Sliema is really getting what it deserves. I am sorry to say this but the last local council elections were a clear example of how, at times, factors that have little to do with political vision influence electoral results. In a few words, Sliema is now reaping what was sown. I might be biased in saying this, given that I was not elected in 2009, having been elected in 2003 and 2006. But I invite others to contradict my statements below.
Beyond the battle between the official Nationalist Party position, the Nikki Dimech faction and the strange alliances of certain Labour councillors, one has to view the whole “Sliema” issue holistically.
Given the lack of proper legislation on financing of electoral campaigns, it is no surprise that political clientelism and business interests play a key role in Maltese politics even at a local level. Indeed, if one looks at the last local election in Sliema it would be very difficult to believe that all candidates’ electoral expenses were within the allowed limits. Many residents to this day tell me it is more than obvious that local elections are not based on a democratic and just level playing field.
In the last council election, one could witness social events such as receptions, the systematic provision of transport for elderly voters, electoral promises to various constituents that have nothing to do with political vision, telephone campaigns of the “Big Brother is watching you” type and so forth. There surely was no level playing field among all candidates.
This was even evident in the character-assassination-whispering-campaigns, at times between candidates belonging to the same party.
Given that Malta has practically no legislation regarding the financing of political parties, this necessarily leads to pressure from business interests for political favours. Hence, it is imperative that contracts awarded by local councils are properly scrutinised.
It is precisely for this reason that when I was councillor I consistently proposed having a contracts manager. I was supported by PN councillor Julian Galea on this… yet a decision by the council was consistently postponed.
Having professional administrative staff is imperative for efficient local councils. Yet, the present council apparently thought otherwise as one of its first decisions was to oust executive secretary Josef Grech.
The work of Mr Grech, his staff and of certain councillors, who, in previous years, did their best to ensure that Sliema’s voice was heard and who worked as a team, was basically discarded.
As for myself, in my six years as councillor I worked as hard as possible to help improve the quality of life in Sliema. I gave priority to issues such as public consultation, sustainable development, the impact of construction on the community, waste management, pollution, public transport, swimming and animal welfare. I worked well with councillors irrespective of their political affiliation and I often managed to convince both Nationalist and Labour council members on various issues.
Well, actually, in my eyes, there were “four” political parties in the council, namely, Green, Labour, the PN “Pullicino faction” and the PN “Arrigo faction”. Perhaps the most surreal experience of all was when certain PN councillors objected that the council should praise the government for the reclaiming and embellishment of St Anne Square!
I thought I would get my best result ever in 2009 but the opposite happened. I was obviously disappointed and I was about to quit politics, feeling a sense of freedom in the process… But, as philosopher Louis Althusser tells us, “the future lasts a long time” … Indeed, I changed my mind after a few weeks and ended being elected AD chairman.
Whenever I am stopped by Sliema residents who complain about all sorts of issues, I remind them of a powerful tool they still possess – the vote.
If you want change, vote for it…
*****
Zolabytes is a rubrique on J’accuse – the name is a nod to the original J’accuser (Emile Zola) and a building block of the digital age (byte). Zolabytes is intended to be a collection of guest contributions in the spirit of discussion that has been promoted by J’accuse on the online Maltese political scene for 5 years.
Opinions expressed in zolabyte contributions are those of the author in question. Opinions appearing on zolabytes do not necessarily reflect the editorial line of J’accuse the blog.
****
9 replies on “Sliema: Reaping what was sown”
Quote – I gave priority to issues such as public consultation, sustainable development, the impact of construction on the community, waste management, pollution, public transport, swimming and animal welfare – unquote.
My question persits. How do these priorities relate to the actual authority and responsibilities of a Local Council as devoled to it by Central Government? Can one add space exploration to the list?
If you’ll permit me; the responsibilities as devolved to Local Councils can be found within the Local Councils Act and its addendum. These responsibilities do fall under the purview of Local Councils – parks for example, roads, street signs, and most interestingly ensuring construction sites do not impact the citizens of that community.
Also, if I remember correctly, the circular bus systems in some communities (Sliema for instance) are also under the purview of the Local Councils (if such a service still exists).
Hi Jon, do you mean to say that councils have the authority to to take decisions on construction sites they believe to impact the citizens? re other responsibilities, i fully agree and confirs my arguent…councils sweep and maintain local parks, streets and pavements, galaxies away from having a direct clout, in excess of what, say, the SRA have, on matters tipo public consultation, sustainable development, the impact of construction on the community, waste management, pollution, public transport, swimming and animal welfare. What they can do is to make representations to the ‘competent authorities’. Now go ask anyone linked to councils how such representations are welcomed by the said authorities.
hi on. I made a first check on council’s authority re construction sites. The first indication is as i suspected…nil…like any other private citizen, they can put forward whatever complaints they may have to this department or that agency as with all other matters of substance including transport etc.
However, for example – as confirmed in studies for my dissertation – if a Construction Project somewhere (say Sliema for instance) breaks a pavement or leaves waste behind the onus for it to be repaired does fall on the council. As you said though, it is virtually impossible for them to enforce and ipso facto, they and the citizens and associated groups become hostages to projects foisted upon them. In hindsight I can imagine it to be even harder in a council split into factions fighting against each other. I completely agree with Jacques’ implication that a third party serves as a facilitator and coalition builder – whilst I can imagine we must live within the parameters of the system as set up now; spending limits in council elections may level the playing field? (Just throwing that one out there).
Hi Jon, spending limits have little impact. A candidate on a party ticket will get loads of free exposure on party media etc that will not feature in expenditure. An independent candidate is therefore at a disadvantage. Re damages, contractors have to pay councils because it is council’s responsibility to maintain. The key issue is example noise or dust pollution, permits etc…all these key functions fall under government departments. Local councils just get the blame and are first line of ‘legimate’ attack of residents.
Danny,
I found the PM’s statement today that party involvement in the Local Councils very interesting – regarding manifestos specifically. In regards to your first post; I do think if we look within the parameters which local councils have to operate – the only party which really lived up to their commitments as a party – within those parameters was the AD. I agree, it is well nigh impossible for the PN and PL candidates to do so, and I was quite amused to picture a PN candidate campaigning on his or her party’s stance on devil may care free market capitalism. By implication, that would mean that the PN candidates – by extension – would actually be supporting the rampant development which I would imagine and hope that their consituents do not want (along with the patronage, etc. etc.). The PL candidates in that case would be supportive of the tenets of Social Democracy including government housing, etc. etc. I must add however, that on examination, the PL would appear to be better placed in their systems for vetting candidates based upon their systems set forth in the kazins (bottom up). Mr. Briguglio however did live up to the tenets of his party – within the parameters – and set forth exactly what his candidature would support and do.
Hi Jon. I invite you to examine the workings of Vito Ciancimino and Salvo Lima leading to pencil developments leading to sprawl in the 60’s rape of palermo, and compare the workings to what has happened in Malta since the 60’s to date. Now compare the massive power of the local council in sicily with that of our local councils which is miniscule to nil. Yet while the palermo sprawl and pencil development came under some sort of control since the 70’s our haphazard development continues unabted to this day. Yet we discuss our pot-hole filling local councils with the enthusiasm of a barcellona supporter while any discussion on the real authority will be even more muted than a discussion on divorce.