B’sodisfazzjoni, inħarsu l-quddiem

Flimkien ma sħabi ħriġt mis-sala tal-għadd tal-voti f’nofs il-lejl bejn il-Ħadd u t-Tnejn.

Għalina din l-elezzjoni kienet esperjenza posittiva għax irnexxielna nirbħu lura l-parti l-kbira tal-voti li konna tlifna fl-elezzjoni tal-2017.

Sodisafatt li l-ilħaqna l-miri tagħna li naqbżu kwota fuq livell nazzjonali. Issa nistgħu ngħaddu għall-fażi li jmiss fil-kampanja politika tagħna: il-ġlieda għall-proporzjonalità vera. Proporżjonalità li l-liġi tagħna tirriżerva b’mod esklussiv għall-PLPN.

Kif diġa ħabbart, iktar tard matul il-ġimgħa ser nikkontestaw ir-riżultat elettorali. Il-kontestazzjoni tagħna hi limitata għall-mekkaniżmu tal-proporzjonalità u dak tal-bilanċ tal-ġeneru li jiddiskriminaw fl-applikazzjoni tagħhom. Il-fatt li ġibna kwota fuq livell nazzjonali jagħti saħħa u kredibilità lill-argumenti tagħna.

Il-Kummissjoni Elettorali tul il-kampanja kollha agixxiet ħażin. L-aħħar argument li kelli mal-kummissjoni l-bieraħ kien meta bi stupidita kbira irrifjutaw li jagħtuni kopja tar-riżultati bil-counts u l-wirt tal-voti. Domt ħin twil nargumenta magħhom meta fl-aħħar ċedew u għaddewli kopja. Ma nistax nifhem għalfejn jieħdu dan l-atteġġament.

Fuq nota personali għandi sodisfazzjoni kbir li kelli madwari team tajjeb li lkoll kemm huma ħadmu għat-team kollu. Ir-riżultat hu xhieda ta’ dan. Grazzi.

Jiena illum il-ġurnata għandi 66 sena u ma naħsibx li hu fl-interess tal-partit li nibqa’ fit-tmexxija wisq iktar. Lil sħabi ilni li nfurmajthom li jridu jsibu lil xi ħaddieħor biex imexxi lill-partit għall-futur. Mhux ser naqbad u nitlaq għax dan ikun ta’ ħsara imma hu l-mument li posti jieħdu ħaddieħor biex ikompli jibni fuq ix-xogħol utli li wettaqna flimkien. Jiena ngħin kemm nista’, mhux biss fi transizzjoni għal tmexxija ġdida imma anke fil-ħidma li trid tibqa’ issir. Għad baqali iktar enerġija!

Kburi li wasalna hawn. Grazzi lill-4747 votant li tawna l-fiduċja tagħhom. Inħarsu l-quddiem b’sodisfazzjon.

Some reflections on the campaign

I have led a team of 10 fantastic candidates in this campaign. Five of them were contesting a general election for the first time. We managed to engage much more than in other elections.

The broom was an effective symbol which communicated our basic political message: the country needs a good clean-up. We opted for a direct and clear message to convey our views across. The feedback we had was substantially more than in past elections.

Our campaign expenditure was around €7,000. Insignificant when compared to the millions spent by PLPN! ADPD’s campaign was developed organically responding to a number of issues and communicating our manifesto proposals throughout the 32-day campaign.

As anticipated, we encountered the usual difficulties when dealing with the constitutional institutions which have been hijacked by the PLPN.  Primarily I am referring to the Broadcasting Authority and the Electoral Commission.

The Broadcasting Authority once more failed to ensure a level playing field. It has permitted the party-political stations a free hand, as usual. PLPN, notwithstanding, still had access to the lion’s share of the campaign transmissions on the national station.

On Tuesday I met the Chief Electoral Commissioner to discuss a pending request from ADPD relative to the vote-counting process. This concerned access to the electoral counting data as is currently given to the PLPN. When the counting of votes was done manually it was possible to carry out visual monitoring to ensure that the counting process was properly managed. This cannot be done today without access to the electronic data held by the Commission. PLPN have been given this right of access and they can as a result check and verify the counting process. 

The Electoral Commission is withholding this right of access to ADPD. Without such a right of access to data held by the Commission we cannot verify the counting process and consequently we cannot put our mind at rest as to the absence of foul play in the process. The Commission has been aware for some time as to our request, and hence it is not acceptable to be informed at such a late hour of their refusal to grant the requested access. The Commission is basing its position on the electoral law which grants exclusive rights of access to political parties represented in parliament. The law, however grants the Commission the authority to remedy such issues. If the Commission keeps refusing to solve the problem it will confirm yet again that PLPN have hijacked this important institution too.

On a different note, I must thank my friend Dr Jean-Pierre Farrugia for publicly endorsing the ADPD campaign. I was not expecting this but it was definitely most welcome.

This Sunday will be a long day. The counting process will be swifter than in previous general elections due to electronic counting. Early in the day we will have the first projections of the results. Then, in the early afternoon the full results will be known. At that point the results will be analysed and the necessary conclusions drawn.

During the campaign I made the point that, subject to obtaining a reasonable number of votes, ADPD will be taking the necessary action to ensure that each and every vote cast has a bearing on the final result. Towards the end of the counting process, I will have the opportunity to address the press and outline the way forward.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 27 March 2022

Wrong messages from the National Audit Office

 

The National Audit Office (NAO) has recently published its report for 2017. In a democracy, the role of the NAO is of paramount importance. Its role of ascertaining the presence (or absence) of good governance at all levels is crucial in determining the health of the public sector.

The report lists the investigations carried out during 2017 in respect of which separate reports have been published and discussed publicly. These include the annual report on the public accounts, the consolidated annual report on local government, special audits and investigations and performance audits. Last year also saw the publication of a stand-alone report on the results achieved by the three main revenue-generating departments of the government, namely the Inland Revenue Department, the Value Added Tax Department and the Department of Customs.

In his overview, Auditor General Charles Deguara welcomes the positive developments, highlighting the administration’s commitment to implementing the NAO’s recommendations as far as possible. This has been done for two consecutive years and it is to be hoped that it becomes an annual occurrence.

The report explains the efforts made to continuously train the staff, thereby ensuring that, as far as possible, an internal team of experts is available to monitor and investigate as required. This is essential in order that the NAO keeps the administration on its toes.

The NAO, in its present format, was set up 20 years ago. Since 1997, it has been part of Parliament, accountable directly to Parliament. Previously, although technically independent it formed part of the Ministry of Finance.

During the past 20 years, it has had much to do. Its specific investigations are the ones about which we hear the most but the workings of the NAO go much deeper. Its continuous examination of the country’s public accounts, and the recommendations made to fine tune or correct methods of operation are always work in progress.

In order for the NAO to be as effective as possible, it should ensure that it keeps at arm’s length from the administration’s day to day operations. For this reason I was worried when reading in the 2017 report a short list of a number of domestic working groups in which the NAO participated. These range from the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) Implementation Project Board, the Financial Legislation Working Group, the Local Government Good Governance Working Group and others. The NAO should have oversight and not sit around the same table forming part of working groups to implement or draft a proposal for implementation.

Some years back the Auditor-General, together with the Ombudsman and the Chairman of the Electoral Commission, had decided to go beyond their terms of remit and accepted the Prime Minister’s invitation to examine the issue of the salaries of MPs and holders of political office. I had taken the Ombudsman Said Pullicino to task about his stand when, together with Arnold Cassola I had met the trio. They then justified their stand by referring to legal advice from the Attorney General’s office and others! The three wise men did not realise that they had compromised their office because they cannot – and should not – switch from being regulators to being advisors, even if temporarily.

The NAO would do well to take a step back, thereby ensuring that it is at arm’s length from the administration. Otherwise it risks sending the wrong messages.

 

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 29 April 2018

Joseph Church : waħdu fin-nofs

 

 

Is-Sur Joseph Church hu l-Kummissarju Elettorali Ewlieni. Huwa uffiċjal pubbliku. Jmexxi l-Kummissjoni Elettorali magħmula minn 9 membri: 4 nominati mill-Prim Ministru, 4 oħra nominati mill-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni flimkien mas-Sur Joseph Church.

Meta l-Gvern ippreżenta l-abbozz ta liġi dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti politiċi mill-ewwel insista li l-awtoritá li kellha tieħu ħsieb it-twettiq ta dawn l-obbligi kellha tkun il-Kummissjoni Elettorali. Il-Gvern insista dwar dan għax il-konsulent legali tiegħu Franco Debono repetutament insista dwar dan. Kienu jgħidu li hekk hi l-liġi Ingliża!

Alternattiva Demokratika dejjem insistiet li kien żball li din ir-responsabbiltá titqiegħed f’ħoġor il-Kummissjoni Elettorali għax din, minħabba l-komposizzjoni tagħha, fl-iktar mumenti kritiċi tieħu posizzjoni partiġġjana biċ-Chairman fin-nofs irid jiddeċiedi prattikament hu l-iktar kwistjonijiet jaħarqu.

Franco Debono u Owen Bonnici kienu jgħidu li l-Kummissjoni Elettorali dejjem mexxiet tajjeb l-elezzjonijiet kollha li kellha l-inkarigu li tmexxi. Dawn forsi qatt ma irrealizzaw li l-liġijiet elettorali tant huma dettaljati li l-Kummissjoni Elettorali ftit għandha fejn tiċċaqlaq u anke kieku riedet kważi qatt ma setgħet tagħti deċiżjonijiet differenti milli tat!

Fuq kollox il-Kummissjoni Elettorali Ingliża hi komposta bmod differenti u fiha persuni li huma verament indipendenti. Il-Kummissjoni Elettorali Maltija għandha tmienja minn disa membri li mhumiex u l-anqas qatt ma jistgħu jkunu indipendenti, avolja huma lkoll persuni serji. Hemm ta’ l-inqas tlieta minnhom li kienu kandidati felezzjonijiet ġenerali. Hemm min minnhom anke illum hu direttur ta Korpi Parastatali nnominat mill-Gvern!

Fdawn iċċirkustanzi Alternattiva Demokratika kienet ipproponiet li l-awtoritá dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti għandha tkun fil-Kummissarju għall-Istandards fil-Ħajja Pubblika li l-Liġi dwaru ġiet approvata riċentement.

Wara xi żmien li Alternattiva Demokratika kienet ħarġet bdin il-proposta, il-Partit Nazzjonalista ukoll kien ħareġ idoqq l-istess diska. Imma l-Gvern webbes rasu.

Mela illum tiddeċiedi l-Kummissjoni Elettorali.

Immaġinaw ftit xinhi l-posizzjoni tal-Kummissjoni meta titalab tinvestiga liżżewġ partiti l-kbar. Diġa hawn l-ewwel każijiet u hemm d-diffikultajiet. It-Times qed tirrapporta li wara li ġie diskuss il-każ tal-invoices tal-PN/Silvio Debono hemm membri tal-Kummissjoni li qed joġġezzjonaw li l-Kummissjoni Elettorali tkun hi li tinvestiga u taqta l-każ.

Ovvja, 4 jaqblu u 4 ma jaqblux. U jispiċċa jiddeċiedi ċ-Chairman is-Sur Joseph Church, waħdu, wara li jkun qies il-parir legali li jirċievi.

Dan kollu seta jkun evitat kieku l-Gvern ta każ tal-fehma ta Alternattiva Demokratika li kienet ippreżentata bil-miktub kemm meta ħarġet il-White Paper kif ukoll iktar tard meta ħareġ l-abbozz ta liġi.

Il-Palazz tal-Girgenti: bejn Gvern u Partit

girgenti-palace-2

Meta nhar it-Tlieta li għadda, jiena u Arnold Cassola iltqajna mas-Sur Joseph Church, il-Kummissarju Elettorali Ewlieni, tkellimna miegħu dwar il-Palazz tal-Girgenti u l-fatt li l-Grupp Parlamentari tal-Partit Laburista għamel użu minnu biex iltaqa hemm.

Għal uħud Alternattiva Demokratika qed tfettaq u tgħaġġibha. Jiena ma naħsibx li dan hu l-każ għax hemm prinċipju importanti ħafna fin-nofs: fejn hi l-linja li tissepara l-partit mill-gvern? Issa jiena konxju li hemm min mhuwiex interessat fil-prinċipji, għax għal uħud, dawn huma burokrazija żejda!

Għandu jkun hemm separazzjoni bejn il-Gvern u l-partit politku li jiffurmah, jew inkella dawn għandhom ikunu ħaġa waħda, jew kważi?  Din hi l-qalba tal-kwistjoni kollha li fil-fehma ta Alternattiva Demokratika teħtieġ li tkun ikkunsidrata battenzjoni kbira.

Il-liġi li tirregola l-finanzjament tal-partiti saret biex ikun hemm trasparenza. Saret ukoll biex tiġbed linja ċara dwar dak li jista jsir u dak li ma jistax isir, u dan permezz ta numru ta kontrolli.

Fost affarijiet oħra, l-Att tal-2015 dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti politiċi, fl-artiklu 34 tiegħu jgħid li partit politiku ma jistax jaċċetta donazzjoni minn sorsi tal-istat. Mhemmx kif u għaliex, iżda xejn, bla argumenti jew eċċezzjonijiet.

Issa donazzjoni għal-liġi dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti politiċi ma tfissirx biss li partit ikun irċieva għotja ta flus. Għax anke jekk jixtri jew jirċievi prodott jew servizz bi prezz ridott, partit politiku jkun qiegħed jirċievi donazzjoni, u l-valur tad-donazzjoni, fdan il-kaz tkun l-ammont li jkun tnaqqas mill-prezz jew mill-valur tal-oġġett jew servizz. Imma jekk partit politiku jirċievi prodott jew servizz bla ma jħallas xejn għalih ikun qiegħed jirċievi donazzjoni li tikkonsisti fil-valur sħiħ tal-oġġett jew servizz li jkun qed jirċievi.

Fil-kaz tal-laqgħa tal-Grupp Parlamentari tal-Partit Laburista li saret fil-Girgenti ġara preċiżament hekk. Il-Grupp Parlamentari tal-Partit Laburista ingħata servizz li kien jikkonsisti fl-użu tal-Palazz tal-Inkwiżitur fil-Girgenti biex fih jiltaqgħu, il-bogħod mill-istorbju, u allura biex il-ħidma tagħhom setgħet tagħti l-frott ippjanat. Dan is-servizz ingħata lill-Partit Laburista mill-uffiċċju tal-Prim Ministru u dan ingħata bla ħlas. Minħabba li ngħata bla ħlas jitqies li huwa donazzjoni.

Il-Prim Ministru ma għandu l-ebda seta’ jagħmel donazzjonijiet ta din ix-xorta. Huwa miżmum milli jagħmel dan minn liġi li ippreżenta l-Gvern immexxi minnu stess fil-Parlament u li daħlet fis-seħħ fl-1 ta Jannar 2016 wara li ġiet approvata. Hemm min qed jargumenta li fil-passat sar l-istess. Probabbilment li dan huwa veru. Imma issa għandna liġi eżattament biex dan ma jerġax isir. Liġi li l-Gvern (ġustament) jiftaħar biha, ħalli mbagħad ikun hu stess li ma josservahiex!

Mhiex ħaġa sabiħa li l-partit u l-Gvern ikunu ħaġa waħda. Meta dan iseħħ, l-anqas ma hu sinjal tajjeb. Ikun ifisser li wasalna fsitwazzjoni li fiha dak li hu tal-pajjiż ikun ikkapparrat mill-ftit. Hekk jibdew il-problemi l-kbar. Jibdew minn affarijiet żgħar li dwarhom jgħidulek biex ma tfettaqx imma imbagħad jinfirxu għal affarijiet ikbar.

Imma jekk ma tkunx tajt kaz fl-affarijiet iżżgħar imbagħad ikun tard wisq.

II-partit fil-Gvern jifforma l-Gvern imma hu separat u distint minnu fkull ħin.

Għalhekk għandha taġixxi malajr il-Kummissjoni Elettorali għax is-separazzjoni bejn il-partit u l-istat hu prinċipju sagrosant meta demokrazija parlamentari tkun bsaħħitha.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: Il-Ħadd 26 ta’ Frar 2017

Joseph tweets a selfie from Girgenti

muscat-girgenti-tweet

A week ago, during a short break from a very “fruitful” meeting of the Labour Party Parliamentary Group, Joseph Muscat, the Prime Minister, tweeted a selfie. The selfie included a number of hangers-on who promptly re-tweeted Joseph’s selfie, announcing to one and all that the Labour Party Parliamentary Group was meeting at Girgenti, the Prime Minister’s official residence in the countryside.

In the tweeted selfie, standing in the front row, perched between Planning Parliamentary Secretary Deborah Schembri and Civil Rights Minister Helena Dalli stands Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, the Cabinet member who around 18 months ago piloted the Financing of Political Parties Act through Parliament  Throughout the past months, the Honourable Owen Bonnici rightly proclaimed this as a milestone. How come his own government and his own political party ignored the implementation of this milestone?

It seems that Joseph, the tweeter from Girgenti, was either not properly advised of the implications of this landmark  legislation or else ignored completely the advice he received.

On Tuesday I visited the offices of the Electoral Commission and met Joseph Church, the Chief Electoral Commissioner. Together with my colleague Arnold Cassola, I drew the attention of Mr Church to the fact that the Parliamentary Labour Party was making use of government property contrary to the provisions of the Financing of Political Parties Act. On behalf of Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party in Malta, we requested that Joseph Muscat and his Labour Party be investigated for acting against the provisions of the landmark legislation: Joseph Muscat for permitting the use of the Girgenti Palace and the Labour Party for accepting to use it as a venue for one of the meetings of its Parliamentary Group.

As I have already explained during a Press Conference held after the meeting with the Chief Electoral Commissioner, as well as in the daily edition of this newspaper [Girgenti: demarcation line between party and state. TMI 23 February] the use of the Girgenti Palace is deemed to be a donation, which in terms of article 34 of the Financing of Political Parties Act is not permissible to be received by a political party from the state. Joseph Muscat the Prime Minister could not grant such a donation, and Joseph Muscat the Leader of the Labour Party could not accept it.

Unfortunately, this incident communicated by tweet sends a very clear and negative message: that Joseph Muscat and his Labour Party consider themselves to be above the law. The law which they rightly described as being a “landmark legislation” was intended to apply to one and all.  Joseph Muscat and his Labour Party seem to think otherwise. In fact, the Labour Party is not even yet registered as a political party as the Electoral Commission, some months back, considered that it does not satisfy the conditions laid down in the legislation.

Some may consider that Alternattiva Demokratika is splitting hairs when raising the matter. I beg to differ, as a very basic principle is at stake: the demarcation line separating the government from the governing political party. This is what lies at the core of the complaint submitted by the Greens to the Chief Electoral Commissioner for an investigation in terms of the provisions of the Financing of Political Parties Act.

I am informed that the Electoral Commission will be meeting next Wednesday when it is expected to consider the request to investigate Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and his political party for ignoring the provisions of the Financing of Political Parties Act.  It is the moment of truth for the Electoral Commission. Eight out of nine of its members are political appointees: four nominated by the Prime Minister and another four nominated by the Leader of the Opposition. The ninth member of the Commission is the chairman, a senior civil servant.

It is time for all nine members of the Electoral Commission to stand up and be counted. As a constitutional body, it is the Commission’s duty to defend the values of a modern day parliamentary democracy. Whether it will do so is anybody’s guess. I will definitely not hold my breath.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 26 February 2017

Girgenti: demarcation line between party and state

indip-230217

Meeting the Chief Electoral Commissioner Mr Joseph Church last Tuesday, together with Arnold Cassola, I raised the issue of the use of the Inquisitor’s Palace at Girgenti by the Labour Party Parliamentary Group for one of its meetings.  Some may consider that Alternattiva Demokratika is splitting hairs when raising the matter. I beg to differ as a basic principle is at stake: the demarcation line separating government from the governing party.

To what extent should the affairs of the government be administered separately from those of the governing party? This is what lies at the core of the complaint submitted by the Greens to the Chief Electoral Commissioner for investigation in terms of the provisions of the Financing of Political Parties Act.

The Act to regulate the financing of political parties was introduced to ensure that party financing was subject to transparency rules. It also establishes no-go areas. Amongst other matters the 2015 legislation provides in its article 34  that political parties should not accept donations from the state. There are no exceptions to this rule.

In terms of the Financing of Political Parties Act, a donation is not just pecuniary in nature. Whenever a political party purchases a product or a service at a reduced price it would be in receipt of a donation. The quantum of the donation would be equivalent to the reduction in price of the product or service received.  On the other hand if a political party acquires a product or a service without paying its commercial price, then, the value of the donation received amounts to the full price of the said product or service.

This is exactly what happened when the Labour Party Parliamentary Group made use of the Prime Minister’s official residence at the Girgenti Inquisitor’s Palace. The Parliamentary Group received the service of a meeting place without payment. Hence its being considered as a donation.

The Prime Minister does not have the authority to make such donations. His actions in this respect are restricted by law which was presented and approved in Parliament by the government he leads and entered in force as on 1 January 2016.  Some have argued that this is not the first time that such meetings were so organised. This may be so. It is precisely for this purpose that the legislation was enacted in order to prevent its reoccurrence. One should not propose such legislation and then be the first to ignore it!

Government and the governing political party should be separate and distinct. When such distinction is not clear, even in the case of minor matters, this would be a very bad indication. It would signal that the resources of the state are not being managed appropriately. It would be wrong to ignore such signals indicating the existence of minor problems as these will, if ignored, subsequently spread to more substantial matters. It would then be too late to act.

The party in Government forms the Government of the day but should be separate and distinct from it at all times.

Hence the need for the Electoral Commission to act immediately. The separation between government and the governing political party is a basic principle in a healthy democracy.

published in The Malta Independent : Thursday 23 February 2017

Il-Palazz tal-Girgenti: u d-dritt li tagħmel li trid (dejjem u kullimkien)

girgenti-palace

Dal-għodu flaqgħa li Alternattiva Demokratika kellha mal-Kummissarju Elettorali Ewlieni tlabnieh jinvestiga l-fatt li nhar is-Sibt 18 ta Frar 2017 il-Palazz tal-Girgenti intuża biex fih saret laqgħa tal-Grupp Parlamentari tal-Partit Laburista. Dan, fil-fehma ta Alternattiva Demokratika jmur kontra l-liġi li tirregola l-Finanzjament tal-Partiti Politiċi u li tipprojibixxi li dan isir.

Din il-liġi daħlet fis-seħħ fl-1 ta Jannar 2016. Nisimgħu ħafna ftaħir kontinwu dwar kemm kienet pass il-quddiem, kif fil-fatt kienet. Imma l-Partit Laburista xorta ġie jaqa u jqum minnha għax uża propjetá pubblika għal attivitá ta partit u dan kontra dak li tippermetti l-liġi.

L-abbuż hu wieħed żgħir imma xorta jibqa abbuż. Huwa it-tip ta’ abbuż li tant drajnieh isir taħt imneħirna li ħafna ma jagħtux kaz. Anzi tilfu s-sens tan-normalita. Ta’ x’inhu tajjeb u x’inhu hażin.

Fost il-kummenti elettroniċi li hemm jakkumpanjaw din l-aħbar f’xi gazzetti online kien hemm min qal : din rajtu, għax ma rajtux it-tieġ taiben Lawrence Gonzi fil-Palazz tal-Girgenti f’ Lulju 2011. Probabbilment li min ifittex isib bosta każi oħra ta ulied politiċi li użaw propjetá pubblika bħalma għamel iben Lawrence Gonzi. Dwar dan jiena qatt ma qbilt. Naħseb li hi użanza ħażina għax tagħti l-messaġġ żbaljat li l-politiku fis-setgħa għandu jedd assolut dwar l-użu tal-propjetá pubblika, li ċertament mhuwiex il-każ. Imma fl-2016 il-Partit Laburista fil-gvern qata’ linja : għal kulħadd, suppost.

Hemm differenza kbira minn żmien Lawrence Gonzi: dakinnhar ma kienx hemm liġi li tirregola dawn l-affarijiet. Illum hemm! U niftaħru biha ukoll!

Il-liġi dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti politiċi saret biex jinqatgħu l-abbużi żgħar u kbar. Jagħmilhom min jagħmilhom. Imma jidher li l-Partit Laburista jidhirlu li dawn ir-regoli japplikaw għal kulħadd minbarra għalih! Għax min jaħseb li hu bsaħħtu jibqa jidhirlu li għandu dritt li jagħmel li jrid: dejjem u kullimkien.

muscat-girgenti-tweet

Il-Kummissjoni Elettorali: Joseph u Simon jappuntaw irġiel biss

electoral commisison 09.2015

Tħabbret il-Kummissjoni Elettorali ġdida. Ġdida sa ċertu punt, għax fil-parti l-kbira tagħha il-membri li għandhom kif inħatru kienu ukoll membri tal-Kummissjoni Elettorali li għadha kif spiċċalha l-perjodu tal-ħatra.

Safejn naf jiena membru wieħed biss hemm ġdid: Dr Victor Scerri li inħatar flok il-Maġġur Vanni Ganado.

Għal min qed jilmenta li l-Kummissjoni Elettorali fiha biss irġiel niġbed l-attenzjoni li l-Prim Ministru appunta ħamsa minn dawn l-irġiel u l-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni appunta erba’ oħra.

Il-Prim Ministru Joseph Muscat appunta liċ-Chairman tal-Kummissjoni (Joe Church miċ-ċivil) u 4 mill-membri fil-waqt li l-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni Simon Busuttil appunta l-4 membri l-oħra.

Ir-responsabbiltà li ma ġiet appuntata l-ebda mara hi biss ta’ Joseph u Simon u ta’ ħadd iktar. Ma hemm ħadd f’min jistgħu jwaħħlu.

Kulħadd irid jiekol !

Mario @ Parliament

 

L-aħbar li Mario de Marco, bħala avukat, qed jassisti waħda mill-kumpaniji tal-iGaming li l-ġimgħa l-oħra kellhom il-liċenzja tagħhom sospiża terġa’ tipponta lejn waħda mill-problemi fil-politika Maltija. Il-Membri Parlamentari Maltin  huma part-timers u jridu jibqgħu jipprattikaw il-professjoni tagħhom sakemm għadhom Membri tal-Parlament. Dan jiftaħ beraħ id-diskussjoni dwar il-konflitt ta’ interess potenzjali li għandu l-Membru Parlamentari Malti f’din is-sitwazzjoni.

Ovvjament, kulħadd irid jgħix, kulħadd irid jiekol!

Il-GRECO [il-grupp ta’ stati kontra l-korruzzjoni fil-Kunsill tal-Ewropa] jgħid hekk dwar il-Membri Parlamentari part-time ta’ Malta fl-aħħar rapport tiegħu li ġie ppubblikat f’Ġunju li għadda:

“Parliamentarians, in Malta are generally part-time legislators who also maintain their private practices. The potential for a conflict of interest due to the personal and professional networks and business links built across Malta, make maintaining decisionmaking independence, and being able to publically demonstrate this independence, a live issue.” (Fourth Evaluation report – 2014)

Sadanittant f’Malta, għoxrin xahar ilu kien konkluż rapport imħejji minn kumitat kompost mill-Ombudsman, l-Awditur Ġenerali u l-Kummissarju Elettorali Ewlieni, intitolat Recommended Remuneration Mechanism for Holders of Political Office. F’dan ir-rapport hemm diversi proposti li wasal iż-żmien li niddiskutuhom bis-serjetà. Dawn il-proposti jinkludu dawk dwar il-possibilità li l-Membri Parlamentari Maltin jibdew jaħdmu full-time fil-Parlament.

Ma jagħmilx sens li l-Membru Parlamentari Malti fil-għaxija jikkritika lill-Awtorità (hi liema hi) dwar kif din qed taħdem u fil-għodu fil-Qorti jassisti lil min jikkontesta l-mod kif tkun ħadmet l-istess awtorità. Il-Membru Parlamentari għandu juri b’mod ċar li hu legislatur indipendenti. Għax sakemm jibqa’ part-timer dejjem ser ikun hemm dubju raġjonevoli li ta’ l-inqas xi drabi huwa jkun immotivat mill-interessi tal-klijenti tiegħu iktar minn kull ħaġa oħra.