Alleanza Elettorali: m’hemmx għaġġla

 

Id-dibattitu pubbliku dwar jekk, meta u kif għandha tkun żviluppata alleanza elettorali bejn Alternattiva Demokratika u l-Partit Nazzjonalista qabad ritmu sewwa fuq il-media soċjali matul il-ġimgħa li għaddiet. Dan seħħ l-iktar bħala riżultat  tal-intervista ta’ Michael Briguglio fuq din il-gazzetta l-ġimgħa l-oħra.

Il-veduti ta’ Michael Briguglio, bla dubju, jirriflettu l-esperjenzi tiegħu u jwassluh għall-konklużjoni li t-toroq li jippuntaw lejn alleanza elettorali (jew kif ġieli nirreferu għaliha, koalizzjoni) għandhom ikunu eżaminati sewwa u mingħajr wisq dewmien. Jiena m’għandi l-ebda għaġġla. Dan qed ngħidu minħabba li l-imġieba tat-tmexxija tal-Partit Nazzjonalista hi ta’ tħassib mhux żgħir u li bħala riżultat ta’ dan qed nifforma l-opinjoni li wara kollox jista’ jkun li dan mhux il-mument addattat għal inizjattiva ta’ din ix-xorta.

Il-kobba mħabbla dwar id-donazzjonijiet li qed tiżviluppa bejn il-Partit Nazzjonalista u Silvio Debono tad-db Group tirrikjedi li jitqegħdu l-karti kollha fuq il-mejda biex ikun assigurat li l-fatti kollha huma magħrufa. Kemm hu veru li l-PN irċieva donazzjonijiet moħbija bħala ħlas għal serviżżi li ma nagħtawx u dan billi għamel użu mill-kumpanija kummerċjali tiegħu?  Apparti l-grupp db kemm-il entitá kummerċjali oħra hemm li għamlet din it-tip ta’ donazzjoni moħbija lill-PN?  Dan kollu ma jmurx kontra dak li l-PN ilu jgħid żmien dwar is-suppost tmexxija serja li jrid?  Allura jekk anke fuq xi ħaġa bażika bħas-serjetá fit-tmexxija l-PN jgħid ħaga u jagħmel oħra kif qatt nistgħu nemmnu u nagħtu piż lil dak li jgħid il-PN dwar prinċipji u kwalunkwe xorta ta’ proposta politika?

Hemm diversi materji oħra li jinvolvu l-imġieba ta’ membri parlamentari ewlenin tal-Partit Nazzjonalista li dwarhom tinħtieġ li tingħata spjegazzjoni.

Per eżempju d-dikjarazzjoni ta’ Claudio Grech li ma jiftakarx jekk qatt iltaqa’ ma George Farrugia, u dan fil-kuntest tal-iskandlu taż-żejt, xejn ma tikkonvinċi. L-aċċettazzjoni da parti tal-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni ta’ din id-dikjarazzjoni tixhed dubju fuq kemm qiegħed jiffunzjona l-kumpass etiku tant meħtieġ u essenzjali għal min appunta lilu nnifsu fit-tmexxija tal-koalizzjoni kontra l-korruzzjoni.

L-anqas ma huma ċari l-affarijiet fejn jidħol ir-rwol ta’ Beppe Fenech Adami fil-Capital One Investment Group u l-Baltimore Fiduciary Services. F’sitwazzjoni kważi identika, Joe Cordina, dakinnhar Teżorier tal-Partit Laburista, kien imġiegħel jirreżenja.

Min-naħa l-oħra Mario de Marco għamel apoloġija pubblika dwar il-ġudizzju żbaljat tiegħu meta huwa aċċetta l-inkarigu mill-Grupp db dwar l-akkwista ta’ l-art f’Pembroke fejn illum hemm l-Istitut għall-Istudji Turistiċi. F’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi, bla ebda dubju, apoloġija mhux biżżejjed.

Irridu nikkunsidraw ukoll il-villa proposta biex tinbena barra miż-żona tal-iżvilupp minn Toni Bezzina kelliemi għall-agrikultura tal-PN u  flimkien ma oħrajn awtur tad-dokument dwar il-politika “ġdida” ambjentali tal-PN. Proposta li tmur kontra dak kollu li kien propost fid-dokument. Il-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni flok ma tajru immedjatament ipprova jeħilsu billi qal li “ma għamel xejn ħażin.

Meta tqies kollox, tista’ tifhem aħjar kemm it-tmexxija tajba u l-iġieba etika huma bosta drabi nieqsa fost l-Opposizzjoni. Kull wieħed minn dawn il-kazijiet, anke jekk meqjus għalih waħdu, kien ikun iktar minn biżżejjed biex tkun xkupata l-barra t-tmexxija kollha tal-Opposizzjoni.

Kif tista’ Alternattiva Demokratika taħdem favur alleanza elettorali ma’ partit politiku li t-tmexxija tiegħu hi kompromessa b’dan il-mod u għandha daqstant x’tispjega dwar l-imġieba tagħha? Kif jista’ l-Partit Nazzjonalista jippretendi t-tmexxija morali ta’ koalizzjoni kontra l-korruzzjoni qabel ma jagħti spjegazzjoni konvinċenti tal-imġieba tal-esponenti ewlenin tiegħu? Il-fatt li l-Partit Laburista għandu ħafna iktar x’jispjega mhu ta’ l-ebda konsolazzjoni u bl-ebda mod ma jiġġustifika l-imġieba tal-Opposizzjoni.

Il-mintna li jinsab fiha pajjiżna hi riżultat dirett tat-tmexxija tal-Partit Laburista tul dawn l-aħħar erba’ snin. Imma hi ukoll riżultat tas-sistema ta’ żewġ partiti politiċi li iktar ma tispiċċa malajr, iktar aħjar għal kulħadd. Is-sistema ta’ żewġ partiti li kkontrollat il-makkinarju tal-istat bla interruzzjoni mill-1966 sal-lum hi responsabbli ukoll għas-sitwazzjoni attwali. Dan minħabba li bħala konsegwenza tat-tip ta’ Parlament li ġie elett kien prattikament impossibli (b’xi eċċezzjonijiet żgħar) li dan jeżamina b’reqqa l-ħidma tal-Gvern b’mod li jkun imġiegħel jagħti kont ta’ egħmilu bis-serjetá.

Filwaqt li l-ħolqien ta’ alleanza elettorali tista’ tkun ta’ ġid għall-pajjiż, iċ-ċirkustanzi preżenti ma naħsibx li jipprovdu l-mument addattat. Il-bibien għad-diskussjoni Alternattiva Demokratika żżommhom dejjem miftuħin imma bħalissa hu l-mument li wieħed joqgħod attent biex ikun evitat li jingħataw messaġġi żbaljati.

Huwa biss meta jkunu ċċarati l-affarijiet li jkun il-mument addattat biex jittieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet dwar il-jekk u l-kif ta’ alleanza elettorali.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum : 26 ta’ Marzu 2017

Electoral Alliance : a cautious approach

The public debate on whether, and to what extent, it is appropriate to have an electoral alliance between Alternattiva Demokratika and the Nationalist Party has been in full swing on social media during the past week, fuelled as it was by Michael Briguglio’s interview on the Maltese weekly Illum last Sunday.

Michael Briguglio presented his views, no doubt based on his experiences and perceptions, concluding that the avenues leading to an electoral alliance (at times also referred to as a coalition) should be explored without delay. The fact that the ethical behaviour of leading members the PN Opposition leaves much to be desired necessitates more caution. There is no need to rush.

The political party donation mess in which the PN and Silvio Debono of the db Group are entangled requires full disclosure in order to ascertain the precise facts. Has the PN (illegally) avoided the provisions of the political party financing legislation through the channelling of funds to its commercial arm under the guise of payment for (fake) services? Is the db Group “donation” a one-off, or is it one of a number?

Wouldn’t this give the lie to the PN’s declared commitment to good governance? If such a basic issue in the PN’s electoral platform is just paying lip service, how can one give weight to any PN declaration of adherence to principle or policy of whatever form or shape?

There are other issues related to the behaviour of senior PN MPs which need clarification.

For example, Claudio Grech’s declaration that he does not recollect ever meeting George Farrugia with reference to the oil sales scandal, is not convincing at all. The acceptance of Claudio Grech’s declaration by the Leader of the Opposition throws considerable light on the functionability of the ethical compass which is an essential tool for the self-appointed leader of an anti-corruption coalition!

Nor are matters on Beppe Fenech Adami’s role in the Capital One Investment Group/Baltimore Fiduciary Services any clearer. In quasi similar circumstances, Joe Cordina, former Labour Party Treasurer was forced to resign.

Mario DeMarco has made a public apology on his error of judgement, which error of judgement was made when accepting the brief of the db Group relative to its acquisition of the land at Pembroke, currently hosting the Institute for Tourism Studies, fro the government. Fine, but apologies are certainly not enough.

One has also to consider the proposed ODZ Villa which Toni Bezzina, PN spokesperson on agriculture and co-author of the PN policy document,  sought to develop contrary to both letter and spirit  of the policy document he had just proposed. The Leader of the Opposition instead of dismissing him on the spot absolved him as “he had done nothing wrong”.

Taken together, the above shed considerable light on the extent to which “good governance” and “ethical behaviour” is often absent in the Opposition’s ranks. In any other democratic country, each one of the above, even if considered separately, would have been more than enough to wipe out the whole Opposition leadership.

Can Alternattiva Demokratika forge an electoral alliance with a political party whose leading members are so compromised and have so much to explain as to their behaviour? Moreover, how can the PN claim moral leadership in a coalition against corruption before it gives satisfactory explanations on the behaviour of its leading exponents? The fact that the Labour Party has even much more to explain is no justification for the Opposition’s behaviour.

The mess in which the country is currently submerged, the direct result of Labour Party stewardship over the past four years, is also the direct consequence of a two-party system which needs to be smashed to smithereens. The two- party system which has controlled the machinery of the state uninterruptedly since 1966 is ultimately responsible for the current state of affairs as it has continuously returned a Parliament which, due to its composition, has, with insignificant exceptions, been unable to hold the government of the day to account.

While the setting up of an electoral alliance could eventually be beneficial to the country, in the present circumstances it is not the right time to rush. At this point in time, linking Alternattiva Demokratika to the PN through an electoral alliance may send wrong messages.

While Alternattiva Demokratika will never close the doors to possible discussions on an electoral alliance, I believe that it is certainly the season to be extremely cautious until such time as the murky waters have cleared. It is only then that the time would be ripe for the necessary decisions.

Published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 26 March 2017

Shock therapy to the political system

 

 

Regulation of the financing of political parties is of fundamental importance in any modern democratic society. Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party in Malta – has been at the forefront in campaigning for legislation since the day when it was founded way back in 1989. When legislation was finally brought forward it was welcomed, even though it could have been much better.

The Financing of Political Parties Act deals with more than just the financing of political parties. It also establishes the formalities on the basis of which political parties must register with the Electoral Commission. It is indeed ironic that the Labour Party, the political party which piloted this legislation through Parliament, failed to register by the date established in the legislation. In so doing the Labour Party – for some reason as yet unknown – sent an unmistakable message that it wanted to delay its being subject to regulation. It had more than ample time to adjust its Party Statute to bring it in line with the law, but it procrastinated for more than twelve months.

Earlier this week, the Electoral Commission announced that it would be setting up a Board to investigate allegations of breaches of the Financing of Political Parties Act that have been brought to its attention. As far as is known there are three such alleged breaches.

The first breach is that brought forward by Alternattiva Demokratika and involves the use of public property by the Labour Party Parliamentary Group for holding one of its recent meetings. I have already written about the matter in the 26 February edition of TMIS (Joseph tweets a selfie from Girgenti). On Friday the Secretary-General of Alternattiva Demokratika Ralph Cassar was informed in writing  that AD’s request for the Electoral Commission to investigate the use of the Girgenti Palace by the Labour Party Parliamentary Group will be taken in hand by the Investigation Board established for the purpose.

We are so used to the use and abuse of public property by the major political parties that it has, over the years, been considered a fait accompli, taken for granted. It may be a “minor abuse” compared to others in the news, but we cannot tolerate even the smallest breach of the provisions of the Financing of Political Parties Act.

The second breach is the one highlighted by the Labour Party regarding the Silvio Debono donations to the Nationalist Party. Silvio Debono has clearly spilled the beans in retaliation to the PN criticism of the ITS land at Pembroke being transferred for peanuts.  It is an issue of fake invoices and tainted donations as described in my article in this newspaper last week. The whole case rests on the existence of possible fake invoices by which illegal donations to the Nationalist Party could have been channelled through its commercial arm. If the investigating board is presented with the fake invoices, which Silvio Debono says he paid on prodding by senior members of the PN leadership, it is difficult to fathom how the PN can avoid carrying the responsibility for the matter.

The third breach has been highlighted by the PN, obviously against the Labour Party. It refers to a number of One journalists who have been selected to occupy positions of trust in various Ministries and authorities. The PN complaint list may have some mistakes, as some names are most probably erroneously listed, but I believe that it is correct to point out this corrupt practice through which the Labour Party media are being subsidised through state salaries – i.e. through the taxes that we pay.

The fact that these three alleged breaches will be investigated under the auspices of the Investigating Board appointed by the Electoral Commission is a step forward. However, it all depends on those selected to carry out the investigation.  I look forward to some shock therapy to the political system as I consider all three complaints to be justified. It is about time that both the Labour Party and the Nationalist Party are brought to their senses and made to realise that they, too, are subject to the law. But then, maybe I am hoping for too much from the Investigating Board!

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday – 19 March 2017

 

 

Il-vit tal-flus taħt investigazzjoni ?

Għamlet tajjeb il-Kummissjoni Elettorali li waqqfet Bord biex jinvestiga l-allegazzjonijiet dwar nuqqas ta’ osservanza tal-liġi dwar il-finanzjament tal-partiti politiċi.

Bla dubju, l-kummissjoni innifisha għandha diffikultá biex taġixxi u dan minħabba l-mod kif inhi komposta.

Il-Kummissjoni għandha quddiemha tlett każi x’tinvestiga.

L-ewwel kaz hu dak li ressqet l-Alternattiva Demokratika dwar l-użu mill-Grupp Parlamentari Laburista ta’ propjetá pubblika għal-laqgħat tiegħu. B’mod partikolari dwar l-użu riċenti tal-Palazz tal-Girgenti għal laqgħa tal-grupp.

It-tieni kaz imressaq mill-Partit Laburista hu dak dwar id-donazzjonijiet mill-kumpaniji ta’ Silvio Debono li qed jingħad li ġew moħbija taħt invoice jew invoices foloz u li għaddew għand il-kumpanija Media Link Communications tal-Partit Nazzjonalista.

It-tielet kaz hu dak li ressaq il-PN li hu huwa dwar kif numru mdaqqas ta’ persuni li jagħtu kontribut sostanzjali fil-media tal-Partit Laburista huma impjegati mal-Gvern jew korpi governattivi b’mod li jidher li dawn qed jitħallsu mill-Gvern waqt li qed jagħmlu xogħol għall-partit!

Bejniethom dawn it-tlett kazi li għandhom ikunu investigati jmissu firxa wiesgħa tal-ħajja pubblika u kull konklużjoni li l-investigazzjoni tista’ tasal għaliha ser ikollha konsegwenzi gravi.

Nistennew li kulħadd jagħmel dmiru.  

Mhux kulħadd bħal Salvu

Għamel tajjeb il-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni li rrefera t-trasferiment tal-art f’Pembroke fejn hemm l-Istitut għall-Istudji Turistiċi għand l-Awditur Ġenerali għal investgazzjoni, għax dan hu trasferiment li fih bosta irregolaritajiet.

Ftit ħin wara li Simon Busuttil għamel id-dikjarazzjoni li ser imur għand l-Awditur Ġenerali huwa irċieva SMS li biha ċ-CEO tal-kumpaniji ta’ Silvio Debono talbu lura l-flus li kienu ngħataw bħala donazzjoni lill-PN. Hu ċar għal kulħadd li dan m’għamlux b’rispett lejn il-liġi, jew minħabba li jrid is-serjetá, iżda bi tpattija immedjata. Kuntrarjament għal dak li qal il-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni dan ma kienx rikatt iżda ritaljazzjoni għal dak li kien diġa intqal.

Imma bħala riżultat ta’ din ir-ritaljazzjoni min-naħa ta’ Silvio Debono, sirna nafu mingħand l-istess Debono li fl-2016 huwa kien intalab jagħmel ħlasijiet ta’ €70,800 għal servizzi li ma kellux bżonn imma li kienu ser iservu għall-ħtiġijiet ta’ Partit Nazzjonalista. Debono żied jgħid li tħejjew invoices u ħallashom.

Ħadd ma jista’ jeħodha kontra l-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni li mar għand l-Awditur Ġenerali biex dan jinvestiga dak li jidhru li huma irregolaritajiet kbar. Imma bla dubju dan il-pass tajjeb ta’ Simon Busuttil ma jikkanċellax l-abbużi li qed ikun allegat li saru dwar donazzjonijiet lill-Partit Nazzjonalista li ukoll jeħtieġu li jkunu investigati.

Huwa ovvju li Debono mhux qed jitkellem għax iħobb l-ordni, is-serjetá u l-osservanza tal-liġi. Imma jekk dak li qed jgħid Debono seħħ, u nistennew li jkunu prodotti l-provi dwar dan, dan huwa abbuz gravi u jeħtieġ li jkun investigat.  Dan mhux tfettieq kif qed jippruvaw jgħidu x’uħud.

Jekk dak li qed jgħid Debono seħħ ifisser li nkisru l-iktar prinċipji bażiċi tal-liġi dwar il-Finanzjament tal-Partiti Politiċi. Nistenna li ma ndumux ma naraw kopja tal-irċevuti u l-kontijiet li nħarġu biex jiġġustifikaw il-ħlas.

L-istorja ma tieqafx hawn. Għax dan kollu għandu konsegwenzi li m’humiex żgħar.

Jekk ippruvat, dan ifisser li l-Partit Nazzjonalista jipprietka s-serjetá fil-pubbliku, imma imbagħad, fejn ma jidhirx, jagħmel mod ieħor.

Jekk ippruvat dan ifisser li hi illużjoni li naħsbu li wara dawk l-uċuħ mimlija qdusija hemm min għandu rieda tajba.

Ifisser fuq kollox li filwaqt li qatt m’għandna nagħlqu l-bibien għal ħadd, irridu noqgħodu b’seba’ għajnejn il-ħin kollu għax bejn dak li jidher u dak li hemm fil-fatt tezisti differenza kbira.

Għax kif tista’ tippreżenta front wieħed u magħqud kontra l-korruzzjoni jekk min jilgħaba tal-paladin tal-imġieba tajba jgħid mod fid-deher u jagħmel ieħor meta ma jidhirx. Mhux kulħadd għandu fiduċja għamja f’Simon Busuttil bħalma għandu Salvu. Dak jaħseb li l-maħmuġ jista’ xi darba jirreklama l-indafa. Erħilu li sa ftit ilu kien konvintissimu li m’hemmx x’tagħżel bejn il-PN u l-PL. Imma issa ikkonverta u donnu nesa’ kollox.

Dak li naraw b’għajnejna u mmissu b’idejna ma nistgħux ninjorawh. Il-ħmieġ jibqa’ ħmieġ, jagħmlu min jagħmlu. Imma meta jitwettaq minn min jagħmel il-ġurnata kollha jipprietka l-indafa, tajjeb ukoll li jkun ċar li mhux qed jirnexxielu jgħaddina biż–żmien.

 

 

Simon jemmen fit-tmexxija tajba ?

 

Għamel tajjeb Simon Busuttil li jiddikjara u jxandar mal-erbat irijieħ li ma hu ser iħalli lil ħadd jirrikattah. Hekk għandu jkun. L-ebda politiku m’għandu jħalli lil min jirrikattah.  

Imma, jekk għadu ma ndunax, Simon Busuttil għandu jkun jaf li hu ovvju għal kulħadd li qed jipprova jgħaddi ż–żmien bin-nies. B’dawk li għandhom fiduċja għamja fih jista’ jgħaddi ż–żmien kemm irid, sakemm iħalluh, imma hu ftit diffiċli biex jgħaddi ż–żmien bil-bqija. Forsi jkun aħjar għal Simon Busuttil li joqgħod attent li jmexxi sewwa, kemm hu, kif ukoll dawk ta’ madwaru. Fil-kaz tad-donazzjonijiet ta’ Silvio Debono tas-Seabank  lill-Partit Nazzjonalista jidher ċar li hemm it-taħwid. Idur kemm idur mal-lewża Simon Busuttil m’huwiex qed jirnexxielu jgħatti dan it-taħwid. Iktar ma jipprova, iktar hemm min qiegħed jiftaħ għajnejh.

Il-problema reali li għandu Simon Busuttil u li jeħtieġ illi jiffaċċja mhux xi rikatt, imma l-għatx kbir għad-donazzjonijiet li kellu l-Partit Nazzjonalista u Ii naħseb illi għad għandu, sakemm isib tarf tad-djun kbar li għandu l-PN. Dan hu għatx li pprova jissodisfa b’donazzjonijiet illegali, meta, skond Silvio Debono mexxejja tal-PN qalulu biex l-għotja tiegħu tkun fil-forma ta’ ħlas għal servizzi li la qatt ma ngħata u probabbilment li l-anqas ma kellu bżonn. Din hi l-verżjoni ta’ Silvio Debono li fil-fehma tiegħi titwemmen iktar minn dak li qal Simon Busuttil.

X’kienu dawn is-servizzi?

Hija din il-mistoqsija li għandu jwieġeb Simon Busuttil iktar milli joqgħod għaddej bit-tejatrin u jilgħab tal-vittma biex jipprova jgħatti xturu u xtur il-PN. Bil-mod kif aġixxa u tkellem matul din il-ġimgħa, Simon Busttil tefa’ dubji kbar dwar  kemm jemmen f’governanza tajba. Għax jekk it-tmexxija tajba diga qed jagħtiha l-ġemb, issa, fit-tmexxija tal-Partit, aħseb u ara kif jimxi iktar il-quddiem.

Kif jista’ jitwemmen, meta dwar dan l-iskandlu tad-donazzjonijiet ta’ Silvio Debono lill-PN Simon Busuttil mhux kapaċi jagħti spjegazzjoni li tagħmel sens?

It-tidwir mal-lewża qatt ma wassal imkien.

Fake invoices and tainted donations

 

 

Around three weeks ago Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party in Malta – requested the Electoral Commission to initiate an investigation into the illicit use of public property by the Labour Party. The case revolved around the use of the Prime Minister’s official residence at Girgenti  as a meeting place for the Labour Party’s Parliamentary Group. Various members of Cabinet tweeted photos of this Parliamentary Group meeting.

It is not so far known whether the Electoral Commission will be taking any action on the Girgenti matter other than that it was on the agenda for a Commission meeting.

Now another, more serious issue, has cropped up out of the blue. This is due to the very serious claim made by Silvio Debono that he gave a political donation to the Nationalist Party in the amount of about €70,800 which was camouflaged as a payment for services rendered through the production and use of a fake invoice for the purpose. This payment is alleged to have been made in a concealed or disguised manner being intended for the political party but by way of deception it was channelled through the party’s commercial arm.

The Nationalist Party, on the other hand, counter-claimed that a payment for €70,800 was made but that this was as payment for services “actually” rendered by its commercial arm, Media Link Communications, to two of the companies forming part of DB group, Silvio Debono’s group of companies. However,  at one point the Nationalist Party also declared that it will reimburse the “tainted money” because it will not be compromised.  The Nationalist Party has to chose between its contradictory reactions: is the €70,800 received from Silvio Debono tainted or is it a payment for services?

Silvio Debono claims that he has the fake invoices and the receipts for the amount paid through which he can substantiate his claims. He further stated that no services were rendered to his companies by Media Link Communications.

This allegation strikes a direct hit at transparency and accountability, the very foundation of the legislation regulating political party financing. The claim by Silvio Debono effectively means that donations of substantial sums of money to political parties can possibly continue unchecked, as long as they are properly disguised and provided that those with a finger in the pie keep their mouth shut. If this allegation is proven, it would signify that the regulatory checks and balances serve no purpose, because the commercial arms of the major political parties will be the proven perfect vehicle to circumvent all due process.

Notwithstanding the fact that the Electoral Commission has the authority to investigate such an allegation, it would normally be very difficult to prove. No political party will ever confirm that it makes use of its commercial arm to circumvent rules and regulations. In fact, earlier this week the Nationalist Party Treasurer stated on PBS that as the person responsible for the party’s finances, he is not aware of the matter. In fact he said that he has never even met Silvio Debono.

Such an allegation can only be proven when the co-conspirator speaks up, as is happening in this particular case, even though, at the time of writing the alleged fake invoices have not been made available for public scrutiny. In actual fact, Silvio Debono is stating that he is aware that he flouted the law as he (or his companies, with his approval) knowingly accepted to settle fake invoices. In so doing, Debono is claiming that he knowingly carried out an exercise through which he gave the Nationalist Party an illegal donation.

The Labour Party has asked the Electoral Commission to investigate this specific allegation and take the necessary action.

I would go further than that. Is it not about time that political parties are forced to dismantle their commercial activities, which should be the state funding of political parties, subject to strict controls. At the end of the day, this may be the only way forward.

The fact that information on the fake invoices and illegal donations was volunteered by Silvio Debono himself in obvious retaliation to his being the target of PN criticism about his being in receipt of a prime site on the cheap adds to the seriousness of the case. Clearly, while Silvio Debono “invested in the PN”, he has not received the expected dividends. At the end of the day, the pressing question requiring a very urgent answer is to identify the number of additional similar investments by Debono himself, as well as by others. As long as such investments yield suitable dividends, we may possibly  never know the answer.

Published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 12 March 2017

 

Il-Partit Nazzjonalista għall-bejgħ? Tridtx tmur! U l-Labour?

 

Qalulna li l-PN mhux għall-bejgħ.

Imma fl-istess waqt li fil-pubbliku l-PN kien għaddej gas-down bi kritika qawwija kontra l-proġett ta’ Silvio Debono fuq is-sit presentement użata mill-Istitut għall-Istudji Turistiċi kienu qed jimpalaw ammonti sostanzjali ta’ euros mingħand Silvio Debono nnifsu.

Silvio Debono, b’Mario de Marco konsulent legali u Francis Zammit Dimech għal xi żmien direttur ta’ waħda mill-kumpaniji tiegħu xejn ma iddejjaq jagħti dawn id-donazzjonijiet, sal-bieraħ ……. meta talab flus lura.

U Simon Busuttil stagħġeb! Għax issa ċċartet il-maskra tal-ipokrezija.

Mhux ovvja li l-PN mhux għall-bejgħ? Jidher li ilu żmien li inbiegħ.

Imma dan kollu jfisser ukoll li jekk Silvio Debono kien lest li jagħti dawn id-donazzjonijiet kollha lill-PN waqt li dawn kienu għaddejjin jikkritikawh bil-qawwa kollha, min jaf kemm impala euros lill-Partit Laburista li fil-Gvern ftiehem miegħu.

€2,000 qalu li ħadu. Min jaf kemm il-zero oħra hemm wara dik iċ–ċifra!

Ovvja li t-tnejn li huma mhux għall-bejgħ. Ilhom żmien twil mibjugħa bl-irċevuta b’kollox!

Kemm jaħsbuna bċieċen!

 

Il-Palazz tal-Girgenti: bejn Gvern u Partit

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 m’huwiex 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 b’attenzjoni 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, f‘dan 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 f’sitwazzjoni 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 iż–żgħar imbagħad ikun tard wisq.

II-partit fil-Gvern jifforma l-Gvern imma hu separat u distint minnu f’kull ħin.

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

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

Joseph tweets a selfie from Girgenti

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