– Dès les Considérations inactuelles Nietzsche s’était calmé, il avait compris qu’il n’est pas possible d’infliger au lecteur une quantité exagérée d’idées, qu’il faut composer, lui laisser reprendre son souffle. Vous aussi, dans Vertiges des néologismes, vous avez eu la meme évolution, et ca en fait un livre plus accessible. La différence, c’est qu’après, Nietzsche a continué.
– Je ne suis pas Nietzsche…
(Michel Houellebecq, Soumission)
Yes, Giovanna Debono should resign. Her position in parliament as a representative of the people is untenable so long as her husband is under investigation for abuse of office. The sad truth is that the moment a minister employs his or her spouse or close relatives within their own ministry their position should no longer be tenable. Robert Musumeci, still posing as some kind of visionary for the hypothetical “movement” (that is none other than an opportunistic collection of gravy train riders) believes that we should wait for a “fair hearing”. Musumeci sat for a law degree virtually by correspondence (he will tell you presence at a lecture does not a law student make – which could be true) and regularly suffers from literal reproduction of positivist garbage you would expect from the vast majority of what is regurgitated from university today.
Fair hearing is for the criminally accused. Sure. It has absolutely nothing to do with the recognition of administrative and political responsibility. The basic manual of political representation (let alone constitutional law principles) would tell you that in order to be above reproach a person in political power should not employ close relatives. The assumption being that the mere employment of such relatives is the beginning of the path to abuse of office. It would be hard for someone in Musumeci’s movement to grasp such a concept. Impossible even. The Gozo Minister employs his spouse within his ministry. Our energy minister’s wife was “employed” by this government without so much as a justification and with a contract of employment the terms of which are shrouded in secrecy. Even the Emperor’s (sorry, PM) wife is prone to carving out for herself a role that is nowhere mentioned in the constitution. It would be ok if such a role were not costing money to the electorate. Yet it does.
Back to DebonoGate. There is no doubt in my mind that Debono will join the blacklist of ex-PN ministers tainted with a whiff of corruption – even if Anthony Debono manages to survive the trials and tribulations of a court of justice. Ninu Zammit, Michael Falzon, Giovanna Debono. The “old way” of doing politics that was allegedly swept aside two years to this day is still waiting to be judged. Simon Busuttil’s party will still be answering for this kind of sins for quite some time yet. Incidentally, the PM should take note that he risks becoming an accomplice to covering up any crimes of corruption if he chooses to sit on reports and whistleblower information until when it pays him to cause a fracas and deviate attention from the troubles within his house. Today’s Debono news paid perfectly to help people forget that we should be inaugurating the promised Power Station.
The PLPN way is still very much alive. This blog, born in 2004, has long warned that the system is one that promotes a race to mediocrity and that will constantly produce stories of corruption, nepotism, cronyism and abuse of power. The former PN government’s sins are now being brought to light – and however erred must pay. Muscat’s government has proven only that it is a case of “same, same but different”. In many cases it is even worse because this government that was supposed to herald change is only good at justifying blatant abuses by claiming it is only repeating what was done before – u hallik mill-ottimista. Simon Busuttil is discovering that change is not only about words but also about deeds and that in order to make a difference actions must follow.
It sucks being bang in the middle between two behemoths that struggle to catch up with the twenty-first century. It sucks being so right about what is so wrong with this country. What sucks most is that we seem to never learn.
Today is a three-fold anniversary. Franco Debono turns 41, the labour government turns 2 and Internazionale FC turn 106. It never rains….
In un paese pieno di coglioni ci mancano le palle.
It might seem to be hotting up. What is it about this nation that turns any democratic decision making exercise into an internecine battle? As the referendum approaches we get to watch the two sides and their different approach to convincing people to cast the vote in their favour. At some point the “No” camp, the one against hunting, stated that it prefers debate to battle. That was a reaction to the earlier affirmation by the hunting fraternity that this referendum meant “War”. Debate? What debate? This Liliput nation is fast proving to have shed all semblance of analytical consideration and prefers the heads-on instinctive approach. Facts and data or principles and values are discarded – we much prefer “taking sides” either instinctively through some visceral attraction to some form of roots or out of spite.
In the end a referendum that (as we have stated elsewhere) constitutes at most a political message to our supposed representatives is becoming yet another Lilliputian outcry as to how eggs are best broken open. The comedic elements have also made their appearance – prime among which is Saviour “Hogan” Balzan – foaming at the mouth and doing his damned best to ruin the appeal of a vote that should be in favour of the reasonable enjoyment of the countryside and above all in favour of the birds.
Ah those wingèd beings have little or no knowledge of what is going on in the island of milk and honey. Would they be able to fathom the deceptive campaign of the Yes Camp, with all its mystical happy families, multi-dogged hunters sans-senter and verbose lawyerisms they would gather in one massive flock above the next meeting of the hunter confraternity and take one massive dump covering all the bullshitters in avian faeces.
Incidentally Liliput insists on subsidising airfares for those of its electors and decision-takers (read voters) who reside abroad. March 2015 and polling booths in Embassy are still a Utopic mirage for those of us who would have hoped to be able to cast out vote comfortably.
The referendum risks becoming a non-event very fast. Sure we will have a result. Either way there will be a sector of Maltese society kicking up a fuss. Politically it is fast becoming obvious that the two main parties that sit in the decision making positions of this country will be able to wash their hands of the main set of consequences – having found someone else to blame for the immediate aftermath. Whether the Birds Directive, derogations and all, will be properly implemented in Malta for the years to follow is another chapter, another story.
In the current whirlwind that is the Swissleaks scandal we risk missing the wood for the trees. Public opinion is easily distracted by petty insinuations and suppositions that run on the lines of taste and “intuition”. Assumptions are always preferable to sound facts and are the refuge of the lazy or the manipulating. As news broke of the names of ex-PN ministers Ninu Zammit and Michael Falzon appearing on the list of people who had funds stashed away in Switzerland we were confronted with the inevitable tsunami of disdain. This was tax avoidance of the highest order, aggravated to boot by the failed declaration of funds when performing duties as a minister of government. We were also told that both had benefited from an “amnesty” having repatriated the funds to Malta. What that really means is that they paid much less tax than they originally owed and it does nothing to clear their false declarations earlier.
In many ways an amnesty in this sense is a legal form of money laundering. Monies that had been “disapparated” into a vault at the Gringot’s Bank far from the scrutiny of the taxman are allowed back into circulation once the payment of a percentage fine is made. The real question is: how was that money made? Why was it hidden away for so long? Was tax avoidance really the only reason? That the money was legitimately acquired and not through, for example, trading in influence, is something for which we have to take the word of the honourable gentlemen who had given sworn statements of assets before parliament before and in which statements they failed to mention the existence of such funds. Forgive me if I remain skeptical.
It gets worse. The current Premier (that’s his new nick – all 4.2 million euro of it) could in all probability have been the one to have accorded the amnesty to the gentlemen in question. When questioned on the matter he took refuge in his usual “tu quoque” rubbish – coming up with a reference to Austin Gatt’s forgotten funds at UPS. The problem is that by focusing on the Where? – i.e. Swiss funds, we miss the more important questions of Why? and What? Why do ministers underdeclare their assets? What dangers lie hidden when they do so? Muscat’s cabinet and MP’s include a minister for Gozo who declared practically a minimum wage in earnings and an ex-Minister who still cannot explain having half a million euros running around the house (to mention but two).
The Cafe Premier saga only goes to worsen the situation (and not just the perception) when it comes to seeing how closely knit are the activities of our representatives to the business community. While we were all aghast at Michael Falzon’s 460k in Switzerland we could read about a 210k commission over a government deal to buy back its own property (rather than simply kicking out a tenant who was not paying). The PM was in on the deal – there are emails to prove it. Not too far away from the Premier, in the law courts, the Enemalta Scandal was still unfolding. Yet again more wheels and cogs being oiled and still no one uses the magic word in Maltese : “Tixħim” (bungs/backhanders).
In the end there is a money trail to be followed. It serves to emphasise why this government cannot keep hiding behind chinese walls when it comes to important deals such as the Transport system and the new power stations and contracts given to consultants. Transparency is only the first step to combat corruption and until now the murkiness within which our politicians function is not helping in any way. We could potentially be very close to a situation that was current in Italy in 1992 – and the danger is that, just as happened in Italy – the big fish survive the cull to the detriment of a few scapegoats.
Which is why we need real non-partisan investigative reporting and a stronger arm of the law. otherwise the wheels will just keep turning and the oil will keep flowing. The only suckers will be the people. For a change.
Opposition leader Busuttil was lambasted from some quarters for having dared suggest that the whole Enemalta procurement scandal was actually abused of as electoral fodder by Muscat and his men. What Busuttil suggested was really not too hard to understand – if the information was available long before the election loomed ominously, why was it withheld until a time when it would pay Labour in opposition as an extra baton to imply government corruption?
Busuttil was not implying that the information should have been kept quiet until after the election (who would think such a thing anyway?) but rather that it should have surfaced when it was discovered and not much later. While the PAC continues on its fishing expedition trying to pin the whole scandal onto Lawrence Gonzi Busuttil’s kind of assertion will fall on deaf ears or attract the playground type of response that the Labour machine has been honed to give.
The HSBC Swissleaks now adds to the intrigue of the Farrugia Brothers discoveries in that it provides an easier target with the cliches straight out of conspiracy theory books – which is not to say that there is nothing underhand going on in the world of procurement, government permits and the like. The problem lies elsewhere. In Malta there is no such thing as investigation beyond politically motivated with-hunts. The politically motivated is also limited in its extent since oftentimes the investigators have a huge interest in making sure that they do not in turn become investigated.
We just have to look at what happened in Italy in the early nineties to understand what I am getting at. Our political parties have developed a system of self-preservation that became ever more evident during the last election. Rules and laws of the overall system have gradually been adapted to ensure the survival of the two political parties – not just politically but also financially. Hidden behind these rules is a system of favoritisms and expectations that link the political aspect to the economy in general on the one hand (from employment to contracts to tenders to permits) and to the social on the other (medical rights, entertainment “elites” and circles).
It would not just be limited to the parties. Institutional flaws would also surface – authorities controlling pieces of the market suddenly hold strong cards for bargaining: which is where I suspect the whole Enemalta picture fits in. From the most expensive multi-million euro tender to the smallest warden with fine giving powers there is an alternate currency of favoritism and favour. Of course if you are the party in government you and your men have a stronger bargaining power. Everybody gets their unjust desserts.
Mani pulite in Italy uncovered a clear system where bungs were paid to the pentapartito (five main parties from DC to PC) whenever anybody anywhere wanted to merely conduct business. No bung (tangente), no party (tender). Does this happen in Malta? The evidence seems to be pointing to it having happened on a regular basis – not necessarily with the blessing of politicians – and that it can still be occurring to this day.
Labour seems hell-bent on institutionalizing the system further. There is no longer a need to hide the “debts” owed to supporting lobbies. It is translated immediately to enabling laws or worse still – as the forthcoming threat of an amnesty for all MEPA violations shows – an actual conspiracy to render the illegal legal. Illegal constructions will enjoy a bonifico of huge proportions and consequences – all so as to appease the debts that got Labour into power. The network between social and business interests intertwining with government is becoming more and more dangerous. We do not have a pool of inquiring magistrates as the Italians did and in some way we can consider that a blessing of sorts given how some people here tend to interpret the laws.
Simon Busuttil was right though in turning up the heat on Muscat. The whole Enemalta investigation is misguided if it turns into a fishing expedition on Lawrence Gonzi. If, rather than speculating in the style of our tabloids, proper questions were asked as to how our whole system is beginning to stink of favoritism, cronyism and party-instigated corruption then, maybe, we could be getting somewhere.
I caught a glimpse of the proceedings at the Public Accounts Committee sessions. Inelegant and clumsy are the first words that come to mind. It was never meant to be a fashion statement or synchronised swimming, sure, but the overall impression before getting down to the nitty gritty is that of yet another debasement of institutional tradition.
Sitting in the metaphorical witness dock former PM Lawrence Gonzi had his patience tried by repeat questioning that seemed to be going nowhere. There was a moment of dramatic irony when Gonzi accused the Committee of not following the procedure it should (that of the COCP) when the Committee was actually chaired by (and therefore under the responsibility of) Jason Azzopardi of team PN.
Still, the line of questioning taken up by Justice Minister seems to be one of spurious fabrication very much in line with the journalistic style at MaltaToday (which revels in the idea of having kicked off this fracas in the first place) rather than the quest for some truth or other (in a land of multiple truths the first to the media machine is King). What exactly is the PAC after? What is this Enemalta business proving in the end?
In all probability this business, like surely many others to come, will prove that businesses, businessmen and corrupt persons in power (and by this I mean persons appointed to manage/run/sit on parastatal entities) will constantly try to find a convergence point in the shadows and suck from the public funds so long as they are not caught.
It was also very interesting to watch the Justice Minister justify the line of questioning by claiming that the amnesty (proklama really) requires constant checking since one of the conditions it contains is that it can be withdrawn if the person enjoying its benefits is found to have hidden the truth.
So we have a “businessman” who is benefiting from an amnesty in order to assist the authorities in uncovering illicit activity by other “businessmen”. The current government’s line seems to be to question this amnesty (with the concurrent risk that many other people might end up not being brought to justice).
While all this is happening we have another sector (construction and development) in which the government seems to be adamant to offer a blanket amnesty to all those who have abused of the law (broken it) and partaken in the rape of the nation (metaphorically speaking). The Taghna Lkoll government has made no effort to hide its tight links to the Malta Developer’s Association and it’s erstwhile Chairman (or is he President?) Sandro Chetcuti.
There is no whistleblowing reason for an amnesty here. The feeble excuse that Taghna Lkoll philosophy can throw up (yes, like vomit) is that those paying for the amnesty will generate lots of money for the coffers. A blanket amnesty that allows people to buy scars on the face of the nation. Brilliant. So long as Sandro tells us that everything is just fine for the developers we must all be grateful.
It may seem too facile an argument but the priorities of Taghna Lkoll in the field of culture are so obviously linked to core voting interests that you cannot but argue on the lines that sound both snobbish and classist. As the effort to denigrate the City Gate project continues to gather momentum we are told of the Great Carnival and Music set of stalls that will offset the great vacuum that exists. Minister Bonnici (him again) told the gathered press that we cannot continue with this “silo mentality” – I must confess I had to look it up since I am not a FEMA graduate and find marketing catchphrases particularly undigestible.
It turns out that fighting the “silo mentality” means copying the design of garages and stalls that some Taghna Lkoll-ing carnival float enthusiast (and ONE employee) had visited on a trip abroad and spending some 6 million euros to build a sort of samba-drone that doubles up as a garage band gig place much to the chagrin of William Mangion.
Is it facile to argue that the ditched plans for the ditch/moat are crying for re-instatement and could well have done with some of those millions? Is it too easy to argue that while we appreciate that the carnival custom in Malta does deserve an investment of sorts (inclusive of a papier-mache’ museum) this should not come as an easy-fix solution that is obviously lacking in global planning?
Personally I love the idea of a regenerated part of Marsa hosting a carnival drove complete with museums and apprentice schools. It is the way these ideas suddenly pop up and are so very evidently the result of “lapazzar” planning simply to shut the mouths of another cohort of voters that is absolutely obnoxious. Stilll. It’s better than those bastard nationalists who never listened eh?
Far from the offices of wake up and smell the coffee. Far from the populistic approaches and ISIS scaremongering. There, in the deep blue tempest toss’d seas, more and more of them are dying. On the eve of the day when Malta celebrates the feast of Saint Paul’s Shipwreck, tens of immigrants who had left Tripoli in the hope of a better future lost their lives to the sea and the cold. What value those lives to the thousands who will throng the streets of the city of gentlemen adulating the Magnus who like the immigrants had been toss’d by the same sea?
Two issues. First the hunting then the constitutional case where the PN seems to have regained two seats. We had a parade of practising and retired lawyers stating the obvious (and then even complicating matters in interviews by not getting it quite right) when it came to referenda and their consequences. Did we need that charade? It reminded me of that farce re-enacted by Alfred Sant pre-1996 when he sat down with the an accommodating notary to sign a “contract with the people” – blissfully ignorant that the whole business of election, swearing-in and governing already covered the job.
As for the constitutional case. There is a glaring silence on the PN side when it comes to arguing which seats should be compensated and why. I watched a lawyer called Adrian Delia perform logical summersaults on an interview with newsbook.com.mt. He was clearly confused by the question as to whether or not Labour should have lost two seats in the process. Let us set aside the absolute hypocrisy of a PN representative talking about proportional representation in parliament – the proportionality has nothing to do with it.
The two candidates Buttigieg and Azzopardi were deprived of their seats because of an error by the Electoral Commission when the original set of parliamentary seats was being distributed. Thus Azzopardi lost out to Justyne Caruana for the fifth seat in the 13th district. If the error is admitted and the proper count repristinated then it should automatically follow that Caruana would lose her seat and Azzopardi would take it up (ths giving a 3-2 result for PN in Gozo). Same applies for the Edward Scicluna – Claudette Buttigieg situation.
The compensation of seats for proportional purposes takes place AFTER the original election of 5 candidates from each district. It has nothing to do with the error that took place BEFORE the proportional attribution. The PN request before the Civil Court should technically have included the request to have the Labour candidates erroneously elected replaced with the nationalist candidates who had been “cheated” by the error.
Happy Saint Paul’s feast to all J’accuse readers. We are one month away from our 10th anniversary of this blog. Thank you for your custom.
