Riżenja hi triq tal-irġulija

Ir-riżenja tat-Tabib Chris Fearne mill-Kabinett tfisser li fil-Partit Laburista għad baqa’ min għandu sinsla. Din ir-riżenja hi pass tajjeb. Hi pass fl-interess tas-sewwa u tal-kontabilità.

Chris Fearne għamel tajjeb li irreżenja meta huwa iffaċċjat b’akkużi kriminali anke jekk għadu ma jafx eżattament fuq xiex huma ibbażati.

Għax ir-riżenji fil-politika Maltija huma xi ħaġa rari, ir-riżenja ta’ Fearne hi ta’eżempju għal kull politiku dwar kif jista’ jerfa’r-responsabbiltà politika li jrid iġorr f’kull ħin.

Ir-riżenja ma tfissirx ammissjoni. Tfisser irġulija. Tfisser dikjarazzjoni li Fearne hu politiku responsabbli li lest bil-fatti jpoġġi l-interessi tal-pajjiż qabel dawk tiegħu u tal-partit.

Ir-riżenja hi it-triq tal-politiku ġenwin li qiegħed hemm biex iservi u mhux biex jisserva.

Wara l-eżempju ta’ Chris Fearne, issa jmiss iktar riżenji, fuq quddiem dik ta’ Edward Scicluna minn Gvernatur tal-Bank Ċentrali.

Isa, Edward, ftit kuraġġ.

Regulating the building industry

Regulating the building industry requires the political will to act in an industry that has repeatedly opposed and defied regulation. Last week’s fatal accident at St Ignatius Junction Sliema is the latest incident in an industry in which regulation is still opposed. The political will to regulate is lacking, notwithstanding all the government theatrics, day in day out.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has submitted his resignation on Tuesday. This will lead to the appointment of a third CEO in as many years. This is a resignation that has been submitted out of frustration, even though the resignation letter has not been published.

This resignation followed the comments of Robert Abela, Prime Minister, who on Sunday, a few hours after the incident acknowledged that the authorities regulating the building industry do not have sufficient resources to carry out their responsibilities and regulate the industry. However, he failed to state or acknowledge that those whom his government appointed to lead the BCA have time and again requested these resources. The government has, so far, repeatedly ignored these requests.

When giving evidence at the Jean Paul Sofia public inquiry, the former CEO of the BCA, Karl Azzopardi, stated that he had repeatedly requested funds for a staff complement of 300 to regulate the industry through inspections and enforcement. The recruitment process was slow and the funds allocated rarely matched what he considered necessary.

From Azzopardi’s evidence at the public inquiry, it results that there were only 11 inspectors at the BCA against a projected requirement of between 40 and 50. In addition to recruitment, he explained that there was also the requirement to train those selected meticulously, as otherwise, they would not be in any way effective.

Karl Azzopardi was squeezed out of his CEO post by the incoming Minister Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi, who preferred his own man, Jesmond Muscat, who, however, resigned earlier this week. The BCA, in the meantime, is still without adequate resources as the Prime Minister’s words have so far not been matched with the allocation of the required resources.

The lack of resources allocated to the BCA is a major contributor leading to the frequent construction incidents which are becoming a too frequent occurrence. Without funds for the BCA to hire and train staff to carry out its regulatory duties, we may have more incidents in the weeks and months to come. There is a political responsibility to be shouldered for this lack of funding of the BCA. Prime Minister Robert Abela tried to transmit the subtle message that Minister Zrinzo Azzopardi was shouldering this by removing the building industry portfolio from his Ministerial responsibilities in the last Cabinet reshuffle.

This is however not enough.

The BCA is once more without a CEO, who is quite obviously fed up with being treated as a political football by those appointing him. His letter of resignation was not published, but its timing gives a clear message which cannot be ignored.

As results from the Sofia inquiry report,  the BCA inspectorate was made up of eleven persons! An identical number of persons make up the BCA Board of Directors!  Those are the government’s BCA priorities at this point.

When the government starts adequately funding the BCA, then maybe we can have an inspectorate that acts proactively to identify the abusers in the industry before they lead to more deaths.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 28 April 2024

Il-maħfra Presidenzjali: min qed jistaħba wara l-vulnerabbli?

Il-Kamra tal-Kummerċ tagħmel l-argument li l-maħfra Presidenzjali approvata mill-Kabinett fl-aħħar jiem issaħħaħ il-kultura tal-impunità fil-pajjiż. Il-Kamra tal-Kummerċ għandha biċċa raġun.

Għalkemm il-maħfra hi kwalità nobbli, din il-maħfra Presidenzjali għandha riħa tinten ta’ kalkulu u opportuniżmu politiku.

Minn dak li qalu kelliema għall-Gvern, dawk li ibbenefikaw minn dan l-abbuż tas-servizz soċjali (prinċipalment pensjoni għall-epilettiċi) huma vittmi f’din l-istorja: huma persuni vulnerabbli, għaddejjin minn tbatija kbira. Ma nafx kemm dan jgħodd għal kulħadd, imma mill-istejjer li smajna ċertament li hemm persuni li batew u li għadhom qed ibatu u li għal dawn il-pensjoni abbużiva kienet salvauomo li setgħet ittaffi ftit mit-tbatija tagħhom.

Is-suppost maħfra, issa qed tpoġġi lill-vulnerabbli fuq quddiem biex warajhom jistaħbew dawk li sabu opportunità oħra biex imaxtru u jibbenefikaw minn miljuni ta’ euro.

Il-mistoqsija li s’issa għad ma ġietx imwieġba hi dwar x’kienet qed tagħmel it-tmexxija tal-Ministeru għall-Politika Soċjali. Is-Segretarju Permanenti fil-Ministeru u l-Ministru innifsu, quddiem dan kollu, baqgħu ċassi. Qed jgħidu li ma kienu jafu b’xejn, ma ndunaw b’xejn.

Ifisser dan li qegħdin hemm għalxejn? Li l-istrutturi ta’ kontroll fil-Ministeru ma’ ħadmux? Jew li kien hemm kompliċità tant mifruxa li irnexxielha tostor kollox għal ħin twil?

Fid-dawl tal-allegazzjonijiet li persuna tal-fiduċja politika fl-istess Ministeru kien qed jidderieġi dan l-eżerċiżżju ta’ ħmieġ li bih sar abbuż sfaċċjat tal-vulnerabbli, kemm il-Ministru kif ukoll is-Segretarju Permanenti fil-Ministeru għall-Politika Soċjali għandhom jerfgħu r-resposnabbiltà għal dak li ġara u jirreżenjaw bla iktar dewmien.

Wara kollox, ma ndunaw b’xejn, ma kienu jafu b’xejn! Xi ħtieġa hemm li jibqgħu mas-saqajn? Bihom u mingħajrhom xorta! Ikunu aħjar li jwarbu it-tnejn!

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

L-aħħar iskandlu: investigazzjoni miexja bil-mod wisq

Fit-Times tal-lum u fin-Newsbook tal-bierah hemm żewġ stejjer konnessi mal-iskandlu tal-benefiċċji soċjali.

Id-dettalji ħerġin ftit ftit. Il-Pulizija ilhom jinvestigaw minn meta ġabru lil Silvio Grixti għal interrogazzjoni f’Diċembru tal-2021, tlett xhur qabel l-elezzjoni ġenerali.

L-istorja tat-Times tal-lum titkellem dwar tpartit tal-vot ma’ benefiċċju soċjali li votant ma kellux dritt għalih.

Dan hu corrupt practice elettorali. Huwa ukoll kaz ta’ abbuż ta’ poter, korruzzjoni istituzzjonali, u ħasil ta’ flus.

In-Newsbook min-naħa l-oħra tippubblika storja dwar l-uffiċċju tal-Customer Care tal-Prim Ministru li issa, dwaru hemm prova fil-pubbliku li kellu sehem u rwol f’dan l-iskandlu.

Iktar ma jgħaddi żmien iktar qed jidher ċar li l-Partit Laburista qiegħed fiċ-ċentru ta’ dan l-iskandlu. Ippjanah u ikkordinah.

F’pajjiż serju kieku s’issa kellna skoss riżenji. S’issa kellna waħda biss: ta’ Silvio Grixti, l-ħaruf tas-sagrifiċċju, li kellu sehem important f’dan l-iskandlu, imma li ċertament ma kienx waħdu.

Wisq nibża’ li d-dewmien tal-passi li qed tieħu l-Pulizja hu parti mill-pjan biex inaqqsu l-impatti tal-iskandlu fuq il-Partit Laburista u fuq il-Gvern.

M’aħniex impressjonati b’dawk li jgħidu li ma jafu xejn u li ma kellhomx x’jaqsmu. Il-pjan ħadem bi kważi perfezzjoni u kull min kellu x’jaqsam, irid iħallas ta’ għemilu.

The abortion debate: just the beginning

The approval of Bill 28 is not the end of the abortion debate. It is just the beginning. Maybe, the end of the beginning! The original proposals of Bill 28 were promising, even if they were no big deal. As originally proposed, Bill 28 was a reasonable starting point to an abortion debate which has been stifled for years on end.

It is neither normal nor acceptable for the Head of State to take part in such a controversial political debate in whatever form he opts to participate.

“Everyone knows my position”, President Vella said, when queried by the press last December. His active lobbying of holders of political office against the introduction of any form of abortion in the Maltese Islands was substantial. To add insult to injury he also went public on his intention to resign office and ignite a political crisis, if Parliament approved an abortion bill. In so doing he was giving full and open support to the conservative elements within the Labour Party and beyond, as a result bringing Robert Abela and Chris Fearne on their political knees and forcing them to change the content of Bill 28.

The Labour Party has buckled under the intense lobbying to which it was subjected. As a result, Labour ended up adopting the conservative political position of the Opposition. It has thus once more illustrated that, in such matters, when push comes to shove, Parliament is led by a unified PLPN. George Orwell’s Animal Farm description is apt: they looked from pig to man and from man to pig again, and could not tell which was which!

As PN MP Claudette Buttigieg emphasised in the Parliamentary Committee for the Consideration of Bills, last Monday, the PN Opposition was consistently conservative throughout the debate. Labour, on the other hand, unfortunately, ditched a draft which was a reasonable start for a serious debate and at the end adopted the conservative PN position.

Where do we go from here? The conservative forces, represented by PLPN have presented a united front in Parliament through the unanimous approval of the amended Bill 28. There are however rumblings that the fundamentalist right is considering the possibility of collecting signatures to call an abrogative referendum as the abortion amendments to the Criminal Code, in their view, go too far!

Notwithstanding what the fundamentalists do, the abrogative referendum procedure, is a unique opportunity, to take the conservative PLPN establishment to task. It is also an opportunity to contest the artificial consensus leading to the approval of Bill 28 as well as an appropriate instrument to denounce the interference in the democratic political process by George Vella, President of the Republic.

On Monday, in their different ways, in Parliament, Professor Isabel Stabile, Integra Foundation leader Maria Pisani and ADPD Chairperson Sandra Gauci, exposed clearly that in view of the fact that Bill 28 as amended is a huge step backwards, it is worse than the status quo, as Rosianne Cutajar quipped after the parliamentary vote. The changes made will not save lives. It will only protect medical practioners, as ably explained by Professor Isabel Stabile.

The way forward is to scrap the approved amendments to the Criminal Code and to alternatively legislate in favour of decriminalisation of abortion. Any woman who opts for an abortion needs empathy and not persecution from the state. A limited legal access to abortion is essential, not only when the pregnancy is a potential threat to the life or health of the pregnant woman. It is also necessary to legislate in favour of abortion in cases of rape and incest as well as in those cases where a non-viable pregnancy arises. These issues have to date been avoided in the public debate. They must be addressed the soonest.

We need to clearly identify this as the moderate way forward. Far away from the emotional appeals of the fundamentalist lobby. Also, considerably distant from the extreme position of those who insist on total individual liberty without any limits.

The 2011 divorce referendum entrenched ethical pluralism in Malta’s political agenda. This was an irreversible step which affirmed that different ethical views not only exist: they need the protection of the state.

The PLPN approved abortion amendments entrench a 19^th century-Malta in our statute books. They need to be ditched and replaced with decent legislation fit for the 21^st century. This is the only reasonable way forward.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 2 July 2023

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

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