Għada s-Sibt

Għada s-Sibt għandna l-Laqgħa Ġenerali Annwali tal-partit.

Kif ħabbart żmien ilu (is-sena l-oħra fil-fatt) naħseb li jkun għaqli li t-tmexxija tal-partit tgħaddi f’idejn persuna iżgħar minni. Persuna li tista’ twassal lill-partit sal-elezzjoni tal-Parlament Ewropew u dik tal-Kunsilli Lokali s-sena d-dieħla u sal-Elezzjoni Ġenerali madwar 4 snin oħra.

Naħseb li dan hu fl-aħjar interess tal-partit li jsir. Issa hu l-aħjar waqt għal pass bħal dan. F’partit żgħir bħal tagħna hu għaqli li t-tibdil meħtieġ nagħmluh gradwalment, fil-mument addattat, bil-pass tagħna, biex inkunu nistgħu nieħdu l-ikbar benefiċċju possibbli minnu!

Aħna jkollna elezzjoni tal-uffiċjali kollha tal-partit kull sena. Din is-sena mhux ser nippreżenta ismi għal kariga ta’ Chairperson tal-partit. (Aħna m’għandniex Kap iżda Chairperson! Qafas sempliċi ta’ tmexxija bla ħafna kumplikazzjonijiet u xinxilli.)

Meta nħares lejn il-ħidma li għamilna flimkien tul is-snin, sar ħafna xogħol, mertu ta’ kulħadd. Imma għad baqa’ ukoll ħafna x’isir.

Da parti tiegħi għalkemm mhux ser nibqa’ fil-kariga ta’ Chairperson tal-partit fi ħsiebni nibqa’ attiv fil-partit biex nibqa’ nagħti l-kontribut tiegħi fil-ħidma li hi tant meħtieġa li tibqa’ issir.

Ir-riżultati li ħdimna għalihom mhux dejjem jidhru. Ħdimna ħafna, numru żgħir ta’ nies f’ambjent li hu mfassal għal żewġ partiti politiċi biss. Ambjent li lilna jarana żejda u jostakolna l-ħin kollu.

Is-sena l-oħra, ftit wara l-elezzjoni ġenerali ftaħna kawża kostituzzjonali dwar is-sistema elettorali imfassla b’mod li toħnoqna. Din il-kawża qed toqrob lejn it-tmiem u huwa ittamat li fl-aħħar kwart tas-sena, wara s-sajf, ikollna l-ewwel deċiżjoni. Hi triq twila li irridu nimxu flimkien.

Mhiex triq faċli, imma hi triq li mxejniha pass pass. Kultant b’diffikultà kbira. Hemm min jikkritikana għax jixtieqilna l-ġid. Lil dawn ngħidilhom grazzi. Nagħtu każ kull ma jingħad. Hemm min imaqdar. B’dawn nieħdu paċenzja.

Tagħna hi ħidma li tirrikjedi paċenzja, inkluż li anke tissaporti kritika inġusta li kultant ifajjar min hu mgħaġġel, bla sabar, inkella ma jafx l-affarijiet jew saħansitra moħħu biss fih innifsu.

Repetutament immorru għand l-Awtorità tax-Xandir dwar il-mod kif il-medja politika tinjorana. Jagħtuna raġun, imma bla rimedju.

Dan hu l-ambjent li fih ħdimna u għadna naħdmu, ghax qatt ma qtajna qalbna. F’dan l-ambjent fl-aħħar elezzjoni ġenerali ġibna 4747 vot, kważi d-doppju tal-elezzjoni ta’ qabel. Mhux biżżejjed. Imma fil-klima li qed naħdmu, b’kollox kontra tagħna, bla riżorsi, hu raġjonevoli.

Dan mhux ambjent li ser jinbidel mil-lum għal għada. Però qatt ma qtajna qalbna. Sadanittant il-ħidma tkompli.

Għada s-Sibt ngħaddi s-siġġu lil Sandra li nawgurala ħafna ħidma fejjieda.

Nieħu din l-opportunità biex nirringrazzja lit-tim kollu li ħdimna flimkien. Grazzi lil kulħadd.

L-Awtorità tax-Xandir: għalfejn qegħda hemm?

Xi ġimgħat ilu iddeċidejna bħala partit li nħarsu sewwa lejn il-media politika (ONE u NET) u l-fatt li dawn kienu qed jinjorawna. Għalihom qiesna ma neżistux. Hekk jixtiequ fil-fatt, għax jidhrilhom li l-eżistenza tagħna hi xkiel għalihom. Jidhrilhom li ntellfuhom.

Meta ilmentajna mal-Edituri tal-ONE u tan-NET dwar il-fatt li ma jirrappurtawniex, it-tnejn li huma, għall-ewwel weġbuna bl-istess mod: dak li jxandru hu fi-diskrezzjoni editorjali tagħhom.

Sussegwentement, imma, in-NET bidel id-diska. L-ewwel beda jxandar xi affarijiet żgħar, imbagħad beda jxandar ftit iktar. Li ġara kien li ċempilli s-Segretarju Ġenerali tal-PN Michael Piccinino. Niftakar kont Brussels u ċempilli biex infurmani li qalulu bl-ilmenti ta’ ADPD u li hu kien ta’ struzzjonijiet biex dawn ikunu indirizzati. Kien pass tajjeb il-quddiem.

Kien hemm kambjament fuq in-NET. Beda jkun hemm rappurtaġġ avolja mhux ta’ xi kwalità. Kif mistenni joqgħodu attenti biex filwaqt li jirrappurtaw, ħafna drabi fuq fuq, iħallu barra fejn jinqaras il-PN. Dik kont nistenniha, avolja, jekk irridu xandir sura din trid tinqata’ ukoll.

Fil-kaz tal-ONE imma bqajna l-istess. Baqgħu għaddejjin b’ċensura politika totali fl-interess tal-Partit Laburista u kontra l-obbligi li jirriżultaw mill-liċenzja li għandhom.

F’Marzu kellna deċiżjoni li kienet l-ewwel waħda tax-xorta tagħha fejn l-Awtorità tax-Xandir laqgħet ilment ta’ ADPD u ordnat lil ONE ixandru rapport qasir dwar dak li kienu iċċensuraw. Dan kien ġie imxandar, b’geddum sal-art! Is-suġġett dakinnhar kien dwar l-isptarijiet, dwar Vitals u Stewards Health Care!

Il-bieraħ kellna kaz ieħor, dwar il-fatt li xi politiċi qegħdin viċin wisq ta’uħud fin-negożju u li dan hu perikoluż għad-demokrazija. Il-bieraħ l-Awtorità tax-Xandir ħabbret li laqgħet l-ilment tagħna. Qaltilna li għandna raġun. Imma din id-darba ma tatx rimedju. Ma ħarget l-ebda ordni lil ONE biex ixandar fil-qosor dak li kien ġie ċċensurat.

Ngħiduha kif inhi: dan it-tip ta’ rimedju hu essenzjalment wieħed simboliku imma hu meħtieġ.

Imma ma jagħmilx sens li l-Awtorità tax-Xandir tgħidli li għandi raġun, imma fl-istess nifs tgħidli biex nieħu paċenzja.

Għax ngħiduha kif inhi: f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi għalfejn għandna awtorità?

In-Nigret : iktar raba’ tajjeb ser jingħata għall-bini

Bħalissa għaddejja diskussjoni dwar applikazzjoni PC 049/19 dwar art agrikola fin-Nigret biex din tinbena. Kellmuna bosta dwar dan.

L-art hi kbira: 11,500 metru kwadru (iva ħdax-il elf u ħames mitt metru kwadru), ftit iktar minn għaxart itmiem.

Hemm kważi 1500 oġġezzjoni għal din l-applikazzjoni li dalwaqt tkun deċiża.

Ftit jirrealizzaw li d-deċiżjoni ilha li ittieħdet mill-2006 biex din l-art tkun tajba għal bini. Id-deċiżjoni ħadha l-Partit Nazzjonalista fil-Gvern permezz tal-Kabinett ta’ Lawrence Gonzi: fuq quddiem il-Ministru George Pullicino.

Dakinnhar Alternattiva Demokratika u l-għaqdiet ambjentali oġġezzjonaw. Il-Labour fl-Opposizzjoni, dakinnhar, fil-Parlament ivvota kontra, imma hekk kif tela’ fil-Gvern ħalla kollox kif kien.

Fl-aħħar programm elettorali ADPD biss insitiet li din l-art m’għandhiex tinbena.

Ir-rapport tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar tlesta u jġib id-data tal-11 ta’ Mejju 2023: jirrakkomanda li l-art għandha tinbena: tlett sulari.

Fil-Gżira: grazzi lil Conrad

Illum ADPD morna l-Gżira fil-ġnien mhedded minn pompa tal-petrol.

Hu tajjeb li l-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira immexxi mis-Sindku Conrad Borg-Manché ħareġ għonqu biex jiddefendi l-ġnien tant meħtieġ għar-residenti.

Il-ġnien hu pulmun essenzjali li jeħtieġ li jikber mhux li jiċkien!

Hi ħasra li f’din l-istorja kollha l-bqija tal-Partit Laburista ħa posizzjoni kontra r-residenti. L-Awtorità tal-Artijiet, immexxija minn Bord maħtur mill-Partit Laburista fil-Gvern, irid jieħu biċċa mill-ġnien għall-ħtiġijiet tal-pompa tal-petrol. L-Awtorità tal-Artijiet qabbded lill-Avukatessa Ramona Attard, President tal-Partit Laburista, biex tiddefendi d-deċiżjoni tagħha dwar il-pompa tal-petrol.

Hi ħasra li l-affarijiet żviluppaw b’dan il-mod.

Għax f’fora oħra l-Gvern tal-Labour qed jgħid affarijiet oħra.

Hu tajjeb per eżempju li tnieda investiment sostanzjali fil-ħolqien u ż-żamma ta’ spazji urbani ħodor. Apparti li l-affarijiet jistgħu jitmexxew aħjar, l-idea hi tajba. Fuq kollox kien ikun ħafna aħjar kieku l-inizjattiva qegħda f’idejn il-Kunsilli Lokali, flok f’idejn Steve Ellul ta’ Project Green li iktar hu interessat li jħejji soda għalih għall-Parlament Ewropew!

Qabel ma noħolqu spazji urbani mħaddra ġodda kien ikun iktar għaqli li nipproteġu dak li għandna.

Grazzi lill-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira u lis-Sindku Conrad Borg-Manché li kienu kapaċi jiddefendu il-ftit li għandna. Moħħna hemm għax l-istorja ma spiċċatx hawn!

Illum fl-Awtorità tax-Xandir

Illum wara nofsinnhar kont flimkien ma’ Ralph Cassar u Sandra Gauci fl-uffiċini tal-Awtorità tax-Xandir biex nippreżenta ilment kontra l-ONE li għal darba oħra naqsu li jirrappurtaw konferenza tal-aħbarijiet ta’ ADPD.

Kienet konferenza tal-aħbarijiet indirizzata minn Sandra u Ralph fejn tkellimna dwar il-periklu għad-demokrazija meta in-nies tal-politika jkun viċin wisq tad-dinja tan-negozju.

Tkellimna dwar ic-chats ta’ Rosianne Cutajar u Yorgen Fenech kif ukoll bosta affarijiet oħra. Imma l-ONE għal darba oħra iċċensurawna.

Ħadd minn ONE ma ġie l-Awtorità tax-Xandir biex jiddefendi ċ-ċensura li qed iwettqu repetutament kontra tagħna. Ma nafx għalfejn ma ġewx, forsi fl-aħħar irrealizzaw li ma jistgħux jagħtu spjegazzjoni kredibbli dwar il-mod partiġjan li bih qed jopera l-ONE.

Nistennew d-deċiżjoni għax minkejja li l-ONE għażlu li ma jiġux l-ilment instema’ xorta waħda!

ADPD dwar il-ħruġ ta’ liċenzja għall-industrija tal-kostruzzjoni

Ftit iktar minn xahar ilu ħadna sehem fil-konsultazzjoni pubblika dwar ir-riforma meħtieġa fl-industrija tal-bini.

F’dawn is-sottomissjonijiet nemfasizaw li :

• Esperjenza, kwalifiċi u taħriġ – it-taħriġ għandu jkun kriterju essenzjali għall-kisba tal-liċenzja u dan għandu jkun wieħed partikolarment meħtieġ għal min m’għandu l-ebda kwalifika formali;
• Ċertifikat ta’ kondotta – għalkemm hemm numru ta’ reati li jitnaddfu minn dan iċ-ċertifikat wara numru ta’ snin, riżultat tal-liġi dwar iċ-ċertifikati tal-kondotta, il-Bord tal-Liċenzji għandu jara li jikkonsidra l-informazzjoni kollha dwar l-applikanti li tista’ tkun ta’ rilevenza fil-qasam tal-kostruzzjoni;
• Imġiba, ilmenti u inċidenti – l-informazzjoni li l-Awtorità dwar il-Bini u l-Kostruzzjoni takkumula dwar is-siti ta’ kostruzzjoni għandha tingħata importanza kbira għaliex l-imġiba fl-operat ta’ kull applikant għandha jkollha relevanza kbira fid-deċiżjoni dwar il-ħruġ tal-liċenzja;
• Assigurazzjoni – din tista’ sservi bħala double-check fuq is-sistema tal-liċenzjar għax tgħarbel ir-riskju ta’ kull applikant u potenzjalment tista’ tirrifjuta li tassigurah fejn dan ikun meħtieġ.

Jekk trid tara s-sottomissjonijiet ta’ ADPD fid-dettall: agħfas hawn

Il-ONE (illum) jiċċensura lil Alfred Sant

Dal-għodu Alfred Sant indirizza l-konferenza ġenerali tal-Partit Laburista. Fl-aħbarijiet tal-lejla tal-ONE ma smajt xejn dwar x’qal. Meta fittixt skoprejt għaliex.

Il-Times online dalghodu irrapporta dak li qal Alfred Sant: tkellem dwar il-korruzzjoni, dwar l-abbuż li qed isir minn kumpaniji multinazzjonali mis-sistema tat-tassazzjoni Maltija biex jevutaw it-taxxi f’pajjiżhom u dwar l-impatti tat-tibdil fil-klima.

Korruzzjoni? Ma tarax! Aqta’!

Meta nara li l-ONE ma jiddejqux jiċċensura anke lil Alfred Sant, xejn ma niskanta li jagħmlu ħilithom biex jippruvaw jiċċensuraw lilna tal-ADPD ukoll.

ONE: ġurnaliżmu tal-ħabbagozz!

Without transparency, accountability is hampered

Earlier this week I was called by the Auditor General to his office in order to discuss the request for an investigation which I had submitted to his office some 15 days ago on behalf of ADPD. My request for an investigation was relative to the contract of service entered into between the Institute for Tourism Studies (ITS) and the Honourable Rosianne Cutajar, then a Labour member of parliament, now turned independent after being squeezed out of Labour.

As pointed out earlier in this column (The role of members of Parliament: TMIS 2 April), the issue is not an investigation of Rosianne Cutajar. It is rather an investigation into the operation of the Institute for Tourism Studies (ITS): whether it has engaged a consultant to its CEO to carry out responsibilities in respect of which the said consultant had no knowledge or competence, as is public knowledge.

An examination of the contract entered into between the Honourable Cutajar and ITS lists the areas of responsibilities which she was expected to shoulder: primarily issues of financial management. These responsibilities fall substantially outside the competences of a qualified Italian secondary school teacher. The contract in question is one which was hidden from public view until it was released by Shift News on the 23 March after it had obtained a copy as a result of a Freedom of Information request.

The inquisitive and investigative free press is shining a light on secretive acts carried out by the public sector: this is what transparency is about. Without transparency there is no way that we can ensure a shred of accountability.

The Auditor General informed me that he had called this meeting to hear my views, prior to his taking a decision on whether to proceed with the investigation and subsequently inform the Speaker of the House of Representatives of his findings.

Good governance does not stand a chance of ever taking root if this is how decisions are taken in the wider public sector. It is about time that all decision-takers start shouldering responsibility for the decisions they take. This ITS contract is one small example of abusive behaviour which needs acting upon immediately. It is not only politicians who must be accountable.

The management of public funds is tied with a duty to act in a responsible manner. All those who manage public funds must be in a position to account minutely for their actions. At the end of the day, it is the Auditor General who is entrusted by Parliament to monitor and report on the matter. Hopefully in the not-too-distant future we will be informed exactly what happened and who is actually responsible.

Transparency and accountability work in tandem. A lack of transparency is normally the first step to try and ensure that accountability is avoided.

Transparency is the indispensable foundation of good governance. In contrast, bad governance is generally wrapped in secrecy through the withholding of information which should be in the public domain. Without transparency, accountability is a dead letter; devoid of any meaning. A lack of transparency transforms our democracy into a defective process, as basic and essential information required to form an opinion on what’s going on is missing. After all, accountability is about responsibility: it signifies the acknowledgement and assumption of responsibility for our actions. This cannot be achieved unless and until transparency reigns supreme.

Whenever government, or public bodies, are secretive about information which they hold, and refuse or oppose without valid reason requests to release information under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act they give ample proof of their governance credentials.

Transparency is a journey, not a destination. We have to work hard at ensuring transparency continuously. It is a long journey, one which never ends.

Rules and laws will not bring about transparency. It will only result whenever each one of us opts to do what is right and not what is expedient. Our actions speak much louder than words.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 16 April 2023

Wara d-deċiżjoni tal-Awtorità tax-Xandir

Idealment l-istazzjonijiet tal-partiti politiċi jingħalqu illum qabel għada. Però hu ovvju li dan mhux ser isir, tal-inqas għalissa.

Sfortunatament dawn kontinwament iqiesu ruħhom li huma l-fuq mil-liġi. Mhumiex sors tal-aħbar, imma magna ta’ propaganda politika.

Jippretendu li għandhom il-kapaċità li jeżerċitaw diskrezzjoni editorjali, meta fir-realtà, t-tnejn li huma kontinwament jipprattikaw ċensura politika: xi drabi bl-iktar mod ovvju, drabi oħra b’mod sottili.

Dan hu l-isfond tal-każ ta’ ADPD deċiż mill-Awtorità tax-Xandir iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa. Il-konferenza stampa saret nhar is-Sibt 11 ta’ Marzu, kif norganizzaw kull nhar ta’ Sibt, kemm qabel kif ukoll wara dakinnhar. ONE u NET, bħas-soltu ma xandru xejn. Ġbidnielhom l-attenzjoni dwar dan. ONE injorawna. NET kellmuna u ġiebu skoss skużi, imma immedjatament bdew jiċċaqlqu, probabbilment għax irrealizzaw x’inhu ġej. Bdew jirrappurtaw ftit. Dan kien pass żgħir il-quddiem li seta u għad jista’ jwassal għal soluzzjoni: avolja għadna l-bogħod.

Wara bgħatna l-ilment lill-Awtorità tax-Xandir li semgħet il-każ u ħadet deċiżjoni.

Ir-rappurtaġġ dwar din id-deċiżjon il-bieraħ fuq il-medja kien estensiv. L-emfasi kien ivarja. Tim Diacono tal-Lovin’ Malta immeraviljat li ONE baxxew rashom u obdew l-ordni tal-Awtorità tax-Xandir. Li ma appellawx mid-deċiżjoni hu fatt li issorprenda. Għaliex? Diffiċli tgħid għalissa.

Bertrand Borg mit-Times of Malta min-naħa l-oħra analizza d-deċiżjoni u ppreżenta l-konklużjoni tiegħu li din kienet l-ewwel darba li l-Awtorità tax-Xandir qed tiċċensura stazzjon politiku. Jibni argument validu f’kuntest tad-dikjarazzjoni li għamlet il-Qorti Kostituzzjonali dan l-aħħar (f’kawża tal-PN dwar ix-xandir) fejn bl-iktar mod ċar kienet qalet li l-obbligu tal-imparzjalità mhux biss tax-xandir pubbliku. Hu obbligu ta’ kull mezz ta’ xandir, bla ebda distinzjoni. Dan hu argument li aħna ilna nagħmlu żmien twil.

L-Independent, Malta Today u Newsbook min-naħa l-oħra irrappurtaw l-aħbar tad-deċiżjoni tal-Awtorità b’mod fattwali.

Issa, x’ser jiġri minn hawn il-quddiem?

Jiena nippreferi li NET u ONE jagħrfu r-responsabbiltajiet tagħhom u jonorawhom. Jekk iridu jkellmuna biex flimkien insibu mod prattiku kif dan jista’ jsir jistgħu jikkuntattjawna meta jridu. Imma jekk mhux ser jimxu sewwa mhux ser ikolli triq oħra ħlief li nkompli nħarrax il-battalja biex leħen ADPD jinstema.

Nistennew u naraw.

Supporting Bill 28

The amendment to the Criminal Code forming part of Bill 28 which Parliament started discussing on Monday 28 November codifies the existing practice at the state hospital. It defines the necessary legal framework for therapeutic abortion. It does not introduce the practice of therapeutic abortion: this has been the practice for quite some time.

The Bill avoids use of the term “abortion”, using instead the term “termination of a pregnancy”, which as we are all aware has exactly the same meaning!

Legislation to date relative to therapeutic abortion is not clear at this point in time. On this basis ADPD-The Green Party was the only political party which tackled the matter during the March 2022 electoral campaign, including a whole section on sexual health and reproductive rights in the electoral manifesto. We went much further than that, emphasising the need for the decriminalisation of abortion too.

The Labour Party in Government, which has been practically silent on the matter during the electoral campaign, has now decided to act, taking a minimalist approach. It has limited itself to ensuring that current practice is protected at law. While this is definitely not enough it is a welcome first step and deserves our full support, even though there is still room for improvement in the proposed text of the proposal.

The Labour Party is right in saying that it is not introducing abortion through Bill 28: therapeutic abortion has been here and practised for some time even in the state hospital. Consequently, the approval of Bill 28 as presented will, in practice, not change anything, it will merely recognise the current state of affairs. As a result, it will give peace of mind to medical practitioners in state hospitals as their current modus operandi would be clearly spelt out in the law, as it should be.

In a sense the current fierce and at times emotional debate on abortion is much ado about nothing. It has however resulted in the local conservative forces speaking from the same hymn book. The opposition to the Bill is primarily twofold. On one hand there is the PN official stand which, together with Archbishop Scicluna has adopted the position paper published by a group of academics. In practice they seek to limit permissible medical interventions to cases of a threat to the life of the pregnant woman, eliminating health issues as justification. On the other hand, exponents of the fundamentalist Christian right, including a minority in the PN rank and file oppose the Bill in principle.

Put simply, the debate identifies three different proposals. The first, proposed by the Labour government in Bill 28, enshrines in law the current practice and places the onus on the medical profession to decide each case on its own merits. The second, supported by the PN opposition and the Church hierarchy seeks to substantially limit the discretion of the medical profession in Bill 28 primarily by eliminating health and mental health considerations. The third position brought forward by the fundamentalist Christian faction is in total opposition to all that is being proposed.

During the Parliamentary debate held this week I took note of the various positive contributions, in particular those of Deputy Prime Minister Chris Fearne, Parliamentary Secretary Rebecca Buttigieg and Opposition spokespersons Joe Giglio and Mario Demarco. Of particular note, in my view, is Fearne’s reference to the hospital’s standard operating procedures. It is being emphasised that these procedures do in fact address important aspects of the criticism aired during the debate, in particular that decisions taken by the medical profession relative to therapeutic abortion procedures should be taken by two or more professionals in order to ensure that no professional shoulders the decision alone. This, I understand is already standard practice!

There is always room for improvement in the proposed text of the Bill as indicated in the level-headed approach of Joe Giglio during the Parliamentary debate on Wednesday. As I emphasised in my article last week it would have been much better if Government had embarked on an exercise of public consultation before presenting the Bill. There would definitely have been more time to listen to and digest the different views. A valid point which was also emphasised by Mario Demarco.

In this scenario, even though viewing it as just a first step, which can be improved: without any shadow of doubt, ADPD supports the proposal put forward by Bill 28 in principle.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 4 December 2022