Presidential theatrics and arm-twisting

(photo: presenting to President George Vella proposals for the consideration of the Constitutional Convention : 5 November 2019)

The role of the President in the governance of this Republic, on paper, is just an issue of formality. In practice, however, it can be much more than that.

Undoubtedly Myriam Spiteri Debono will be a different President from her predecessors. Spiteri Debono has a distinct advantage over all of her predecessors: she has no political baggage because she has not held any executive political office to date. Only Sir Anthony Mamo, the first President, had the same advantage!

In her inaugural speech as President, Myriam Spiteri Debono made many an important political point. Fundamentally she emphasized that she will not seek to influence the political debate (a difficult pledge which, however, she did not strictly follow herself). Although she did not name him, this was a clear dig at her predecessor, who, in addition to lobbying the executive intensively in favour of his contrasting political views, unashamedly interfered in the public debate on proposals relative to the IVF legislative changes as well as on Bill 28 which sought to clarify the abortion provisions of the Criminal Code.

His Excellency George Vella would have been taken to task in any self-respecting Parliament. A motion for his removal, because of his behavior, would have been submitted for Parliament’s consideration.  Almost two years ago, given the President’s behaviour in office, I had written in these columns that there are “valid reasons to consider the impeachment of Dr. George Vella from his Presidential duties.” (TMIS: The Presidential rubberstamp: 31 July 2022)

Any person who allows his personal views to conflict with his or her Constitutional duties is, in my view, not fit for office.

Parliament, unfortunately, was not irked by George Vella’s arm-twisting of the executive. It was not bothered, as it thanked Vella for his services! Not one of the Members of Parliament stood up to remind one and all that when the holder of the office of the President interferes in the political debate, he/she is performing a grave disservice to the Republic.

One only hopes that there is no repetition of this interference in parliament’s work.

Parliament needs to reinforce the office of the President. In particular, for example, the Constitution needs some clarity as to how the President can defend the Constitution when he/she does not have the appropriate legal tools available. 

Let me clarify: It is essential to consider in some depth the role of the President of the Republic. Specifically, we should consider whether the President should continue to be just a rubberstamp or whether he or she should have limited review powers over Parliament’s legislative function.

ADPD- The Green Party, in submissions to the still pending Constitutional Convention, focused on this specific matter, among other issues. In the document submitted to the Convention, my party proposed that the President should be able to send legislation back to Parliament for its reconsideration, if, in his/her view such legislation runs counter to the provisions of the Constitution.

The President, on assuming office, declares that he/she will do all it takes to defend the Constitution. He/she is not however equipped with any (constitutional) tools with which to carry out this responsibility.

The Green proposal presented more than four years ago for the consideration of the Constitutional Convention identifies an essential tool with which His Excellency the President can act responsibly within the parameters of the law. We further proposed that should Parliament refuse to budge, the President should refer the matter to the Constitutional Court for a final decision. 

This is how the Presidency should function. Much better than when it was subject to the George Vella theatrics, lobbying, and arm-twisting of the executive.

published in Malta Independent on Sunday : 14 April 2024

The courage to change

Good governance is central to the proper nurturing of this 50-year-old Republic. Good governance is founded on transparency and accountability. Secrecy and the withholding of information from the public domain, in contrast, generate bad governance.

Transparency is a basic characteristic of good governance whereas secrecy is the distinguishing mark of bad governance. This inevitably leads to the shielding of unethical behaviour, as well as the propagation of a culture of greed and corruption.

Transparency and accountability are inseparable twins. Accountability is, in fact, non-existent or severely diluted in the absence of transparency.

Good governance is much more than a concept. It is the essential foundation for any democratic Republic.  In the absence of good governance, greed flourishes, and national institutions are slowly transformed into personal fiefdoms. Corruption and rampant clientelism are the inevitable results of a lack of good governance.

In her inaugural speech on Thursday, President of the Republic Myriam Spiteri Debono spoke of the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Daphne’s assassination was described by Her Excellency as a wound that, as a nation, we must heal the soonest.

Daphne Caruana Galizia was actively involved in journalism, investigating corruption. Notwithstanding the continuous vitriol she faced, Daphne identified many a scandal associated with the governance model championed by the Labour Party in government.

This, in reality, is the wound to be healed. We need to finalise that begun by Daphne by ensuring, as a nation, that the corrupt face the music the soonest. Then the festering wounds of corruption, made worse as a result of a culture of impunity, will start the healing process. The rule of law must prevail without any exception.

The assassination of Daphne is also a heavy blow against good governance.  The public inquiry into the circumstances that led to Daphne’s assassination concluded with identifying the Maltese state as being ultimately responsible for all that happened.

A culture of greed has been reinforced with a culture of impunity.

The change necessary to heal this wound requires considerable courage and goodwill. I am not at present convinced that the political leadership currently in government is acting in good faith. It is a leadership under siege, continuously defending those who have driven this country to the dogs.

Land use planning and our environment are regulated by greed. Agricultural land is slowly disappearing as a result of the planning policies of the PN in government way back in 2006 through the so-called rationalisation exercise. The Labour Party opposed these plans when in Opposition but it is currently in the process of milking them dry to ensure that the greedy are fully satisfied.  Some have already licked their lips! Others are awaiting their turn.

It takes courage to act against greed, when both Parliamentary parties are fully committed to entrenching it as a way of life. They ensure the quality of life of the greedy, but in the process are ruining that of all the rest of us: both the present as well as the future generations.

The current set-up of our Parliament is part of the problem. It is no wonder, that, in this scenario, we are lumped with an electoral system that ensures that the voice of change is silenced by making it as difficult as possible for it to be heard.

Change is hindered as the national institutions are rigged against those who dare to speak up for the representation of a variety of minority views in the country.

As a result of this lack of political goodwill, ADPD-The Green Party is currently in Court contesting the discriminatory nature of this rigged electoral system. It is a constitutional court case that is hopefully approaching its conclusion.

At ADPD-The Green Party, we have long been speaking about the urgent need for electoral reform, focused on the need to ensure that every vote is valued. Until such time, no change can ensure that everybody is on board. One person, one vote, one value.

It takes courage (and political goodwill) to change.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 7 April 2024

The President of the Republic: a flicker of hope

The term of office of current President of the Republic George Vella will expire in the first days of April. His successor, the new President, will, for the first time require the consent of a two-thirds majority of the House of Representatives in order to be elected. This, in practice, means that both Government and Opposition must be in agreement for such an appointment to be approved.

Talks between government and opposition are known to have commenced. They are confidential in nature and as such little is known as to how they have proceeded to date. All that is known is that the Opposition Parliamentary group has drawn a significant red line: it will not support any candidate for the Presidency of the Republic if such candidate was a member of the Cabinet of Ministers led by Joseph Muscat and censored by the public inquiry into the circumstances leading to the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

The red line drawn by the Opposition is significant. It is not known how government ranks have reacted to it, as, so far, no public statement has been made on the manner in which the talks between the Labour led government and the PN Opposition are progressing. 

The veil of confidentiality is reasonable, but at some point, it must and will inevitably be lifted in order to enable the public debate on the Presidency to proceed.

At the time of writing Prime Minister Robert Abela is being quoted as emphasizing that he is “hopeful” that an agreement will be arrived at, even at this late hour. It is being stated that ongoing talks are constructive, this giving rise to a possibly positive outcome by the early April deadline. The first indication of the name of a possible agreed nominee is also available at the time of writing.

The two-thirds hurdle which must be overcome in order to elect a President of the Republic, once every five years, has a specific aim: that of ensuring that the selected person has as wide an acceptance as possible. He or she must be able to bridge the political divide. This must be done on a continuous basis.

There have been a countless number of instances in the past when the political parties in Parliament have succeeded in overcoming partisan squabbling and reached agreement on many a sensitive matter. Including the appointment of a Head of State. Then it was good politics to do so. Now it is also a must!

The art of compromise is good politics which, unfortunately, is not sufficiently mastered by many in the political world. It does not mean giving up any of your views, values or beliefs. It rather signifies that you also see the good in what others do and factor it in what you do or say. It is a point that is often sadly missed in this polarized society which we call home!

I still fail to understand why, for example, the Opposition in Parliament failed to accept former Chief Justice Joseph Azzopardi as Commissioner for Standards in Public Life. I had then stated that the Opposition had the right to block the proposed appointment, but it also had the duty to give reasonable explanations for doing so. It failed to give reasonable explanations, because none, in my view, existed. Playing party politics with our institutions is not on.

The rest is now history, except, that, in my opinion, Joseph Azzopardi has proven himself to be a good choice as Commissioner for Standards in Public Life. Both PN and Labour, unfortunately, acted irrationally in this matter. The PN was intransigent while Labour over-reacted.

It is appropriate that both Government and Opposition learn lessons from their past mistakes. It is in the interest of the country that they do this the soonest possible.

The fact that talks are proceeding constructively, maybe, is an indicator that, possibly, there is still some flickering hope for this country. We can only wait and hold our breath: possibly for not too long!

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 24 March 2024

Does the building construction industry care?

We had another serious accident in the building construction industry this week at Gżira. The retained  façade of a number of buildings currently in the process of being redeveloped into a hotel, collapsed into the street: Belvedere Street in Gżira.

These accidents don’t just happen. They are inevitably the result of someone’s error, big or small.

Without waiting for the building construction industry reform, currently in hand, there are already enough rules and institutions in place, which, had they functioned properly, could possibly have avoided this accident altogether.

Fortunately, no one was physically injured: no one however has any merit in this. It is just pure luck that a pedestrian in Belvedere Street Gżira, just avoided being hit by the flying stonework, as was reported in some sections of the media.

The building operations in hand were subject to two development permits: PA 01866/20 and PA 08659/21. The site has an area of 384 square metres.

The media has informed us as to the name of the architect and the developer entrusted with this project. There are however other actors who should be spotlighted. The documentation available on the Planning Authority website indicates the names of a site technical officer, a project supervisor as well as a site manager who were appointed in line with the requirements of legislation currently in force. This is the supervisory team which was ultimately responsible for managing the site at Belvedere Street in Gżira. They had to ensure that the method statement drawn up by the architect responsible for the project was followed.

It would thus be interesting to know how the works carried out on this site at Gżira were actually supervised. The Magisterial inquiry will possibly shed some light on the matter.

Perusal of the demolition method statements in the files of the two development permits indicate the various planned precautions to avoid accidents. The crux of the whole issue is now to establish whether the planned precautions were sufficient and equally important, if they were followed. The actual supervision carried out on site is crucial.

The Magisterial inquiry will undoubtedly examine all this to understand the site dynamics and possibly arrive at a clear conclusion as to what has exactly happened.

Too many accidents are taking place on building construction sites. At times sections of the building construction industry are conveying the message that the industry does not really care. This attitude is grossly unfair as many do in fact care. It is the minority which at times act haphazardly and cause accidents.

The present situation is, in my humble opinion, the inevitable result of having successive governments handling the building construction industry with kids’ gloves.  

The problem is also one of attitude right through the industry and the institutions which regulate and operate it. Does the building industry care?

The deaths of Miriam Pace (Santa Venera: March 2020) and Jean Paul Sofia (Kordin Industrial Estate: December 2022) were momentarily shocking. Unfortunately, however they were quickly forgotten, just as the earlier death of the 27-year-old Latvian construction worker Maksims Artamonovs (Mellieħa: March 2012) was forgotten too. Nothing seems to have changed in the operational attitudes of sections of the building construction industry as a result of these deaths or other cases of serious injury.

Do you remember the dumping on a pavement of a migrant worker injured on a building construction site in Mellieħa in 2021? Apparently, most have forgotten all about this incident too!

Do we care? A majority of spineless specimens of Members of Parliament was even coerced into declaring that there was no need for a public inquiry into the building construction industry, even though Prime Minister Robert Abela reversed this decision unceremoniously shortly afterwards when faced with a massive public protest. This resistance is indicative that deep down the state and its institutions are downright insensitive to the human suffering caused by the building construction industry.

Only time will tell whether there will be anything beyond the usual cosmetic changes. How many more lives must be sacrificed on the altar of building construction greed? At the end of the day, the building industry only cares about its turnover.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 11 February 2024

Lil hinn mit-tumuri u kliem iebes ieħor

Li tiddeskrivi persuna bħala tumur hi gravi. Tfisser li l-persuna hekk deskritta tqisha bħala s-sors ta’ inkwiet u aġitazzjoni.

Li Franco Debono għandu personalità ikkulurita hu fatt. Mhux waħdu fil-ħajja pubblika!

Kull min hu fil-ħajja pubblika hu suġġett għal kritika, kultant anke dik mhux flokha. Fid-dibattitu, imma, li għaddej, ma tistax tgħid biċċa mill-istorja u tieqaf hemm.

L-avukat Edward Debono fuq il-programm ta’ Andrew Azzopardi tas-Sibt filghodu fuq l-RTK fakkarna fuq meta Franco Debono, fil-Parlament ivvota kontra l-budget u riżultat ta’ hekk waqqa’ l-Gvern.

Kien ikun ħafna interessanti kieku l-avukat Edward Debono fakkarna ftit meta l-Gvern ta’ Lawrence Gonzi fittex lil Franco Debono bis-servizzi sigrieti ghax ma kienx il-Parlament biex jivvota. Forsi nesa, u biex jiftakar nissuggerilu jaqra hawn.

Jista’ forsi jiftakar meta fil-Parlament kienu ġew ippreżentati għad-diskussjoni żewġ mozzjonijiet dwar il-politika fil-qasam tal-ġustizzja u l-intern. Waħda kienet ippreżentata minn Franco Debono. Oħra kienet ippreżentata minn Michael Falzon u Jose Herrera għall-Partit Laburista.

Il-Gvern ta’Gonzi, injora l-mozzjoni ta’ Franco u ressaq għad-diskusjoni l-mozzjoni tal-Partit Laburista. (ara hawn xi ktibt dakinnhar)

Kien hemm differenza waħda bejn iż-żewġ mozzjonijiet: ta’ Franco kienet mozzjoni dwar politika tal-Gvern li kellha tkun aġġornata, tal-PL kienet tispiċċa b’dikjarazzjoni ta’ sfiduċja fil-Ministru.

Lawrence Gonzi dakinnhar għażel li jisfida r-raġuni u spiċċa jerfa’ l-konsegwenzi.

Habitual bypassing of procurement regulations in the public sector

Last Monday the Auditor General published the annual audit report on the Public Accounts for the financial year 2022. He did so, as is customary, after presenting the said report to Mr Speaker for the consideration of Parliament.

The audit report, which is over 300 pages long, contains around 250 recommendations for action meant to address the shortcomings which were identified in this year’s audit report.

The National Audit Office identified five key findings as a result of this year’s audit, namely: limited internal controls, insufficient enforcement of amounts due, a lack of an audit trail, weakness in the payroll system, and, most worrying of all, the “habitual” bypassing of procurement regulations in the public sector.

Various news items in the local media, reporting on the audit report, focused on the issue of the weakness in the tax collection system and the amounts of taxation due which are contested, have not been collected or have been written off. The matter is serious enough.

However most worrying of all is the issue of the “habitual” bypassing of procurement regulations by a number of public sector entities. This denotes the effort to bypass procurement rules, throughout the public sector, and seek corners away from the glaring spotlight of internal controls thereby avoiding proper governance. As a result of this bad practice, in addition to subjecting the public purse to unnecessary expenditure, this distorts competition and locks out various potential suppliers from participating and competing in a fair manner in line with procurement regulations.

This method of operation is unfortunately becoming a common practice in the public sector through the use of direct orders, when these are not necessary, and in particular by the splitting of contracts into a number of smaller contracts to facilitate this practice with ease.

Lack of adequate planning within the various entities is also the cause of non-observance of public sector procurement regulations. At times this lack of adequate planning is the result of administrative incompetence. At other times it is just planned that way and then used as an excuse to facilitate the renewal of contracts without going out to tender. It is also used to justify the use of the negotiated procedure as a result of which a public entity negotiates a contract for services or supplies required with one or two entities.

This is resorted to under “extraordinary circumstances” but the Auditor General chastised at least one department (AACC – The Active Aging and Community Care Department ) for repeatedly avoiding going out to tender and using a negotiating procedure instead.

The Auditor General lists the contracts for the relevant services entered into by the Active Aging and Community Care Department, through the negotiated procedure, namely Cleaning Services, Nursing Services, Meals for Homes, Clerical Services and Domiciliary Services!

The Ministry for Gozo, on the other hand was taken to task by the Auditor General for “habitually” splitting services of substantial value into several contracts in order to facilitate the issue of direct orders instead of issuing a public call for tenders. This is a fragmentation of purchase requirements and is an infringement of procurement regulations. It was authorized directly by the Permanent Secretary of the Gozitan Ministry!

At times one wonders what all those appointed in managerial grades in the public sector are doing. Specifically, one can query the role of Permanent Secretaries in managing and monitoring adequately the departments under their responsibility.

Permanent Secretaries are the top civil servants in the different ministries. Are they properly equipped to manage the Ministries for which they are responsible?

Enforcing accountability and ensuring good governance in the public sector, at the end of the day is the responsibility of each of the Permanent Secretaries in the different Ministries. Through this audit report, the Auditor General is once more drawing their attention as to what needs to be done in order to follow a road map away from bad governance, towards good governance.

An obvious unwritten conclusion of the audit report is that some of the Permanent Secretaries are definitely not fit for purpose. The fact that none have resigned or been fired since the publication of the audit report speaks volumes.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 24 December 2023

Love and tears: the theatrics of the speculative brigade

During the conference launching the KPMG annual review of the property market held last week, Michael Stivala, Malta Development Association Chairman, in a tear-jerking intervention, told us that the developers love us. Developers, he emphasised, need to treat third parties neighbouring their development as part of the family.

There is only one reply to these theatrics: we have had enough.  Much more than enough, in fact.

Redevelopment works in most of our towns and villages are, many a time, carried out without sufficient attention to the needs of and impacts on those living and working in the vicinity. At times it is seems as if they don’t even exist. They are considered by developers to be a nuisance.

ADPD-The Green Party has been at the forefront, over the years, in emphasising the need to apply a moratorium on large-scale development. It is welcome news that former Prime Minister and Labour Leader Alfred Sant is now singing from the same hymn book.

Too much damage has been done over the years through the continuous support of over-development by the state.

The rationalisation exercise approved by Parliament in 2006 had then added two million square metres of ODZ land to the development zone. A substantial portion of this land is now in the process of being developed and most localities are at the receiving end. To date ADPD-The Green Party is the only political party advocating the reversal of this exercise. We have been constantly harping this point since the day the rationalisation exercise was approved way back in July 2006.

To add insult to injury, the state does not fail to take up opportunities to join the speculative industry as is currently being done by Enemalta at il-Qajjenza, limits of Birżebbuġa. Earlier this week it has been reported in the media that Enemalta Corporation as well as the Lands Authority are supporting a planning control application by a private developer, which application is proposing the development of the site of the former gas-bottling plant. This site was decommissioned some years back when the LPG sector was privatised and the plant moved to another site at Bengħajsa.

This planning control application (PC 22/23) involves land having an area of slightly under 24,000 square metres and seeks to change the zoning of the site of the former Enemalta gas bottling depot to one of mixed residential and commercial development spread over six blocks. The proposed blocks vary in height from four to eight floors.

Do we need this? Isn’t enough damage already in hand? The question which begs a reply is the need to explain why Enemalta and the Lands Authority are joining the speculative brigade: bulldozing over the rights of the residential community. Enemalta has caused too much damage to the Birżebbuġa community over the years. Isn’t it time for some form of atonement?  Enemalta should commence planning for reparations, to make good the damage done over the years.

It would be of considerable interest to know the views, on the proposed Qajjenza development, of the three government MPs elected from the Birżebbuġa electoral district. These being Robert Abela, Prime Minister, Enemalta and Environment Minister Miriam Dalli and land use planning Minister Stefan Zrinzo-Azzopardi. It would not be in my view incorrect to assume that they support this application, as otherwise they would have stopped Enemalta from giving its consent.

It is no use that they now join Michael Stivala in shedding tears in sympathy with the Qajjenza residential community. It would have been more appropriate if the political appointees which they have nominated over the years took the appropriate decisions immediately.

Shedding tears is not a newly invented gimmick. Fortunately, most can see through such theatrics.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 12 November 2023

There are crooks everywhere you look

The decision of the Court of Appeal delivered last Monday has vindicated Daphne’s last words: “there are crooks everywhere you look”. The Court of Appeal decision on the hospitals’ case is shocking: it drives home the point that the institutions and authorities which exist to protect us were in fact in collusion with Vitals/Stewards in order to enter into simulated contracts “intended not to provide medical care but for other reasons”.

This is the worst possible certificate confirming that this country is led by crooks.  The Court of Appeal has now confirmed that the government led by Joseph Muscat has acted in collusion with Vitals/Stewards as a result defrauding the public purse.

The Court decision is a 99-page document replete with legal jargon which, however, at the end of the day boils down to one single word collusion. Government acted in collusion with those seeking to defraud us. Heads should roll!

The list of those found guilty of collusion includes the then Prime Minister, the Attorney General, and the office holders in charge at INDIS Limited (formerly Industrial Parks) and the Lands Authority.

Faced with such a decision how can anyone ever have faith in authorities and institutions?

Having the authorities in collusion with crooks is a negation of all that we have been taught to expect from the state and those running it.

A number of those responsible are no longer in public office. Others are however still around. One of them, Professor Edward Scicluna, who, as former Finance Minister had the responsibility for managing the public purse, is currently Governor of the Central Bank of Malta. He should have resigned from the post of Governor on Monday morning, minutes after the Court of Appeal decision was delivered. I fail to understand why the Opposition has not yet moved a motion in Parliament requesting his immediate removal.

Edward Scicluna is a complete disgrace. He will not resign as he hasn’t the flimsiest idea of what political responsibility is all about. Hence, he should be removed by Parliament.

Three years ago, when giving evidence at the public inquiry into Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination, Edward Scicluna had, through his own testimony, depicted himself as a spineless Minister of Finance, weak, soft and cowardly, incapable of acting decisively when faced with abuse.

Then he had stated “why should I resign if someone else did wrong?” He had further informed us that to enter local politics he had left his Brussels comfort zone.

By not acting appropriately and using his authority as Finance Minister Edward Scicluna is, after Joseph Muscat, the ultimate politically responsible for this daylight robbery. Instead of paying the political price he was however rewarded with being appointed Governor of the Central Bank. As Finance Minister he even managed to revise upwards the salary and perks of the Governor of the Central Bank, in anticipation of his appointment to the post!

Can we have confidence in a Central Bank Governor who has amply proved that he has no balls? He has time and time again proved that he is incapable of shouldering responsibility.

Scicluna is not alone. There are others which facilitated this daylight robbery. They too should shoulder the blame and resign or be removed. These include the Attorney General Victoria Buttigieg, the Permanent Secretary in Konrad Mizzi’s Ministry (Ronald Mizzi), and the ever-absent Police Commissioner Angelo Gafà. All of them have contributed to this mess which has resulted in Malta being ruled by crooks. There are crooks everywhere you look. They made it possible.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 29 October 2023

The developing scandal: beyond the obvious

On 20 December 2021 the media informed us that Labour MP Silvio Grixti was resigning his Parliamentary seat. The reason for his resignation was not clear. It was however understood to be connected to “fraudulent sick leave certificates” in respect of which he was interrogated by the Police and subsequently released on police bail.

No details were released twenty-one months ago. The media were most probably given false leads as a number of outlets compared the Silvio Grixti case to the probe on sickness certificates then under way on PN MP Stephen Spiteri.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that Silvio Grixti needed to shoulder total responsibility for whatever had happened, immediately. It was on the eve of a general election and the actual scandal details had to remain under wraps. Otherwise, it could develop out of control, and that was too risky on the eve of a general election. It would have defeated the whole purpose of the scam: the purchase of votes through the fraudulent use of social services.

The scandal, briefly explained, so far is known to involve around 800 persons who received a “severe disability pension”. The amounts involved vary and are in the region of €450 per month per person. To benefit, proof in the form of specialised medical certification has to be submitted.

In a highly organised manner, a number of Labour Party supporters who were declaring with their social contacts that they did not intend to vote during the 2022 general elections were approached by persons linked to the Labour Party. This Labour Party “customer care group” offered these voters the possibility of receiving a financial benefit in the form of a severe disability pension. A number took the bait and were supplied with forged medical certificates to submit to the Social Security authorities in order that they start receiving a monthly cheque.

Some queried how this was possible when they did not have the ailments which would entitle them to receive the pension. Last week Newsbook published an interview with one such person. She explained how on the eve of the general election she received a phone call from the customer care unit of the Office of the Prime Minister. The person calling, whom she identified, discussed with her the reasons for considering not voting. She then suggested that she apply for the severe disability pension. As she queried her eligibility, she even received emails from the OPM customer care officer with details of the application.

There are other similar stories linking persons close to the Labour Party to this social benefit scam. It is also being claimed that in some cases kickbacks were involved! The allegations are being made relative to middlemen and canvassers of some Minister currently in office!

This is a case of organised crime. The mastermind/s have kept their distance from those actively involved in order to try and avoid identification!

More details are being published as individual cases are being decided by the Courts. The misapplied social benefits are being refunded and suspended prison sentences are being applied. However only some 20 per cent of the identified cases have been concluded. Moreover, it is only the beneficiaries that have been arraigned to date. The middlemen and those producing the forged documents have not been publicly identified so far. It is clear that Silvio Grixti is definitely not alone! However, no one has been publicly identified yet, except the customer care officer at the OPM! Who are the others?

Why is it taking so long to bring all those involved to justice?  This includes the identification and prosecution of the mastermind/s. The police have known about the case, at least, since when they interrogated Silvio Grixti, 21 months ago.

It is not only a case of the fraudulent receipt of social benefits. It is also an issue of corrupt practices. Unfortunately, no legal action can be taken in respect of corrupt (electoral) practices as such action is limited to a time frame of three days from the official publication of the general election results.

The police lack of action for such a long time enabled the scam to reap its primary dividends: that of exchanging votes with fraudulent social benefits. In addition, the police inaction ended up protecting the Labour Party which did not have to face the music when it really mattered: before the March 2022 general elections.

The public inquiry led by Mr Justice (retired) Antonio Mizzi will be examining the technical aspects of the social security application process to ensure that possibly there would not be a repetition of this scam. It is unlikely however that it will identify the masterminds and the middlemen and women! That is beyond its terms of remit. Only after the mastermind/s have been identified, and after they have faced the music, will justice have been served.

There is also a political responsibility to be shouldered. Everything points towards the Labour Party. If Robert Abela was a decent politician, he would have immediately accepted political responsibility as party leader and stood down. When he is eventually cornered, Abela will shift the blame on someone else. Decent men and women have resigned from public office for much less than that!

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 17 September 2023

The auditor general: enforcing accountability and ensuring good governance

The office of the Auditor General is a fundamental institution of our Republic. The office is attached to Parliament to which it reports on a regular basis.

Together with my colleagues, last week I had a meeting with the Auditor General and his team in order to discuss ADPD’s request for his office to examine the issues arising from the failure of  Enemalta’s distribution network during the July heatwave.

Has Enemalta managed its resources adequately over the years? Is proper planning in operation at the Corporation in order to ensure that the impacts of climate change are contained? The multiple failures of Enemalta’s distribution network indicate a negative response to these queries. Hence the need for an investigation to identify the method of operation of Enemalta over the years, spotlighting the mismanagement and lack of planning which has led to the current state of play. Those responsible must be held to account.

Our request for an investigation of Enemalta operations brings to four the number of pending ADPD requests for investigations on the Auditor General’s desk.

Earlier this year, in April, ADPD had requested an investigation of the Institute of Tourism Studies (ITS) relative to a contract of service entered into between the said ITS and the Honourable Rosianne Cutajar. She was then a Labour Member of Parliament, but is now an independent MP after being squeezed out of the Labour Parliamentary Group.

We had then requested that the Auditor General examine how the ITS could ever receive adequate service as detailed in its contract of service with the Hon Cutajar when the said Cutajar has no competence in such matters. Specifically, ADPD had drawn the attention of the Auditor General and queried as to how a qualified Italian secondary school teacher could advice on the management of the ITS including its financial management, an area in which it is public knowledge that Cutajar has no competence whatsoever.

Another request for an investigation submitted in January 2022 by ADPD concerns the golden handshakes received (mostly) by members of Cabinet whenever heads roll or Cabinets change. The criteria for the utilisation of public funds in such cases have to be clear and should not to be tailor-made and adjusted every so often by those directly concerned or earmarked to benefit.

Of particular concern is the lack of transparency as well as a lack of adequate oversight in this important area of expenditure. So far little feedback has been forthcoming. With rumours of another imminent Cabinet reshuffle intensifying, the importance of an early conclusion of this investigation is considerable.

A third investigation requested by ADPD concerns the Department of Revenue and its practice of offsetting taxes due with pending payments. As far as is known, this is being done without clear rules and robust oversight. Way back in May 2021 ADPD had requested the Auditor General to examine this practice in depth. Any deals on the offsetting of taxes due must stand up to public scrutiny. It must also be subject to robust oversight procedures.

If this is not done, we could have a serious problem on our hands. In a press statement issued on 19 May 2021 I had stated that “Any suspicions that tax reductions are a ‘thank you’ for any donations to the party in government must be swiftly dispelled.”

If properly done offsetting taxes due with pending payments may be a valid tool for the proper management of public funds. There is however a real danger that without proper oversight this practice could camouflage suspicious deals which at the end of the day further fund illegal political party financing.

The office of the Auditor General has a central role in ensuring that the public sector is transparently governed and accountable for all its actions and operations. It is likewise our duty at ADPD to draw its attention to investigate areas which in our opinion require careful scrutiny. We do this in the belief that the office of the Auditor General is a fundamental institution, essential for the good governance of our Republic.

The proper functioning of the republic’s institutions is the only effective guarantee for good governance and accountability.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday 13 August 2023