Profitti għas-settur privat, riskji u kontijiet għall Gvern!

Nhar it-Tnejn li għadda l-Parlament iddiskuta s-sentenza mogħtija mill-Imħallef Francesco Depasquale fuq il-konċessjoni dwar tlett isptarijiet tal-Gvern lill-Vitals Global Healthcare liema konċessjoni eventwalment għaddiet għand Steward Health Care. Id-deċiżjoni li ngħatat hi kontra l-Prim Ministru bħala kap tal-Eżekuttiv, kif ukoll kontra l-Avukat Ġenerali, kumpaniji diversi mill-grupp kummerċjali ta’ Steward Health Care u xi korpi pubbliċi u r-rappresentanti tagħhom.

Din hi kawża li ppreżenta Adrian Delia meta kien għadu Kap tal-Opposizzjoni. Il-parti kbira tad-diskussjoni parlamentari dwar din is-sentenza iffukat fuq nuqqas ta’ governanza tajba, dwar tmexija ħażina u dwar frodi flimkien mal- korruzzjoni, assoċjati ma’ din il-konċessjoni sa mit-tnissil tagħha.

Dan kollu joħroġ ċar mis-sentenza tal-Qorti tal-ġimgħa l-oħra. Imma għal min kien attent, dan kien diġa jidher ċar fiż-żewġ rapporti dwar din il-konċessjoni tal-isptarijiet, rapporti li ħareġ l-Awditur Ġenerali f’Lulju 2020 u f’Diċembru 2021. Is-sentenza tal-Qorti qed issaħħaħ u tirrinforza l-konklużjonijiet li wasal għalihom l-Awditur Ġenerali.

Niftakru li f’Lulju 2020 l-Awditur Ġenerali kien ippubblika l-ewwel rapport tiegħu, rapport li hu mifrux fuq iktar minn 200 paġna u li kien jiffoka fuq il-proċess tal-offerti għall-konċessjoni dwar l-isptarijiet. Dan kien supplimentat b’addendum ta’ 20 paġna oħra. Iktar tard f’Diċembru 2021 l-Awditur Ġenerali kien ippubblika it-tieni rapport tiegħu b’467 paġna, li kien jiffoka fuq il-qafas kuntrattwali tal-konċessjoni u kif dan ġie mħaddem.

L-Awditur Ġenerali kien ikkonkluda fir-rapporti tiegħu li l-preparazzjoni li wettaq il-Gvern in konnessjoni mal-konċessjoni kienet waħda superfiċjali, u li meta ħareġ is-sejħa għall-offerti kien fil-fatt diġa ftiehem u fuq kollox lill-Kabinett bosta drabi kien iħallieh fil-għama. Anke l-Ministru tal-Finanzi kien imwarrab, qiesu kien qiegħed hemm għalxejn!

Punt interessati li isemmi l-Awditur Ġenerali hu li Vitals Global Healthcare ippreżentaw garanzija bankarja mill-Bank of India li kienet datata 13 ta’ Marzu 2015, ħmistax-il ġurnata qabel ma fil-fatt ħarġet is-sejħa għall-offerti. Dan sar għax il-ftehim kien diġa sar u s-sejħa li ħarġet għall-offerti kienet waħda finta! A bażi ta’ dan, l-Awditur Ġenerali kien tal-fehma li Vitals Global Healthcare kellhom ikunu skwalifikati milli jippartiċipaw fis-sejħa għall-offert għall-konċessjoni dwar l-isptarijiet.

Dan hu kollu importanti u separatament wassal għal konklużjonijiet li issa wasal għalihom ukoll l-Imħallef Depasquale fis-sentenza li qed nitkellmu dwarha. Ifisser li Gvern serju, kieku ried, seta jaġixxi. Kellu biżżejjed informazzjoni biex jibgħat lil Steward Health Care isaqqu. Imma b’mod ċar dan ma setax jagħmlu għax il-Gvern kien parti integrali mill-ħadma li saret.

Imma hemm affarijiet oħra, daqstant importanti, ta’ natura fundamentali u li huma presentment skartati mid-diskussjoni pubblika. Kemm jagħmel sens li qasam sensittiv bħas-saħħa ikollu parti sostanzjali minnu taħt kontroll kważi assolut tas-settur privat. Jagħmel sens il-Public-Private Partnership fil-qasam tas-saħħa?

Din hi mistoqsija li hi kompletament skartata fid-dibattitu pubbliku li sar u li għadu għaddej. Hi mistoqsija fundamentali li mit-tweġiba għaliha tista’ toħroġ il-fasla ta’ kif is-settur privat jista’ jikkontribwixxi u jipparteċipa mingħajr ma jikkontrolla: kif kulħadd jitħallas ta’ xogħolu imma li ħadd ma jitħalla jberbaq il-ġid tal-pajjiż.

L-esperjenza li għandna f’dan il-pajjiz dwar l-involviment tas-settur privat f’dawn it-tip ta’ proġetti hi waħda ta’ problemi kbar: problema ta’ deċiżjonijiet ħziena u ta’ abbuż ta’ poter, kif ukoll suspetti kbar ta’ frodi u korruzzjoni. Dan b’referenza kemm għal din il-konċessjoni tal-isptarijiet, il-progett tal-enerġija f’Delimara u anke fil-progett ta’ San Vinċenz f’Ħal-Luqa. F’kull kaz hemm rapporti voluminużi tal-Awditur Ġenerali li jispjegaw dettaljatatment it-taħwid li ġie iġġenerat mill-Gvern immexxi mill-Partit Laburista wara l-2013.

Huwa mudell ekonomiku fallut li jarmi l-assi pubbliċi. Mudell li intuża ukoll f’ċirkustanzi oħra bħall-bejgħ tal-art f’Pembroke bir-ribass biex ikun iffavoreġġat il-proġett spekulattiv tal-Grupp dB.  Il-profitti li jirriżultaw mill-ispekulazzjoni, sfortunatament għandhom prijorità fuq il-ġid komuni għal dan il-Gvern.

Hu ċar li jekk irridu l-involviment tas-settur privat fi proġetti pubbliċi, dan l-involviment għandu jkun regolat sewwa u din ir-regolamentazzjoni għandha tkun infurzat biex tkun assigurata governanza tajba mill-bidu nett, mill-ewwel ideat sat-twettieq ta’ proġetti ta’ din ix-xorta.  S’issa kollox qiegħed jitħalla jimxi għal riħu bil-konsegwenzi li qed naraw b’għajnejna u li qed insiru nafu bihom ftit ftit. Nuqqas ta’ regoli ċari li jkunu infurzati jwassal inevitabilment għal taħwid, għal frodi u għal korruzzjoni. Riżultat ta’ hekk ibati l-pajjiz kollu.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 5 ta’ Marzu 2023

Private profits public risks

On Monday Parliament discussed the decision delivered in Court by Judge Francesco Depasquale relative to the Government hospital concession awarded to Vitals Global Healthcare, eventually substituted by Steward Health Care. The decision delivered is against the Prime Minister as head of the Executive, as well as the Attorney General, various companies in the Steward Health Care Group and a number of quangos and their representatives.

This Court Case was presented by Adrian Delia when he was Leader of the Opposition. The major part of the Parliamentary discussion has focused on bad governance, fraud and corruption which were all associated with the hospital concession process since its inception.

All this emanates from the Court decision delivered last week. However, those who observe the political scene attentively would be undoubtedly aware that all this was already evident in two reports published by the Auditor General on this hospital concession: the first one published in July 2020 and the second one in December 2021. The Court’s decision, in fact, reinforces the Auditor General’s conclusions.

We do clearly remember that in July 2020 the Auditor General had published a first report running into over 200 pages focusing on the hospital concession tendering process. This was followed by an addendum and later, in December 2021 the Auditor General published a second report, 467 pages long, which reviewed the contractual framework of the hospital concession.

In his reports the Auditor General concluded that the preparatory work carried out by the public sector in relation to the hospital concession was very superficial. The Auditor General’s reports also identified that even before the request for proposals was published Government had already concluded on awarding Vitals Global Healthcare the hospitals concession! Cabinet and even the Finance Minister were generally kept in the dark. 

The Auditor General, in his investigations, found a bank guarantee presented by Vitals Global Healthcare. It was issued by the Bank of India on the 13 March 2015, a fortnight before the request for proposals was even published. This clearly established that the agreement was already sealed even before the public request for proposals had been published. The Auditor General had clearly identified this as a definite proof of collusion. On this basis, the Auditor General had in fact expressed a strongly worded opinion that Vitals Global Healthcare should have been disqualified from participating in the request for proposals relative to the hospitals’ concession.

All this is of paramount importance. Way back in 2020/21 it had led to the Auditor General conclusions which have now been confirmed by Mr Justice Depasquale in the decision delivered last week. This means that government should and could have acted then: it had sufficient information to send Steward Health Care packing. However very clearly it could not act as it was part and parcel of the deceit at hand.

There are however further matters, just as important as the above, which the current debate unfortunately avoids. We should ask: does it make sense for a sector as sensitive as health to be controlled in this manner by the private sector? Does a public-private partnership in the health sector make sense?

These questions are being ignored in the public debate currently at hand. These questions are of a fundamental nature as the replies thereto could identify the manner as to how the private sector can be involved without having a controlling interest and how all those involved can be fairly remunerated without squandering public funds.

The local accumulated experience resulting from this kind of projects is very problematic: we are continuously faced with incorrect decisions, abusive decision-taking as well as substantial suspicions of fraud and corruption. This is being stated with reference not just to this hospital concession but also to the energy deal at the Delimara Power Station and the project at the Luqa elderly residence: St Vincent de Paul. In each case the Auditor General has produced voluminous reports detailing the mayhem generated by the post 2013 Labour government.

It is a failed economic model which discounts public goods. It has also been applied in other sectors: a case in point being the Pembroke land “sold” at throwaway prices in favour of the speculative project of the dB Group. Speculative profit is unfortunately being continuously prioritised over the common good by the present government.

It is crystal clear that if we want the private sector involved in public projects its involvement must be regulated, and the said regulatory regime must be adequately enforced in order to ensure good governance throughout, from inception right through to implementation. So far it is a free for all: the consequences are for all to see.  A lack of clear rules and their enforcement inevitably leads to confusion, fraud and corruption. The whole country, as a result, has to pay the consequences.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 5 March 2023

Simon’s ODZ bluff

 

20 January is the closing date for the submission of expressions of interest in response to the call by the Privatisation Unit for the setting up of a Motorsports complex in Malta.

During the press conference that launched the call on 29 September, Parliamentary Secretary for Sport Chris Agius emphasised the fact that the choice of location was up to the investors presenting the submissions, even though several sites were proposed in the consultation process leading up to the call for expressions of interest.

However, Sam Collins, writing on 25 April last year on an online motor-racing guide, under the heading Malta eyes Formula 1 with new circuit stated that a “110 hectare parcel of land has been earmarked for the development.”  It is pretty obvious that the as yet unidentified  “110 hectare parcel of land” to be used for this proposed motorsports complex will be situated outside the development zone (ODZ). Each hectare consists of 10,000 square metres, meaning that 110 hectares equals one million, one hundred thousand square metres.

Sam Collins describes the proposal in this manner: “The government documents relating to the circuit’s development point out that part of its purpose would be to attract major international racing series, including Formula 3 and similar classes. The proposed facility would also include facilities for concerts, conferencing and a racing school. A hotel and museum of motoring and transport heritage would also be built on site. Road safety and driver training would play a major part in the facility’s layout, with a dedicated area for these activities. A CIK Kart circuit would also be built alongside the main track.”

The basic question which had to be addressed – but which most obviously has not been addressed so far – is whether Malta can afford to waste this much land. The answer, in my opinion, irrespective of the number of motor-racing car enthusiasts on the island, is clear and unequivocal: Malta cannot waste any more of its limited land.

The sites that have been possibly earmarked are limited in number, as Malta’s size does not present too many options and the impact of the selected site will be substantial, irrespective of its current use.

Development on the  parcel of land selectedcould have a substantial impact on areas of ecological importance that are protected either in terms of local policy or else as a result of EU or international commitments. Knowing that most of the undeveloped land along Malta’s coastline from Bengħajsa right up to Ċirkewwa is protected for ecological purposes, this could be the case, particularly if the identified parcel of land is close to the coast.

The impact could be further increased in view of the possible proximity of the selected parcel of land to residential areas. A specific area, mentioned consistently through the grapevine, would lump these impacts on Malta’s political south, further adding to the disregard for residents’ quality of life in the region accumulated over the years.

There are, therefore, three issues on the basis of which the proposed facility is objectionable: firstly, that Malta is too small for such a development; secondly, that the environmental impact will be substantial and thirdly, that the neighbouring residents’ quality of life, as well as biodiversity and natural resources, will be bartered for short term economic gain.

Depending on the precise eventual location, it may be possible to mitigate and reduce the impact on residents. However, it is most probable that a reduced impact on residents would signify increased impact on natural resources and biodiversity. In my opinion, this signifies that even on the drawing board the project should have been a non-starter.

In recent months we have had the Żonqor “University” debacle. A major sticking point in that case was that the original proposal was to use land situated outside the ODZ and public opinion’s unifying reaction was “No to ODZ development”.

The Parliamentary Opposition, both inside and outside Parliament, took a clear stand against the ODZ Development proposed at Żonqor. Yet in the case of the proposed motor track facility, the Opposition Spokesperson on Sport, David Agius, was invited to be present when the call for expressions of interest was launched. His presence confirms that, notwithstanding Simon Busuttil’s solemn declarations on the sanctity of ODZ land, the proposal for the (ODZ) motor track facility enjoys bipartisan support.

Which means that Simon’s talk on ODZ is just bluff.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 3 January 2016

José Herrera jiġbidlu l-ispaga

Naqbel mad-deċiżjoni li ħa s-Segretarju Parlamentari José Herrera meta ordna lid-Direttur tal-Kunsilli Lokali biex dan jagħti struzzjonijiet lill-Kunsill Lokali ta’ San Pawl il-Baħar li hu meħtieġ li dan jirrevoka d-deċiżjoni tiegħu li jaħtar Kunsillier minn fostu bħala Works Manager tal-lokalita’ ta’ San Pawl il-Baħar.

Is-Segretarju Parlamentari aġixxa korrettement biex jassigura tmexxija ghaqlija, trasparenti u kontabbli. Tmexxija li tosserva dak li tistabilixxi l-liġi tal-Kunsilli Lokali.

Is-Segretarju Parlamentari José Herrera kien l-aħħar linja ta’ difiża li kellha il-komunita’ ta’ San Pawl il-Baħar għax is-saffi l-oħra ta’ difiza jirriżultaw li fallew u ma ħadmux.

Fallew milli jaqdu dmirhom il-kunsilliera infushom li issa qed jirriżulta li ħadd minnhom ma kellu konoxxenza tal-obbligi tagħhom. Ħadd minnhom ma oġġezzjona. L-Kunsilliera Laburisti kollha ivvutaw favur. Dawk tal-PN astjenew. Ħadd minnhom ma semma leħnu u ġibed l-attenzjoni  li kienet qed isseħħ irregolaritá bil-ħatra ta’ kunsillier bħala works manager.

L-anqas ma mexa sewwa il-proċess tal-aġġudikazzjoni tal-offerti . F’dan l-istadju l-offerta tal-Kunsillier kellha tkun meqjusa bhala inammissibli. Dan ifisser li min ħa sehem f’dan il-proċess ma jifhimx.

L-anqas ma qeda dmiru s-Segretarju Ezekuttiv tal-Kunsill Lokali li wera b’dan il-każ li ma kellux għarfien adegwat tar-regoli tal-Kunsilli Lokali. Jekk ma jafx dawn l-affarijiet x’qiegħed jagħmel bħala Segretarju Eżekuttiv tal-Kunsill Lokali ta’ San Pawl il-Baħar?

Falla ukoll id-Direttur tal-Kunsilli Lokali li kellu l-obbligu li jintervjeni fil-każ mill-ewwel minghajr ma jkun hemm il-ħtieġa li s-Segretarju Parlamentari  jagħmilha ta’ suġġeritur.

Fortunatament il-Kunsilli  Lokali li jaġixxu b’dan il-mod huma ftit fil-għadd.

Minn dan il-każ ta’ San Pawl il-Baħar nistgħu naslu għal numru ta’ konklużjonijiet.  Hemm bżonn urġenti li kemm il-Kunsilliera kif ukoll is-Segretarji Eżekuttivi jkunu mħarrġa aħjar biex jagħrfu jaqdu sewwa r-responsabbiltajiet tagħhom. Huwa meħtieġ ukoll li  l-proċess tal-aġġudikazzjoni tal-offerti jkun afdat f’idejn persuni kompetenti  kif ukoll li jkun hemm iktar nies imħarrġa fil-lokalitajiet biex jaqdu din il-funzjoni. B’hekk il-Kunsilli Lokali jkunu assigurati li jkollhom pariri mingħand persuni  li jifhmu.

Fl-aħħarnett huwa  meħtieġ  li d-Direttur tal-Kunsilli Lokali jkun iktar proattiv u jkun lest li jiċċaqlaq mingħajr il-ħtieġa li jiġbidlu l-ispaga José Herrera .

Il-bojkot ta’ Ċensu Farrugia

Ċensu Farrugia tal-GRTU jrid bojkot. M’huwiex ser jattendi laqgħat tal-MCESD meta dawn jiddiskutu l-prekarjat.

Il-Gvern, ġustament irid jiġġieled il-prekarjat li f’Malta hu b’saħħtu prinċipalment minn fuq il-kuntratti tal-Gvern u tal-korpi parastatali. Għax il-kuntratti tal-Gvern jintrebħu (ġeneralment) minn min joffri l-orħos prezz. U l-iktar mod prattiku kif uħud iqisu li jistgħu jaslu għal offerta li tkun l-orħos huwa billi jagħsru liż-żgħir.

Ġustament il-Gvern għandu fil-mira tiegħu dawn il-kuntratti.  Sa hawnhekk tajjeb.

L-ewwel idea tal-Gvern kienet li ma jippermetiix iktar li jkun hemm sub-contracting. Ċjoe li min jirbaħ kuntratt ma jitħallix jgħaddi l-kuntratt (jew kif isir ġeneralment parti minnu) lil ħaddieħor. Kien hemm opposizzjoni għal din l-idea. Din issa inbidlet u minflok hawn l-idea li min jitfa l-offerta jrid jgħid minn qabel min ser ikunu is-subcontractors u l-kundizzjonijiet oħra dwarhom li japplikaw.

L-idea tal-Gvern hi tajba imma m’hiex prattika.

Fl-opinjoni tiegħi biex il-Gvern jiġġieled bis-saħħa lill-prekarjat ma hemm bżonn jibdel (kważi) xejn ħlief il-livell tas-sorveljanza tal-kuntratti.

Il-kundizzjonijiet ġenerali tal-kuntratti tal-Gvern diġa joħolqu qafas ta’ regolamentazzjoni dwar is-sub- contracts. Min jirbaħ kuntratt ta’ xogħol jew servizz għall-Gvern diġa għandu l-obbligu li ma jistax jaqbad u jiddeċiedi hu li jagħti sub-contract. Dan jista’ jagħmlu biss wara li kiseb l-approvazzjoni tal-Gvern.

Għaldaqstant kullma jeħtieġ li jsir mill-Gvern hu li jistabilixxi regoli ċari tal-kriterji li fuqhom jagħti l-permess biex ġaladarba kuntratt ikun intrebaħ ikun jista’ jkun hemm sub-contractors. Punt ewlieni ta’ dawn il-kritierji għandu jkun li ma jingħatax lok għal prekarjat u li kundizzjonijiet minimi ta’ xogħol ikunu rispettati.

Biex  infasslu flimkien l-aħjar triq kif nistgħu naslu ħalli negħlbu l-prekarjat huwa neċessarju li jkun hemm kulħadd madwar il-mejda.  Għalhekk il-bojkott ta’ Ċensu Farrugia m’hu ser isolvi xejn.

Dan parir bla ħlas.

A step in the right direction

The presentation by maverick MP Franco Debono of a motion requesting that Parliament and the Auditor General should examine the proposal that government takes over St Philip’s Hospital is a step in the right direction.

The decision for government to take over the private hospital was taken after negotiations between auditing firms representing government and the hospital owners concluded terms for an eight year lease with the option to purchase. No call for tenders was issued. The hospital owner however issued a call for an expression of interest in the acquisition of the hospital.

There are various matters which the Auditor General should examine.

First: is the proposed takeover of St Philip’s Hospital value for money or is it a political gimmick on the eve of general elections?

Second : isn’t the proposal to take over St Philip’s Hosptal just a confirmation of bad planning involved in the development of Mater Dei Hospital which has resulted in its being too small for the country’s needs so soon after being finalised?  Who was responsible for the Mater Dei brief which has resulted in wards bursting at the seams and  hospital corridors being transformed into wards? Who will shoulder political responsibility for this failure?

Third: is it right for government to negotiate with those who are in breach of the Companies Act through non-submission of audited accounts for a number of years?

Four companies are involved in St Philip’s Hospital. All of them have not submitted audited accounts for a number of years as can be noted through the list of documents available online  at the Registry of Companies. The Golden Shepherd Group Ltd   (C 14948) has last submitted its audited accounts on July 15, 2008. Private Health Investment Ltd (C 24386) has last submitted its audited accounts on February 1, 2007. Medicaid Ltd (C 5283) has last submitted its audited accounts on September 14, 2007. Biomed Laboratory Ltd (C 14303) has last submitted its audited accounts on October 12, 2007.

The Golden Shepherd Group is owned by Frank Portelli, Private Health Investment Ltd and Medicaid Ltd.  Private Health Investment Ltd is owned by Medicaid Ltd and Biomed Laboratory Ltd.  Medicaid Ltd is owned by Frank Portelli whilst Biomed laboratory Ltd is owned by Frank Portelli and Medicaid Ltd.

I await the Auditor General’s conclusions!   I also look forward to Dr Frank Portelli’s comments on government’s health policy and its implementation.

first published on di-ve.com Friday 12 October 2012

Frank Portelli : il-mument tal-verita’

Il-Gvern jagħmel sew jekk isib mod kif jista’ jagħmel użu bl-aħjar mod tal-faċilitajiet tal-Isptar St Philip’s, propjeta’ tat-Tabib Frank Portelli.

Biex jagħmel dan iżda għandu l-obbligu li jsegwi r-regoli finanzjarji. Fosthom li jrid joħroġ tender pubblika. Minkejja li jidher li n-negozjati mat-Tabib Frank Portelli jinsabu fi stadju avvanzat tant li bdew ħerġin id-dettalji fil-gazzetti s’issa ma ħarget l-ebda tender pubblika. Ħarġet biss expression of interest f’isem il-kumpanija reġistrata bħala sid l-isptar. Sid l-isptar talab sottomissjonijiet minn min hu interessat li jieħu l-isptar f’idejh!

M’għandi l-ebda dubju li t-Tabib Frank Portelli jkun irid li jsir kollox above board.  S’issa jidher li hu mexa sewwa imma l-Gvern għal darba oħra miexi b’disprezz lejn ir-regoli finanzjarji.

Dejjem hekk jagħmel il-Gvern lejliet l-elezzjoni. (Id-darba l-oħra kien imiss lill-MEPA għal bosta irregolaritajiet lejlet l-elezzjoni!) Dan hu ħażin u għandu jkun it-Tabib Frank Portelli l-ewwel wieħed li jsemma’ leħnu fuq hekk. Wara kollox kien Frank li kontinwament semma’ leħnu kontra l-irregolaritajiet.

Jiena naf lil Frank bħala persuna serja. Nittama li ma jiddiżappuntanix.

Għal Frank dan hu l-mument tal-verita!