Ħatriet politiċi fis-settur pubbliku (Positions of trust)

Fl-Ombudsplan għall-2015 l-Ombudsman jirrimarka li l-ħatriet diretti fis-settur pubbliku [dawk li nirreferu għalihom bħala ħatriet politiċi] jistgħu jwasslu għal-nuqqas ta’ trasparenza.

Kull persuna impjegata fis-servizz pubbliku għandha tkun persuna ta’ fiduċja. L-Ombudsman fil-fatt jgħid li s-servizz pubbliku għandu jkun apolitiku u dan għax għandu jkun lejali lejn kull amminjistrazzjoni. Is-servizz pubbliku għandu jkun il-ħolqa bejn l-amministrazzjonijiet differenti u l-istrument li permezz tiegħu l-politika tal-Gvern tal-ġurnata tkun imwettqa, mhux biss b’lejalta’ lejn il-vot popolari imma fuq kollox b’ġustizzja u ekwita. Għax l-amministrazzjoni pubblika, ġdida jew qadima, hi hemm għal kulħadd. Mhiex hemm biss għal dawk li ivvutaw għaliha.

Minn mudell ta’ servizz pubbliku fuq stil Anglu-Sassonu fejn għandek servizz pubbliku permanenti mexjin lejn mudell Amerikan fejn numru kbir ta’ persuni jinbidlu mal-bidla fil-Gvern. Meta dan ma jsirx b’regoli ċari u trasparenti joħloq inġustizzji u nuqqas ta’ trasparenza.

Il-każ tal-bdil tas-Segretarji Permanenti kważi kollha mal-bidla fil-Gvern hu wieħed mill-eżempji li lkoll nafu bih. Ma ġratx biss taħt l-amministrazzjoni ta’ Joseph Muscat. Anke fi żmien Lawrence Gonzi kellna każijiet fejn il-Gvern ried jaħtar persuni li ried hu f’posizzjonijiet li qieshom bħala li huma ta’ fiduċja. Niftakru l-ħatra ta’ Direttur għall-Ħarsien tal-Ambjent u ta’ Chief Executive tal-MEPA li qabel l-2013 kienu nħatru direttament mill-MEPA bl-approvazzjoni tal-Ministru għall-Ambjent u dan mingħajr sejħa għal applikazzjonijiet.  Il-Gvern ta’ dakinnhar ma kienx qabel  mar-rapporti tal-Perit Joe Falzon (Uffiċjal tal-Verifika tal-MEPA) li kien qal b’mod ċar li dawn it-tip ta’ ħatriet ma kienux korretti.

L-Ombudsman jemfasizza li l-ħatriet f’ position of trust (ħatriet politiċi) għandhom ikunu minimi. Wieħed jifhem li kemm is-Segretarjati Privati fil-Ministeri kif ukoll uħud mill-persuni meħtieġa biex ifasslu policies għandhom ikunu persuni ta’ fiduċja. In-numru tagħhom iżda għandu jkun ċar, limitat u regolat b’mod li kulħadd ikun jaf fejn hu.

Ma dan jiena nżid nirreferi għall-ħatriet ta’ Bordijiet u Awtoritajiet. Dawn il-ħatriet għadhom jibdew isiru wara skrutinju pubbliku [public hearing] minn Kumitat Parlamentari. Dan hu punt li temfasizza Alternattva Demorkatika fil-Manifest Elettorali għall-elezzjoni ġenerali tal-2013. Huwa neċessarju li jkun assigurat li jkun hemm iżjed persuni kompetenti li jinħatru fil-Bordijiet u l-Awtoritajiet. Skrutinju pubbliku tal-persuni nominati jista’ jkun mod kif dan ikun assigurat.

 

Il-ħatriet politiċi fl-amministrazzjoni pubblika ma jistgħux ikunu eliminati. Imma nistgħu bħala pajjiż nassiguraw li l-mertu jkollu rwol ferm iktar importanti milli għandu sal-lum fil-ħatriet pubbliċi.

Tad-daħq ……. jew tal-biki?

Qiegħed nisma’ lill-Onorevoli George Pullicino jitkellem fil-Parlament bħalissa (It-Tlieta 25 ta’ Frar 2014 ftit wara is-7 pm).

Qiegħed jistaqsi sensiela ta’ mistoqsijijiet lil Konrad Mizzi Ministru tal-Enerġija u l-Konservazzjoni tal-Ilma wara li dan għamel stqarrija Parlamentari dwar madwar 650 file dwar serq ta’ elettriku qabel Marzu 2013 li instabu msakkrin f’kamra bla ma ttieħdet azzjoni dwarhom.

Qiegħed jinsisti li kulħadd għandu jerfa’ r-responsabbiltajiet tiegħu fl-Enemalta u dan fil-kuntest ta’ diversi każijiet ta’ serq tal-elettriku.

Sewwa qiegħed jgħid l-Onorevoli Pullicino.

Imma meta niftakar kif kienet taħdem il-MEPA fiż-żmien li jiena kont fl-Uffiċċju tal-Uffiċjal tal-Verifika (Audit Officer) nitbissem. Anzi kważi ninfaqa’ nidħaq.

Ma niftakarx li qatt smajt lill-Onorevoli Pullicino jitkellem b’dan il-mod dwar il-MEPA meta kien il-Ministru responsabbli għall-MEPA. Kieku, forsi l-affarijiet kienu jkunu ħafna aħjar fil-MEPA.

Il-MEPA u l-froġa tal-Mistra Village

Il-Kummissarju tal-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar David Pace f’rapport li ġie ippubblikat il-bierah it-Tnejn 2 ta’ Diċembru 2013 fi ftit kliem jgħid li l-permessi għall-iżvilupp mill-ġdid tal-Mistra Village huma froġa oħra tal-MEPA. Dan jagħmlu wara li mexxa investigazzjoni fuq talba ta’ Din l-Art Ħelwa.

Il-frejjeġ fil-MEPA li kienu jsiru taħt Lawrence Gonzi, George Pullicino u Mario Demarco għadhom qed isiru taħt Joseph Muscat u Michael Farrugia.

Hu ġustifikat, jgħidilna l-Kummissarju tal-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar, li l-permessi għall-iżvilupp tal-Mistra Village jkunu irtirati.

Ir-rapport li tistgħu taqrawh fuq is-sit elettroniku ta’ Din l-Art Ħelwa jagħti raġunijiet dettaljati biex jispjega għaliex il-Kummissarju David Pace wasal għal din il-konklużjoni. Ir-rapport jispjega xi tħalla barra fil-konsiderazzjonijiet li għamel id-Direttorat tal-Ippjanar u jgħid li l-Bord tal-MEPA kien iggwidat ħażin mill-Major Projects Unit tal-istess MEPA. Il-Bord tal-MEPA ngħata informazzjoni nieqsa u informazzjoni żbaljata.

F’pajjiż ċivilizzat il-Bord tal-MEPA kien jirreżenja en bloc wara deċiżjoni bħal din.

Darba waħda hekk kien sar meta l-Perit Joseph Falzon kien ħareġ rapport dwar il-permess abbużiv tal-LIDL ta’ Ħal-Safi fuq talba għal investigazzjoni li dakinnhar kienet saret minn Alternattiva Demokratika . Dakinnhar 6 minn 7 membri tal-Kummissjoni għall-Kontroll ta’ l-Iżvilupp li approvat il-permess kienu irriżenjaw lejlet l-elezzjoni ġenerali tal-2008.

Ma nafx kemm il-wieħed jew waħda mill-membri tal-Bord tal-MEPA għandhom il-kuraġġ li jammettu li għamlu żball u li għandhom iħallsu tiegħu billi jirreżenjaw.

Nistennew u naraw.

A position of trust

Government has just announced that it has appointed 14 Permanent Secretaries. Three of the appointees have already served under the previous administration. The others are new to the post.

Within twenty four hours from Labour’s election to office, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat announced the appointment of a designate Head of the Civil Service. In line with Lawrence Gonzi’s appointments the said designate Head of the Civil Service was also appointed simultaneously as Principle Permanent Secretary at the Office of the Prime Minister and Secretary to the Cabinet.

Within hours rumours announced that all Permanent Secretaries had been requested to submit their resignations which, it was stated, were necessary and in line with normal practice in a democratic society.

It  was not however stated that the real issue with the post of Permanent Secretary is that it is a position of trust. All those appointed were so appointed because the previous administration considered that they could be trusted. Knowing some if not most of the appointees I can say that the trust demonstrated by the previous administration in the appointment of its Permanent Secretaries was most probably based on a cocktail of considerations.  Their administrative abilities undoubtedly featured prominently on the list. There were undoubtedly other issues. Given the sensitivity of the posts I have no doubt that political loyalty was given some weight in the appointments made. In some cases more than others.

The posts of Permanent Secretaries are not the only posts which the Gonzi administration considered as positions of trust.  I remember clearly the reports drawn up by former MEPA Audit Officer on the appointment of the Director for Environment Protection at MEPA and MEPA’s  CEO without issuing a call for applications. The MEPA Audit Officer had then argued that there was no need to consider such posts as positions of trust meriting direct appointment. Subjecting them to a public competition through an open call for applications would have been fair and proper.

A number of public corporations and authorities have appointed their senior management, primarily CEOs, through either an open call or else through a direct appointment. In view of the fact that the Public Administration Act has not been brought into force there is no enforceable rule to ensure a clear demarcation line as to which posts in the wider civil service are to be deemed as positions of trust and which not.

It is logical for persons appointed to positions of trust to make way when those who appointed them are no longer in authority. But then in a micro-state as Malta, where each and every one of us is known to one and all, it is in my view essential that the positions in the wider civil service which are deemed to be “positions of trust” are to be the minimum possible number.  It does not make sense to have a large number of such posts.

Unfortunately this matter has never been discussed. What is government’s position on the matter?

It is about time that all the cards are on the table.

L-ittra anonima tal-PN

Jiena ukoll irċevejt l-ittra anonima tal-PN li paġna minnha qed nirriproduċi hawn fuq.

Żammejtha għax mill-envelope u l-label għaraft mill-ewwel minn fejn ġiet. Fl-ebda ħin ma kelli dubju u irriżulta li kelli raġun dwar dan.

Il-PN beda l-kampanja tat-twerwir bit-transfers.

Jiena ma kellix bżonn min ifakkarni għax kemm il-PN fil-Gvern kif ukoll il-Labour fil-Gvern it-tnejn imxew ħażin miegħi meta kont impjegat fis-settur pubbliku.

Fiż-żmien li Lawrence Gonzi u l-PN ilhom fil-Gvern mhux transfer ħadt iżda kelli l-kuntratt tax-xogħol fl-uffiċċju tal-Uffiċjal tal-Verifika tal-MEPA (Audit Officer) mhux imġedded u dan f’April 2007!

L-istorja tiegħi mal-Labour seħħet fl-1984 meta tkeċċejt mix-xogħol mal-Gvern għax kont nikteb fil-gazzetti tal-PN.

Għadni ma fhimtx għalfejn bgħatuli l-ittra anonima. Imma jidher li l-PN għandhom ħafna flus x’jaħlu.

M’għandhomx għalfejn ifakkruni. Għax jiena niftakar sewwa x’għaddejt minnu! Imma jidher li huma (il-PN) donnhom insew, u jippretendu li l-uniku passat li jeżisti hu ta’ ħaddiehor. Għax tagħhom iridu jinsewh qiesu qatt ma kien xejn. Mhux hekk tgħid.

Ħalluna naħdmu ………ħalluna ngħixu

Ħalluna naħdmu.

Hekk qal l-iżviluppatur Sandro Chetcuti waqt laqgħa organizzata man-nies tan-negozju mill-Partit Laburista. Dan hu slogan li qed jintuża issa biex ifisser ġlieda kontra l-burokrazija. Fost oħrajn kontra l-hekk imsejħa burokrazija fil-MEPA.

Qalulna li fil-Ġermanja permess ta’ żvilupp joħroġ fi tlett xhur iżda f’Malta jieħu ta’ l-inqas tmien xhur.

Li ma qalulniex li f’Malta l-industrija tal-bini tħalliet għal snin sħah tagħmel prattikament dak li trid. Bil-konsegwenza li presentement hawn iktar minn 70,000 post residenzjali vojt. Dawn il-postijiet vojta huma ekwivalenti għal 9 darbiet daqs iż-żona residenzjali ta’ B’kara.

Ma qalulniex li minkejja l-attaparsi kontrolli l-MEPA ħarġet permessi li qatt ma kellhom joħorġu.

Il-Lidl ta’ Ħal Safi inbena bħala riżultat ta’ permess ta’ żvilupp li qatt ma kellu joħroġ. Tant li wara li l-Uffiċjal tal-Verifika (Audit Officer) tal-MEPA fi Frar 2008 ikkonkluda l-investigazzjoni tiegħu kienet irreżenjat il-Kummissjoni għall-Kontroll ta’ l-Iżvilupp.

Il-Lidl ta’ Ħal-Luqa mhux biss nbena f’żona li ma kienx permess li jsir dan il-bini talli l-parkeġġ tiegħu qiegħed sitwat taħt l-aħħar parti tal-flight path għall-mitjar internazzjonali ta’ Malta. Jiena infurmat li waqt li kien għaddej ix-xogħol ta’ kostruzzjoni fis-sit tal-Lidl f’Ħal-Luqa minħabba l-jib tal-krejnijiet li kien hemm fil-parking area l-aċċess għall-mitjar ingħalaq għal xi ħin. Huma u neżlin l-ajruplani tant ikunu fil-baxx meta jkunu fuq il-parkeġġ tal-Lidl ta’ Ħal-Luqa li kien hemm periklu serju ta’ inċident minħabba dawn il-krejnijiet.

Il-problemi konnessi mal-MEPA huma is-swaba politiċi li hemm fiha l-ħin kollu. Ir-riforma tal-MEPA ma indirizzatx l-iżjed element essenzjali u ċjoe kif jinħatru dawk li jieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet. Dwar dan Alternattiva Demokratika fil-manifest elettorali li ser tippreżenta għall-elezzjoni ġenerali li għandna wara l-bieb ser terġa’ tipproponi soluzzjoni li lill-politiku toħorġu l-barra mill-proċess li permezz tiegħu preżentement qiegħed involut direttament fid-deċiżjonijiet u minflok issaħħaħ ir-rwol tiegħu (tal-politiku) fejn tidħol is-sorveljanza.

Il-MEPA għandha rwol importanti. Sfortunatament m’hiex titħalla taqdi dan ir-rwol. Tkun tista’ taqdi dan ir-rwol meta jinħatru persuni kapaċi fit-tmexxija tal-MEPA. Dawn il-persuni jeħtieġ li jkunu disponibbli biex kontinwament jagħtu kont ta’ egħmilhom. Ir-rwol tal-MEPA mhux biss li toħroġ jew iżżomm il-permessi tal-iżvilupp. Fuq kollox għandha l-obbligu li fid-deċiżjonijiet tagħha u permezz tagħhom tassigura li l-kwalita’ ta’ ħajja li ngħixu lkoll kemm aħna titjieb.

Biex dan ikun jista’ jsir il-MEPA trid trabbi is-snien mal-Gvern u l-awtoritajiet pubbliċi. (Għax fost l-agħar deċiżjonijiet tal-MEPA hemm dawk fejn huwa involut il-Gvern: il-power station f’Delimara, il-Freeport f’Birzebbuga, l-impjant tal-iskart ta’ Sant’ Antnin f’Marsaskala……) Meta dan ikun jista’ jsir, imbagħad  ikun possibli li jingħad li l-MEPA qed taqdi l-missjoni tagħha.

Ħalluna ngħixu!

My watch at the Audit Office

My watch at the Audit Office of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority came to an abrupt end some five years ago in circumstances which were then described as being a direct threat from Mepa to the independence of its Audit Officer.

The resulting public controversy saw the Ombudsman’s intervention in the summer of 2007 with his well-articulated solution to develop his office as the base for functions such as those of the Mepa Audit Office. As a result of their being based at the Ombudsman’s Office, these functions would be guaranteed the protection of that office: the best way of ensuring the office holder’s independence.

It was a bold step which unfortunately took five years to implement. It is only now that the first steps leading to the migration of the Mepa Audit Office functions to the Ombudsman’s Office have been initiated.

At this point it is pertinent to highlight some of the achievements of the Mepa Audit Office, which notwithstanding its independence being constantly threatened in its first four years of existence, still managed to deliver.

I state that the Audit Office’s independence was threatened during the first four years of its existence purposely, as when Minister George Pullicino and his sidekick, then Mepa chairman Andrew Calleja, relinquished their hold on Mepa in 2008, in this respect matters slowly drifted back to normality.

The Mepa Audit Office faced an uphill battle. During the period 2004-8, Mepa opposed the basic rules of decent governance. It continuously objected to informing complainants of the conclusions of investigations, which conclusions were based on facts unearthed generally from the authority’s files but at times also as a result of interviewing Mepa staff.

The Audit Officer considered that communicating the conclusions of investigations to complainants was essential in order that they would be in a position to understand the reasons justifying or otherwise the complaints submitted.

On my watch the Mepa Audit Office carried out a large number of investigations. Some concerned hot topics of the day and made it to the front pages of various newspapers and at times headline news on local TV stations.

I single out one very important investigation which illustrates the manner of operation of Mepa.

The investigation took a cue from a report in The Times entitled Tensioned Structure Raises Winemaker’s Ire, published on January 27, 2006. This investigation was in effect an inquiry focusing on the chairman, Mr Calleja, and his method of operation.

It resulted that on a specific site a number of notifications in terms of the Development Notification Order were refused for reasons which were detailed in the respective files. Subsequently other notifications were submitted on the same site, these being approved!

The investigation revealed that the case officer had been given specific instructions on how to deal with the notifications under consideration after the prospective developer had a meeting with the Mepa chairman accompanied by other Mepa officials (report 2006-031 dated March 13, 2006). Mr Calleja lost his cool and considered the report of the Audit Office as an “unwarranted intrusion in administrative measures adopted by Mepa”.

In addition, 25 days after the report was issued, on April 7, 2006, the Environment Minister had a meeting with the Audit Officer. During this meeting the minister informed the Audit Officer that he had instructed Mepa that my contract of employment, which was to expire later in the month, was not to be renewed.

In a letter dated April 11, 2006, the Audit Officer explained to the minister in writing how his action was a direct threat to the independence of the Audit Office:

“Your action would seriously undermine the independence of the Audit Office… Unfortunately since its inception the Audit Office has met with, at best, lukewarm support from the chairman and in certain cases outright hostility. If the post of audit officer was to depend on the goodwill of the chairman or the minister, than its role would be superfluous and its work can effectively be carried out by the personal staff of the minister.”

The audit officer concluded his letter by tendering his resignation.

The minister’s instructions were later withdrawn, as late in April 2006 my contract of employment was renewed for one year.

Twelve months later more drastic action was taken.

In 2007 the renewal of the Audit Officer’s appointment, which required approval by Parliament’s Select Committee, was delayed until such time that my contract had expired.

As no audit officer was then in office no request could be submitted for my contract’s renewal. He could only request my reinstatement when his appointment was renewed.But this was ignored.

This is the sequence of events which led to the migration of the Audit Office function from Mepa to the Ombudsman’s Office.

It was essential to ensure the independence of the office-holder at all times.

Published in The Times of Malta Saturday August 18, 2012 

Il-Mercaptan: MEPA u Enemalta kompliċi ?

Il-bieraħ f’Konferenza Stampa organizzata minn Alternattiva Demokratika ippubblikajna rapport dwar investigazzjoni li saret mill-Uffiċjal tal-Verifika tal-MEPA (l-Audit Officer Joe Falzon).  Din l-investgazzjoni saret wara li jiena għan-nom ta’ Alternattiva Demokratika tlabt biex il-Perit Falzon jivestiga eżattament x’ġara, u in partikolari jekk il-MEPA għalqitx għajnejha għal dak li kienet qed tagħmel il-MEPA.

 

Mill-mod kif żviluppaw l-affarijiet AD hi tal-fehma illi kien hemm kompliċita bejn il-MEPA u l-Enemalta li serviet biex ippruvat taħbi dak li ġara. Fir-rapport tiegħu il-Perit Falzon ikkonkluda li l-MEPA naqset mill-obbligi statutorji tagħha u dan meta ma ħaditx azzjoni kontra l-Enemalta.

Tislima lil Joe Falzon

Illum ħarġet l-aħbar li l-Perit Joe Falzon ser jispiċċa mill-kariga ta’ Uffiċjal tal-Verifika tal-MEPA wara l–aħħar tax-xahar li qegħdin fih.

L-istorja hi waħda twila. Imma fil-qosor bdiet madwar 5 snin ilu fis-sajf tal-2007. Dakinnhar Joe Falzon kien għadu kif inħatar għat-tieni darba bħala Uffiċjal tal-Verifika. Meta reġa’ daħal fl-uffiċċju kien sab li l-assistent tiegħu, li kont jien, meta spiċċalu l-kuntratt ma kienux ġeddewhulu. Kienet qamet polemika fejn jiena kont akkużat li kelli konflitt ta’ interess.

Ara per eżempju dan l-artiklu tas-17 ta’ Ġunju 2007 u dan l-artiklu l-ieħor tal-24 ta’ Ġunju 2007 liema artikli ġew ippubblikati t-tnejn fit-Times.

Bħala konklużjoni tal-argumenti li kienu nqalgħu dwar id-dritt li kellu l-Perit Falzon li jaħtar l-assistenti tiegħu, u per konsegwenza jassigura l-indipendenza tal-operat tiegħu l-Ombudsman kien ippropona li l-funzjoni tal-Uffiċċju tal-Verifka kellha tgħaddi fl-uffiċċju tiegħu.

Meta eventwalment saret l-emenda fil-liġi din kienet tipprovdi illi l-ħatra l-ġdida (Kummissarju dwar l-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar jidhirli) kellha issir bi qbil bejn il-Prim Ministru u l-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni. Imma f’kaz li ma jkunx hemm qbil il-ħatra kellu jagħmilha l-Ombudsman.

Minn dak li hu magħruf s’issa jidher li l-Prim Ministru u l-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni ma qablux fuq min kellu jinħatar u l-Ombudsman għadda biex ħatar persuna huwa li ser jibda fil-ħatra fl-1 t’Awissu 2012.

Li sar ħażin kien li meta beda l-proċess li jdaħħlu fis-seħħ il-liġi l-ġdida lil Perit Falzon ma qalulu xejn. Ħallewh fil-għama u infurmawh fl-aħħar minuta!

Mal-Perit Falzon jiena ħdimt fil-qrib għal tlett snin sħaħ. Dejjem ħdimna bil-galbu u bir-reqqa u b’attenzjoni. Sfortunatament mhux talli mhux dejjem sibna l-kooperazzjoni talli ħafna drabi ħlief gambetti ma sibniex.