the use of “revolving doors” by politicians as soon as their political office draws to an end is permissible.
The use of “revolving doors” is a reference to the practice of some politicians to join the Board of Directors or team of advisors of business/industry in an area which they would have been responsible for regulating when in office.
The practice in the EU and some other countries is to postpone the possible entry of former Commissioners (holders of political office) in the areas they previously regulated by three years. This signifies that former Commissioners (or Ministers) are forbidden (unless they obtain prior clearance) from joining Boards of Directors and/or organisations of lobbyists for a number of years. A case in point was the recent Barroso appointment to the Goldman Sachs Board which whilst being considered as being “morally reprehensible” was not deemed to be a breach of the EU integrity code.
As far as I am aware, the Standards in Public Life Bill currently pending before Malta’s Parliament does not address the issue. The issues to be addressed are various. Primarily, however, it is urgent to establish a cooling-off length of time during which time persons active in public life should not take up posts in the private sector in order to ensure the observance of an ethical benchmark.
John Dalli’s taking up the post of Chairman of Marsovin is only one example. There are various others amongst which the posts which John Dalli himself as well as Karmenu Vella (present Commissioner and former Minister for Tourism) had taken up with the Corinthia Group in the past.
In fairness the applicability of such an ethical standard should also be considered for top civil servants, who should approach the use of revolving doors with extreme caution.
I have no quarrel with non-Maltese residents renting residential property in whatever form or shape. The problem is, however, that as a result the high rents demanded have squeezed out of the market the small numbers of Maltese residents who, not having the means to purchase, must perforce rent out.
The rental market was dormant for over 60 years and was resurrected primarily as a result of the 2008 overhaul of rent legislation. It was a process that started with earlier amendments to the law in 1995. Unfortunately, there was no real preparation for the impact of its resurrection in the residential sector. The end result was that the residential rental market is functioning in a warped manner, catering for the high (foreign) earners and ignoring those at the lower end of the scale: the low wage earner who lives from hand to mouth.
Malta and Gozo are being incessantly raped to produce more residential units, primarily for renting out to non-Maltese employees in the financial services and betting sectors that are mushrooming to benefit from favourable taxation rates. Yet the properties that can be rented out to the locals are being left vacant, as can be ascertained by an examination of the information published as a result of the last census.
Subsidies dished out by the Housing Authority may be of some help in reducing the resulting social pain. However, what is required is a radical overhaul that would place all vacant properties on the market. Ideally, this should be done through fiscal incentives that would encourage owners to shoulder their social obligations. A number of incentives have been or will be rolled out to encourage the rehabilitation of dilapidated property. The carrot will certainly function in a number of instances and a number of vacant properties will, as a result, return to the marketplace.
However, after the carrot has carried out its duty, it should be the turn of the stick. Properties vacant for a long time, say for more than 5 years (or some other reasonable length of time), should be taxed until they are put back to use. In such a small country we cannot afford to waste any of our scarce resources. Ensuring that this waste is avoided is everybody’s business.
published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 22 January 2017
L-attakki fuq Mario de Marco li qed jagħmlu uħud, flimkien mas-skiet ta’ dawk ta’ madwaru, kif ukoll in-nuqqas ta’ Simon Busuttil li jlissen kelma ta’ appoġġ bħala turija ta’ solidarjetá pubblika juri (għal min kien għadu ma ndunax) l-istat li fih jinsab il-Partit Nazzjonalista illum.
Kif diġa kelli l-opportunitá li nikkummenta fuq dan il-blog, huwa tajjeb li min hu fil-ħajja pubblika jagħti tagħrif bażiku dwar l-istat ta’ saħħtu. Għax il-pubbliku għandu dritt li jkun jaf.
Imma hemm limitu għal kollox.
Meta tapprofitta ruħek mill-fatt li persuna tinsab mal-art biex tipprova twarrabha min-nofs bid-daqqiet ta’ sieq tkun qed turi x’valuri għandek.
Minn ċerti nies ma kontx nistenna aħjar, u ż-żmien sfortunatament qed jagħtina raġun.
Mela issa nafu li l-Bank of Vassallo ġabar lura flusu. Dawk il-€250,000 li kien silef lill-kumpaniji kummerċjali tal-Partit Nazzjonalista. Skond rapport fil-gazzetti tal-lum intqal li dan is-self ilu li tħallas lura minn Awwissu li għadda.
Mhux magħruf jekk tħallsux interessi fuq is-self. Fil-fatt l-aħbar kienet li tħallsu il-€250,000. Imkien ma issemmew il-ħlas ta’ interessi. Probabbilment li dan sar minħabba li ma tħallsux flus. S’issa ħadd għadu ma qal jekk l-interessi tħallsux f’xi forma oħra. F’kaz li dan sar ma naħsibx li ser ikun hemm xi irċevuta.
Blog ta' Carmel Cacopardo 