Fir-Repubblika tal-Banana

Meta l-mexxej Laburista Robert Abela indirizza lill-partitarji fil-Każin Laburista ta’ Birkirkara, nhar il-Ħadd li għadda, kellu raġun jilmenta li s-sentenzi f’kawżi kriminali, bosta drabi jidhru baxxi jew laxki. Xi drabi qed jingħata l-messaġġ li qiesu ma ġara xejn. Il-Prim Ministru għandu bosta postijiet iktar addattati fejn jista’ jwassal il-preokkupazzjoni tiegħu dwar il-ħtieġa ta’ politika iktar addattata dwar is-sentenzi li qed jingħataw mill-Qrati.

Seta ġibed l-attenzjoni tal-President tar-Repubblika biex il-materja tkun ikkunsidrata fil-Kummissjoni għall-Amministrazzjoni tal-Ġustizzja. Seta qajjem il-materja f’laqgħa formali mal-Prim Imħallef. Seta ukoll illeġisla biex inaqqas il-flessibilità li għandha l-Qorti meta tapplika l-pieni li hemm fil-liġi. Fil-fatt kellu għad-disposizzjoni tiegħu bosta għodda jew mezzi biex jasal għall-bidla mixtieqa. Imma li joqgħod ipeċlaq fil-każin laburista ta’ B’Kara bil-prietka ta’ nhar ta’ Ħadd mhux wieħed minnhom.

F’Birkirkara Robert Abela tkellem ukoll dwar il-kunflitt ta’ interess li Membri Parlamentari li jipprattikaw il-liġi kriminali huma esposti għalih. Matul in-nofstanhar ta’ filgħodu b’abbiltà, dawn l-avukati, jiddefendu lill-klijenti tagħhom u jippreżentaw sottomissjonijiet quddiem il-Qrati dwar pieni baxxi jew tnaqqis fil-pieni inkella dwar sentenzi sospiżi.  Imbagħad, waranofsinnhar, emfasizza Robert Abela, dawn l-istess Membri Parlamentari jiġu fil-Parliament jargumentaw b’qawwa fuq il-perikli ta’ żieda fil-kriminalità.

Dwar dan għandu raġun. Imma din il-linja ta’ ħsieb ma tapplikax biss għall-avukati li jipprattikaw il-liġi kriminali.  Tapplika ukoll għal avukati fiċ-ċivil u fil-liġi kummerċjali kif ukoll għal membri parlamentari fi professjonijiet oħra kif kellna l-opportunità li naraw bosta drabi tul is-snin! Din hi esperjenza li diġà għaddejna minnha matul is-snin.

Il-Membri Parlamentari għandhom jiddedikaw il-ħin kollu tagħhom għall-ħidma parlamentari. M’għandux ikun possibli li Membri Parlamentari jibqgħu jagħmlu kwalunkwe xogħol ieħor, kemm jekk dan ikun imħallas kif ukoll jekk le. Bħala partit dan aħna ilna ngħiduh is-snin, għax nemmnu li fil-prattika hu l-uniku mod kif tista’ tindirizza u tnaqqas b’mod effettiv il-kunflitt ta’ interess ovvju li jirriżulta illi Membru tal-Parlament hu espost għalih fis-sistema tagħna kif inhi illum.

Robert Abela qal iktar minn hekk. Irrefera għad-diskursata li kellu ma’ Maġistrat dwar is-sentenzi baxxi li ħerġin mill-Qrati Kriminali. Il-Maġistrat, qal Abela, iddefendiet ruħha billi emfasizzat li s-sentenzi mogħtija qed jitbaxxew mill-Qorti tal-Appell, li fid-dawl ta’ sentenzi oħra ġja mogħtija qed tnaqqas sentenzi li jkunu ngħataw mill-Maġistrati.

Robert Abela żbalja meta ikkomunika direttament mal-Maġistrat. Żbalja iktar meta tkellem dwar dan fil-pubbliku għax b’hekk bagħat messaġġ żbaljat u inkwetanti li l-Qrati qed jirċievu ordnijiet diretti mingħand l-eżekuttiv. Dan fi kliem sempliċi hu ta’ theddida għall-indipendenza tal-ġudikatura.  Bħala avukat, bla dubju, Robert Abela jirrealizza li qabeż il-linja ta’ dak li hu tollerabbli mill-politiku f’soċjetà demokratika.

F’pajjiż demokratiku fejn is-saltna tad-dritt hi realtà mhux ħrafa, Robert Abela kien jirreżenja fi ftit siegħat minn x’ħin pubblikament ammetta  li hu għamel pressjoni fuq il-Maġistrat. Il-Maġistrat li min-naħa tagħha kompliet miegħu fid-diskussjoni s’issa, kienet tkun ġiet identifikata u dixxiplinata.

Imma, kif tafu, minn dan kollu, ma ġara xejn.

Nhar it-Tnejn fi stqarrija għall-istampa, jiena tlabt lill-President tar-Repubblika biex isejjaħ laqgħa urġenti tal-Kummissjoni għall-Amministrazzjoni tal-Ġustizzja biex din tkun tista’ tieħu l-passi neċessarja dwar dak li ġara.

S’issa għad ma ġara xejn. Forsi l-President kien imsiefer, inkella kien imħabbat b’xi attività dwar il-larinġ li nsibu fil-ġonna Presidenzjali ta’ Sant Anton.

Issa forsi jmiss iċ-ċelebrazzjoni tal-ġimgħa tal-banana fl-aġenda Presidenzjali. Bla dubju din tieħu prijorità fuq l-indipendenza tal-ġudikatura fir-Repubblika tal-Banana!

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 4 ta’ Frar 2023

In a Banana Republic

When Labour Leader Robert Abela addressed the party faithful at the Birkirkara Labour Party Club last Sunday, he was right to complain that the sentencing policy currently applied by the judiciary may at times appear as being too lenient. However, as Prime Minister he had other fora through which to convey his preoccupation and to emphasise the need of an up-to-date sentencing policy.

He could have drawn the attention of the President of the Republic in order that he may refer the matter for the consideration of the Commission for the Administration of Justice. He could have legitimately brought up the matter in a formal meeting with the Chief Justice. He could also legislate in order to restrict the current flexibility which the Courts have when applying the law. In fact, he has at his disposal various tools to bring about the change he spoke about: pontificating at the Birkirkara Labour Party Club through a Sunday political sermon is not one of these tools.

At Birkirkara Robert Abela also spoke on the conflict of interest which Members of Parliament who are practising criminal lawyers are continuously exposed to. They ably defend their clients during the morning in Court pleading in favour of minimal sentencing, including the application of suspended sentences. Then, in the afternoon, emphasised Robert Abela, in Parliament, these same Members of Parliament vociferously argue on the dangers of an increasing criminality.

He is definitely right on that. But this line of reasoning does not only apply to criminal lawyers. It is also applicable to MPs who are civil and commercial lawyers as well as to other professionals in their specific area of practice. We have been exposed to this over the years in a number of cases. Is it not about time that parliament is made up of full-timers? No Member of Parliament should carry out any other work (paid or unpaid) except that resulting from his/her parliamentary duties. My party has been emphasising this for a considerable number of years. We believe that it is the only way to effectively address the obvious conflict of interest which abounds in Parliament.

Robert Abela said more. He referred to a tete-a-tete with a sitting Magistrate with whom he discussed the lenient sentencing which the Criminal Law Courts are applying. The Magistrate, said Abela, defensively replied that it is all the fault of the appeals court as they consider themselves bound by precedent when they revise the decisions delivered by the inferior courts, ending up in lighter sentences.

Robert Abela was wrong when he conveyed his views directly to one of the Magistrates currently sitting in judgement at the inferior Courts. Bragging about it in public makes it even worse as it conveys the wrong message that the judiciary is at the beck and call of the Executive. This, in plain language, threatens the independence of the judiciary. As a lawyer, Robert Abela is undoubtedly aware that he has gone far beyond the red line.

In any other democratic country where rule of law is fact, not fiction, Robert Abela would have resigned within a couple of hours after having publicly admitting pressuring a sitting Magistrate. Similarly, the Magistrate who allowed the discussion to proceed would by now have been identified and disciplined.

But, as you are aware, nothing has happened yet.

On Monday in a press statement, I have called on the President of the Republic to convene an urgent meeting of the Commission for the Administration of Justice to take the necessary and required action. So far there has been no reaction whatsoever. Possibly his Excellency the President is currently abroad, or, maybe he is extremely busy with some activity promoting the citrous products of the presidential kitchen garden at the San Anton Presidential Palace!

As things stand banana week would definitely be a future activity in the Presidential agenda: this takes priority over the independence of the judiciary, in this Banana Republic!

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 5 February 2023

Wara t-tkeċċija ta’ Mario: l-ikbar daqqa jħossuha t-tfal

Ma’ Mario tkellimt ftit minuti wara li ħarġet fil-pubbliku l-aħbar tat-tkeċċija. Kien trankwill bħal dejjem. Konvint li għamel kullma seta, l-obbligu tiegħu bħala edukatur.

Hu diffiċli nifhem kif l-Ordni Dumnikan wasal biex iddeċieda li jkeċċi lil Mario minn surmast ta’ St Albert. Mario għandu karattru ferm differenti milli qed jippruvaw ipinġuh. Miegħu dejjem tista’ tiddiskuti u problema qatt ma naf li ħarab minnha: jipprova jsolviha jew jagħti kontribut biex tissolva. Id-diskussjoni taħraq qatt ma ħarab minnha, iżda dejjem kien hemm, preżenti b’argumenti sodi u b’konvinżjoni f’dak li jemmen u jagħmel.

Ma’ Mario ħdimt mill-qrib, issa għal bosta snin fil-partit. Għalih l-iskola kienet ħajtu. Iddedika l-ħin tiegħu kollu għall-iskola. Bosta drabi anke is-Sibt u l-Ħadd kien jibqa’ għaddej bil-ħidma tal-iskola, favur it-tfal. Għax xogħolu ta’ edukatur mhux wieħed limitat minn x’ħin jiftaħ il-bieb tal-iskola sa ma jagħlqu.

Id-dedikazzjoni tiegħu għall-iskola kienet totali: għas-servizz tat-tfal flimkien ma’ sħabu l-għalliema.

Id-daqqa kiefra tal-Ordni Dumnikan bla dubju Mario jħossha. Imma fl-aħħar jirkupra minnha. Mhux l-istess it-tfal. Dawn id-daqqa jibqgħu jħossuha fit-tul. Possibli li ser tagħmel differenza kbira f’ħajjithom!

L-ikbar ħsara li d-Dumnikani għamlu hi lit-tfal. Għalhekk jeħtieġ soluzzjoni malajr. Forsi ma tafx kif, il-medjazzjoni tal-Arċsqof tagħti l-frott. Forsi.

Jistaqsuni: meta ser twarrab?

Il-kritika tal-ħidma tal-ADPD minn xi ġurnalisti xejn ma iddejjaqni, anke meta din ma tkunx ġustifikata, anke meta min jagħmilha jkun għamel ix-xhur jinjorana. Il-kritika, anke meta tkun distruttiva, hi dejjem ta’ għajnuna biex tifhem x’inhu għaddej minn moħħ dak jew dik li tagħmilha. Biex tidentifika u tifhem aġenda moħbija.

Iktar kmieni matul il-ġimgħa kkummentajt fuq dan il-blog li jkun għaqli u fl-interess tal-partit, jekk jiena ma nibqax fit-tmexxija. Hu dejjem tajjeb li jkun hemm uċuħ ġodda, idejn ġodda u ideat ġodda.

Però hu tajjeb li nifhmu li b’uċuħ ġodda mhux bil-fors li nimxu l-quddiem.

Kemm ilni nmexxi l-partit dejjem fittixt li nagħti spazju liż-żgħar u lill-ġodda biex ikunu jistgħu jaħdmu. Mhux biss biex joħorġu b’ideat imma biex ikun possibli li l-ideat tagħhom jirriflettu ruħhom fil-politika tal-partit: kemm f’dak li ngħidu kif ukoll fil-mod kif inġibu ruħna.

Nifhem li hemm min il-kampanja tagħna ma għoġbitux. Hemm min xtaqna b’politika ta’ konfront, imma aħna għażilna politika tar-raġuni li tħalli l-appell għall-emozzjoni fil-ġemb. Dan deher ċar fil-ftit opportunitajiet li ngħatajna f’dibattiti mal-partiti l-oħra. Dak tal-Università hu forsi l-aħjar eżempju li s-sehem tiegħi fih kien appreżżat mill-ġurnalisti ewlenin. Hemm min ma qabilx miegħi: din xi ħaġa naturali. Però l-fatt li meta kont qed nitkellem jien waqa’ skiet perfett uriena li z-żgħażagħ presenti riedu jisimgħu. Kellhom għatx għal informazzjoni u argumenti li normalment ma jisimgħux. Dan ukoll hu kontribut importanti u pożittiv li tajna lill-kampanja elettorali!

Ir-riżultat tal-elezzjoni li bih kważi irduppjajna l-voti li ksibna fl-elezzjoni tal-2017 ifisser li xi ħaġa tajba għamilna, għax kieku dan ma kienx minnu l-voti kienu jonqsu u mhux jiżdiedu.

Bla dubju l-ħidma tagħna hemm ħafna x’jista’ jitjieb fiha.  Dan jiddependi minn diversi affarijiet.

Bosta minn dawk li jaqblu mal-partit u jappoġġawh, anke fil-pubbliku, huma mpenjati f’elf ħaġa: m’għandhomx ċans għall-attiviżmu politiku. Aħna m’għandniex każini, u l-anqas hemm il-ħsieb li jkollna! L-anqas uffiċċju ma’ għandna: fil-fatt meta jkun hemm il-bżonn nislef l-uffiċċju tiegħi għall-laqgħat tal-partit!

Fondi m’għandniex wisq: fil-kampanja infaqna madwar €7,000 u bħalissa għaddejjin b’kampanja biex niġbru l-fondi għax ftit li xejn baqa’!

Dan kollu jillimita l-mod dwar kif nistgħu nwasslu l-messaġġ tagħna. Imma rnexxielna nwassluh, avolja b’diffikultà.

Uħud qed jagħtuni l-pariri dwar x’għandi nagħmel. Anke qed jgħidu li jiena ser nirreżenja meta jiena ma għidt xejn minn dan. Jiena konvint li għandi nagħmel il-wisa’ lil ħaddieħor. Però jkun żball kbir jekk nagħmel kif qed jippretendu uħud li nwarrab immedjatament! Inkun irresponsabbli jekk nagħmel hekk.

Hi responsabbiltà tiegħi li nara l-partit jiffunzjona f’kull ħin. Dan ser nibqa’ nagħmlu sal-aħħar minuta meta ngħaddi t-tmexxija lil ta’ warajja. Dan ser iseħħ imma l-waqt li jseħħ nagħżlu flimkien ma sħabi, biex il-partit, sadanittant, ikompli jissaħħaħ!

The resignation of David Thake

The resignation of David Thake is a positive step.  It takes courage to admit to having acted incorrectly and shoulder the political responsibility for your actions. There are others who should follow in his footsteps. Parliament, as a result would be a much better place.

The fact that the tax misdemeanours of the companies owned by David Thake were revealed through media leaks does not make the case any less serious. It however adds another worrying dimension to the saga: institutional breach of ethics, this time by the tax authorities. The Minister for Finance Clyde Caruana is politically responsible for this. He has to act fast to address the matter.

Registered editors already have a right to request income tax returns of sitting MPs. This right should be extended to VAT returns, not only those submitted personally by sitting MPs but also by companies in which they have a controlling interest. This would do away with selective leaking of damaging tax information which generally targets those who those close to government seek to damage or destroy!

It has been established that the two companies owned by David Thake, namely Vanilla Telecoms Limited and Maltashopper Limited have collected Value Added Tax due on their services and retained the tax collected for a long period of time. His companies, stated David Thake, had a problem with their cash flow and thus they were not in a position to pay up the taxes they had collected.

Vanilla Telecoms Limited owes the exchequer €270,000 while Maltashopper Limited owes another €550,000. This is a substantial sum which has been collected from taxpayers through VAT and includes fines and interest due for non-payment.

There are serious doubts as to whether Thake’s claim that he was simply applying the Covid-19 tax deferral scheme is correct.

Given that most of the pending VAT dues of Thake’s companies date back to substantially before the outbreak of Covid-19 Thake has yet to explain as to why it took him so much time to address the cash flow problems of his companies. He has shed too many crocodile tears in emphasising that faced with cash flow problems he opted to pay his employees rather than the VAT office. His delay in acting to address his cash flow problems has the specific consequence of endangering the livelihood of the very employees, which he is so keen to protect!

It is not correct to describe David Thake as a tax evader. It is unfair to compare him to Bernard Grech, his party leader, who was investigated for tax evasion over the years and opted to pay up on the eve of the PN leadership contest.

In view of the fact that Thake’s companies have yet to submit their accounts it is not yet clear as to the actual cause of his cashflow problems.

The point at issue is whether it is right for David Thake to bankroll his companies through the taxes they have collected as economic operators. The fact that there are others who do likewise, and maybe worse, is no consolation!  He was a member of parliament elected on a good governance platform. The mismatch between his behaviour and his stated beliefs cannot be clearer than this.  This is no minor administrative omission as David Thake emphasised when he announced his resignation.

Its fine to preach good governance. Putting this into practice is a completely different matter. Thake’s resignation, even though he took some time to decide that he should resign, puts some sense back into local politics. Thake’s resignation is a positive contribution to improve standards. Ian Castaldi Paris and Rosianne Cutajar should be next.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 16 January 2022

The golden handshakes must be transparent

It has been reported, in various sections of the press, that Justyne Caruana, former Minister of Education, has received, or will be shortly receiving payment in the region of €30,000 as a result of her ceasing to hold political office. This has occurred after she was forced to resign subsequent to the publication of a damning report from the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life which report concluded that the Ministry of Education, under her political direction, had screwed the exchequer to benefit her “close friend”.

Since 2008 holders of political office who cease to occupy such office have received golden handshakes, substantial sums which some describe as severance pay. The sums disbursed to date are substantial and, over the years, are said to be close to a total of €1,500,000. Holders of political office in receipt of such payments are not just members of Cabinet, as payments have also been made to former Leaders of the Opposition throughout these years.

The applicable criteria are largely unknown. There is no transparency whatsoever in the process.

There is a serious issue of governance.  The Executive is bound to be accountable through ensuring that both the criteria applied as well as the monies disbursed are well known. It is an expenditure from the public purse, so there should be no secrets about it. It is in the public interest to know how the public purse is being managed at all times.

First: the objectives of the payments should be crystal clear. When holders of political office take up their post, generally, they take leave from their current employment or close their private offices if they are professionals. Their job prior to assuming political office may be lost by the time they relinquish office. On the other hand, losing contact with their professional environment will generally place them in a difficult position to reintegrate when their term of political responsibilities draws to an end. 

Hence the objective of these so-called golden handshakes is to compensate for the fact that the holder of political office cannot go back to his/her former job or professional environment. He or she will generally have to start from scratch or almost. Not all cases are identical and hence the criteria drawn up should allow for some leeway. Do they? We do not know as to date these criteria are considered as some state secret!

The objective of the payments made is to ease the transition of the holder of political office back to a normal life.

The second point is to establish who should apply these criteria. From what is known through reports in the media the matter is regulated by the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM), either directly or through the Cabinet office. This is not on.

Ideally the criteria should be applied by an authoritative person or body separate and distinct from the OPM. The OPM has a finger in the pie, generally, in all the circumstances leading to the appointment to political office or to the dismissal therefrom. It should therefore not be in a position of sugaring resignations with promises of generous hand-outs.

The third point is then to establish the quantum payable.

From what is known, locally, this is established at a month’s salary for every year’s service, subject to a minimum payment of a six-month salary. It is not known whether eligibility is pegged to a minimum period in office.  These payment rates are substantial when compared to those in other jurisdictions. In addition to having smaller payments other jurisdictions subject such benefits to a minimum period in office, generally of not less than one year.

There are also a number of other serious considerations which need to be made. Should loss of political office as a result of an unfavourable election result have the same impact as being dismissed from office or being forced to resign as a result of unethical or unacceptable behaviour?

Specifically, should ending your political appointment in disgrace be rewarded? It should definitely not be so.

These are some of the issues which transparency brings to the fore. We need to discuss them seriously and only then can they be applied ethically and fairly.

It is for these reasons that earlier this week I have requested the Auditor General to investigate the golden handshakes being paid out by the Office of the Prime Minister to former members of the Cabinet. The payments made and the criteria applied should be examined meticulously.

Good governance should be our basic guide.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 9 January 2022

Wara r-riżenja ta’ Justyne

Issa Justyne irriżenjat għat-tieni darba mill-Kabinett ta’ Robert Abela. Il-Kabinett ta’ Abela, l-ikbar wieħed fl-istorja, naqas bi tnejn, Justyne u Rosianne.

Meta irriżenjat Rosianne ma kien daħal ħadd ġdid fil-Kabinett.

Kif diġa għidt, il-każ ta’ Justyne għadu miftuħ, mhux biss għax il-Kumitat Permanenti tal-Parlament dwar l-Istandards fil-Ħajja Pubblika għad irid jiddiskuti r-rapport (m’għandux għaġġla) imma ukoll għax hemm riżenji oħra li jeħtieġ li jsiru.

Frank Fabri u Paul Debattista huma mistennija li jwarrbu ma jdumux. Tal-ewwel għax iffirma l-kuntratt abbużiv u illegali u tat-tieni għax kien hu li iffaċilita dan il-qerq kollu billi kiteb ir-rapport li għal xi żmien kien qed jingħad li taparsi kitbu Daniel Bogdanovic u b’hekk ikun jista’ jsir il-ħlas ta’ ħmistax-il elf euro.

Minn kif tkellem Robert Abela jidher li m’għandux għaġġla biex jaħtar Ministru flok Justyne. Dan isaħħaħ ix-xniegħa, li issa ilha ftit ġranet għaddejja, li mhux biss ġejja reshuffle tal-Kabinett dalwaqt, imma li hu ippjanat ukoll li jinbidlu diversi f’karigi mlaħħqin.

Ma ninsewx ukoll li f’Jannar, xahar ieħor, għandu jibda jinstema l-ġuri dwar il-hold-up li falla fuq l-HSBC. Intqal diġa li f’dan il-ġuri jistgħu jsiru rivelazzjonijiet dwar membru ieħor tal-Kabinett ta’ Robert Abela. Din tista’ twassal għal riżenja oħra!

Nistennew u naraw.

Il-Milied it-Tajjeb

Wara Justyne: nistennew issa r-riżenja ta’ Frank Fabri

Ir-riżenja ta’ Justyne kienet inevitabbli.

Setgħet iddum ftit ieħor taħsibha, imma kienet fir-rokna, ma kelliex minn fejn toħroġ.

Din hi t-tieni riżenja bħala riżultat tar-rapporti tal-Kummissarju għall-Istandards fil-Ħajja Pubblika. L-oħra kienet Rosianne Cutajar!

Li tirriżenja darbtejn mill-Kabinett fi 23 xahar, kif għamlet Justyne, naħseb li hu record. Juri li l-ġudizzju ta’ Robert Abela li jagħtiha ċans ieħor kien wieħed żbaljat għall-aħħar.

Ir-riżenja ta’ Justyne mhiex il-konklużjoni. Għad hemm iktar : ir-riżenja ta’ Frank Fabri, Segretarju Permanenti li approva l-kuntratt ta’ sieħeb Justyne, Daniel Bogdanovic, issa hu iktar meħtieġa minn qatt qabel.

Fil-ġlieda għall-governanza tajba, fil-ġlieda kontra l-abbuż u l-korruzzjoni, iċ-ċivil għandu rwol importanti. Is-segretarji permanenti għandhom sehem kruċjali f’din il-ġlieda. Min minnhom jonqos li jaghti sehem mhemmx post għalih. Min jiffaċilita l-ħmieġ għandu jitwarrab minnu fih

Il-kuxjenza ta’ George Vella

Intqal ħafna dwar George Vella, l-President tar-Repubblika, u l-kuxjenza tiegħu, u dan wara ir-rapport tal-inkjesta dwar ir-rwol tal-istat Malti u ċ-ċirkustanzi li wasslu għall-assassinju ta’ Daphne Caruana Galizia.

Mhux ser nagħti kaz ta’ dak li qalu ipokriti bħal Jason Azzopardi li dwaru diġa ktibt diversi drabi (ara per eżempju dan : A Christmas Carol for Jason Azzopardi) li għandu ħafna kontijiet pendenti mal-kuxjenza tiegħu. L-ebda żjara fuq il-qabar ta’ Kristu m’hi ser tħassar dawn il-pendenzi!

George Vella kien jifforma parti mill-Kabinett ta’ Joseph Muscat. Qatt ma esprima ruħu fil-pubbliku kontra dak li kien qed jiġri. Nafu minn dak li ntqal fil-media li fil-Grupp Parlamentari Laburista, anke meta kien jifforma parti minnu George Vella, kien hemm diskussjoni mqanqla dwar dak li kien għaddej. Kien hemm numru żgħir ta’ Membri Parlamentari li kienu kritiċi ta’ dak li kien għaddej, fosthom jingħad li kien hemm George Vella.  Dwar dan jiena diġa ktibt 5 snin ilu fil-kuntest tad-dibattitu dwar il-Panama Papers.

Kont għidt hekk nhar it- 3 ta’ Mejju 2016 :

“Il-grupp parlamentari laburista m’huwiex kuntent bis-sitwazzjoni. Huwa konxju li s-skiet tal-Partit Laburista quddiem it-taħwid tal-Gvernijiet tas-snin 70 u 80 kienet raġuni ewlenija li kkundannat lill-partit għal 25 sena fl-Opposizzjoni. Illum jirrealizzzaw li hu kmieni wisq, wara biss tlett snin, biex il-partit laburista jsib ruħu f’dan it-taħwid kollu. Il-ftit li għamel Joseph dwar il-kaz (anke jekk kosmetiku) għamlu biex jipprova jissodisfa lill-grupp parlamentari tiegħu. Imma xorta ħadd ma hu sodisfatt. Dan kien jidher anke nhar il-Ħadd mill-body language ta’ Joseph x’ħin kien qed jindirizza l-folla fuq Kastilja.

Iċ-ċavetta qegħda f’idejn il-grupp parlamentari laburista biex dan iwassal lill-partit forsi jiġi f’sensieh. Is-soċjetà ċivili ukoll għandha responsabbiltà kbira li tibqa’ ssemma’ leħinha biex tkompli tagħmel il-kuraġġ lil dawk li fil-Partit Laburista qed jinsistu li Konrad (u Keith) għandhom jirriżenjaw. L-intellettwali tal-pajjiż hemm bżonn ukoll li joħorġu mill-friża u jiftħu ħalqhom flok ma jillimitaw ruħhom għat-tfesfis fil-widnejn.“

George Vella kien wieħed minn dawk li ppruvaw jikkoreġu l-affarijiet minn ġewwa u ma rnexxielhomx! Għax is-saħħa tagħhom kienet limitata.

L-opinjoni li jiena għandi, u dejjem kelli, dwar George Vella, hi ta’ persuna serja. Nistqarr li xelliftha ftit din il-fehma meta George Vella kien wieħed minn tal-ewwel li appoġġa lil Joseph Muscat meta dan ippreżenta ruħu fl-elezzjoni għal mexxej tal-Partit Laburista (kontra George Abela, Marie Louise Coleiro, Michael Falzon u Evarist Bartolo). Sfortunatament minn kmieni ħafna beda jidher li Joseph Muscat kien bniedem amorali: il-boxxla tiegħu mhiex dak li hu sewwa. Ma jinteressahx dak li hu tajjeb jew ħażin, iżda biss dak li hu popolari.

George Vella iżda mhux amorali, u għalhekk li għandu jirrfiletti iktar fuq ir-responsabbiltajiet politiċi tiegħu tul il-perjodu li dam jokkupa post fil-Kabinett ta’ Joseph Muscat.

Joseph Muscat li hu amorali warrab, kif qal hu stess biex jerfa’ r-responsabbiltà politika ta’ dak li kien għaddej.

Huwa obbligu ta’ George Vella, anke f’isem il-Laburisti ta’ integrità, li bħalhom hemm bosta, li hu ukoll jaċċetta r-responsabbiltà politika għal dak li ġara: irid jew ma jridx is-sehem tiegħu qiegħed hemm, ħadd u xejn m’hu ser iħassru!

Carmelo Abela u s-serqa tal-HSBC

Hu diffiċli biex nemmen li Carmelo Abela kien involut jew b’xi mod assoċjat mal-attentat tas-serqa tal-HSBC Ħal-Qormi.

Il-fatt li hu avversarju politiku ma jagħmlux kriminal.

Il-fatt li ma naqblux fuq diversi aspetti tal-politika ma jiġġustifikax dak li qed jingħad dwaru.

Dan ma jnaqqas xejn mill-gravità tal-allegazzjoni ta’ Ċensu Muscat, il-Koħħu, li għandha tibqa’ tkun investigata bir-reqqa.

Jibqa’ mistoqsija waħda, għalissa. Carmelo Abela għandu jirriżenja jew le minħabba din l-allegazzjoni? Riżenja, f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi tfisser azzjoni biex tnaqqas il-ħsara li din l-allegazzjoni qed tagħmel lis-sistema politika. Mhux ħsara lill-Labour jew lill-PN imma lill-pajjiż kollu.

Li tirriżenja f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi mhux dikjarazzjoni ta’ ħtija, iżda dikjarazzjoni ta’ irġulija. Ma saritx, u probabbilment ma issirx minħabba li fil-politika Maltija ma hawnx serjetà. Kieku kella issir malajr jibda jingħad (bla ġustifikazzjoni): qed tara kif għandu x’jaqsam.

Il-klima politika f’dan il-pajjiż, sfortunatament, ma tħallix lil Carmelo Abela jaqbad it-triq tal-irġulija. Li beda l-passi legali kontra l-kummenti dijaboliċi ta’ Jason Azzopardi kien about time. Imma dak biss mhux biżżejjed.