Category: Campaign 2013

Categories
Campaign 2013

The surreal case of (ex) Commissioner Dalli

The next time there is an election for Sliema’s local council don’t expect a long list of potential candidates queueing outside Paul Borg Olivier’s door.  Silvio Zammit (no relation) is the latest PN councillor (and deputy mayor) to resign from his post citing “personal reasons”. Of course, the fact that he is embroiled in the scandal that has rocked the European Commission might be much more than a personal reason but hey… who’s nitpicking here? At the time of writing this post we do not have much to rely upon other than a statement by John Dalli (no surprise there – denial of involvement) and press statements by the Commission shedding light on the results of an OLAF (anti-Fraud office) report into the matter.

The unavailability of any further facts precludes anyone from acting as judge and jury on John Dalli, Silvio Zammit or the OLAF office for all that matters – without facts it is all based on speculation. This does not mean however that the goings-on over the last 24 hours do not merit more than a passing observation since a number of conclusions can be drawn – irrespective of the where the final proof will ultimately take us. Here goes:

1. Malta’s shame – PN’s dishonour

There’s a scandal in the Commission and it involves a Maltese nominated Commissioner. No amount of “boo-ya I told you so” celebrations on the part of some anti-Dalli factions within the PN will compensate for that one. If, as seems to be the general theory, the post of Commissioner was used as a sort of “kicking upstairs” of an inconvenient politician (a policy that seems to make party priorities trump national interest) then it is clear where the responsibility lies. If a one-man show blog could come up with this kind of CV for Dalli we can really see the nomination for Commissioner in perspective.

In comparison to the pie-on-the-face that comes along with a disgraced Commissioner, the  Silvio Zammit bit of the scandal is tantamount to a few crumbs on one’s beard. Be that as it may, it is no insignificant fact that Silvio Zammit was until a few hours ago a PN councillor who ran for elections in a locality on a PN ticket. The mere existence of the emails linking him with the Swedish company suffice to demonstrate that Silvio Zammit is used to an unorthodox way of approaching politics and that is a euphemism. His antics have contributed to adding him to an increasingly long list of ex-PN councillors who fail to understand the basic concept of proper political behaviour. This is a massive fail for the nationalist party – a huge glitch in the system that can only be exacerbated if the right scrutiny is not exercised on future candidates: at both local and national level.

2. Media wars

There was a banal exercise of mental masturbation yesterday as different “media companies” battled for the unenviable prize of having “broken the news” of Dalli’s resignation. I first heard of it via a phone call of a relative of mine who told me that RTK had just included a flash news in the bulletin. I am no authority on “who came first” in this instance though and quite frankly being first to get the news is nowadays much less important since the “scoop” is liable to lose its unique value in minutes if not seconds. What is more important is getting the right news and the right information. Not giving the news a particular slant at an early stage is important (as Natalino Fenech rightly could teach a few elements within the Labour party) .

So what did we know and what did the media tell us? Here’s a list of statements lifted from different media sources with a CONFIRMED OR UNVERIFIED quotient:

  1. 1. John Dalli has resigned from his post of Commissioner – (CONFIRMED) – (ALL NEWS)
  2. His resignation follows an OLAF investigation into alleged fraudulent activities – (CONFIRMED) – (ALL NEWS)
  3. The alleged activities involve contacts between a businessman and acquaintance of John Dalli & a Swedish Tobacco company (CONFIRMED) – (CM RELEASE)
  4. OLAF found conclusive proof of exchanges between this businessman and the Swedish Company. (CONFIRMED) – (REPORTS OF EMAILS & CM RELEASE)
  5. The OLAF report did not find any conclusive evidence of the direct participation of Mr Dalli but did consider that he was aware of these events (CONFIRMED) – (CM RELEASE)
  6. John Dalli categorically denies being aware of these events (CONFIRMED) – (PBS TVHEMM interview)
  7. The OLAF report showed clearly that the European Commission’s decision-making process and the position of the services concerned has not been affected at all by the matters under investigation. (CONFIRMED) – (CM RELEASE)
  8. The corrupt activity involved a Maltese businessman named as Silvio Zammit (TIMES, MALTATODAY, DI-VE – no explanation of how his name is out).
  9. The corrupt activity involved a Maltese entrepreneur who had approached the company using his contacts with Mr Dalli and sought to gain financial advantages in exchange for influence over a possible future legislative proposal on snus. (CONFIRMED – CM RELEASE, OLAF REPORT)

At this point we have to look at an article by MaltaToday that stands out for a particular slant that it gives to the correspondence between Zammit and Swedish Match. All the information gleaned from most sources (and in particular the Commission’s press statement) indicated that Zammit had contacted Swedish Match and that he “sought to gain financial advantages in exchange for influence over a possible future legislative proposal”. Whatever way that is read you get the idea that Zammit contacted Swedish Match and offered to use his confidence with John Dalli in order to influence future Tobacco law. The phrase “sought to gain financial advantage” clearly implies that Zammit offered his services for a fee.

Yet. And this is a bit yet. Maltatoday, having claimed to have seen part or all of the email exchange, titles its article “Silvio Zammit was offered fee to set up meeting with John Dalli – email“. In the article in question we find the following paragraphs:

MaltaToday is informed that Zammit was in contact with Swedish Match over the possibility of influencing John Dalli ahead of a major revision of the Tobacco Products Directive that would have further regulated the access of tobacco to minors and other non-tobacco products like Swedish Match’s snus.

Swedish Match told MaltaToday that had they received an “indecent proposal that was a real and credible offer” by a Maltese businessman who claimed he could influence Dalli on his anti-tobacco legislation.

According to the email between Zammit and Swedish Match, the Nationalist councillor was offered a fee to broker a meeting between the company and John Dalli.

This information does not result from any other publicly available piece of news. MaltaToday is giving a diametrically opposite twist to the events by implying that “according to the email between Zammit and Swedish match”, Silvio Zammit was offered a fee to broker a meeting between the company and John Dalli. So it would seem that rather than sending an email to the Swedish company in which he offered his services in exchange for a fee, Zammit – once contact was established – actually received an offer of a fee to broker the meeting. Which would be rather strange since the Swedish company then proceeded to report the facts to the Commission/OLAF for investigation.

It is in John Dalli’s interests to first and foremost prove that he had no knowledge of the going-on. Insofar as the current situation is concerned that would exclude him from the corrupt activities that allegedly involve the former Sliema PN Councillor. Whether or not the Swedish company or Silvio Zammit was doing the “offering” is irrelevant to John Dalli once he manages to prove that he was extraneous to the whole events.

Meanwhile, MaltaToday would do well to either publish the emails in its possession or rewrite the article in question in order to eliminate any ambiguity. Unless of course ambiguity was the original intention of the article (not that the headline leaves much space to imagination).

3. Conclusions

In this pre-election run up Dalli finds himself once again out of the game. New scandals, new allegations mean that any aspirations he had to join the dagger-fest that is brewing in Pietà must perforce be put on hold. The nationalist party does not come out of this series of events any stronger. Pie on Dalli’s face is pie on Lawrence Gonzi’s nomination for commissioner – a serious post that commands respect (which also puts a huge petard on the ridiculous conspiracy theories involving a nationalist plot to rid themselves of Dalli).

For starters the PN government has to nominate a new commissioner – and if this is to be a valid, face-saving politician it means disqualifying one of the big guns from the forthcoming national election. Tonio Borg is being mentioned and I would not be surprised if Simon Busuttil get a few virtual votes either. Everybody seems to be forgetting about our Ambassador Emeritus at this point – who better to sit wisely on a Commission seat? Labour exponents seem to be fantasticating about “Labour’s right” to nominate the commissioner. Nothing would be more ridiculous. That bright europarliamentarian Joseph Cuschieri has even suggested Alfred Sant – of course, Alfred “Switzerland in the Mediterranean” Sant. As they like to say with so much tongue in cheek in their parts… bir-rispett kollu!

As for Silvio Zammit. Well, he is definitely not the last of the PN circus act (pardon the pun) to have hit a brick wall when it comes to politics. Unless something is done about having a proper school of politicians – not the yes men kind who dwell on the mistaken idea that it is all about power and networking – then we surely have more surprises in the waiting from the nationalist party stables.

 

******

CM RELEASE – PRESS STATEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION – 16 OCTOBER 2012

Press statement on behalf of the European Commission

Commissioner John Dalli has today announced his resignation as a member of the Commission, with immediate effect.

Mr Dalli informed the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso of his decision following an investigation by OLAF, the EU’s antifraud office, into a complaint made in May 2012 by the tobacco producer, Swedish Match. The company alleged that a Maltese entrepreneur had used his contacts with Mr Dalli to try to gain financial advantages from the company in return for seeking to influence a possible future legislative proposal on tobacco products, in particular on the EU export ban on snus . As soon as the Commission received the complaint it immediately requested OLAF to investigate.

The OLAF final report was sent to the Commission on 15 October. It found that the Maltese entrepreneur had approached the company using his contacts with Mr Dalli and sought to gain financial advantages in exchange for influence over a possible future legislative proposal on snus. No transaction was concluded between the company and the entrepreneur and no payment was made. The OLAF report did not find any conclusive evidence of the direct participation of Mr Dalli but did consider that he was aware of these events.

The OLAF report showed clearly that the European Commission’s decision making process and the position of the services concerned has not been affected at all by the matters under investigation.

The final OLAF report and its recommendations are being sent by OLAF to the Attorney General of Malta. It will now be for the Maltese judiciary to decide how to follow up.

After the President informed Mr Dalli about the report received from OLAF, Mr Dalli decided to resign in order to be able to defend his reputation and that of the Commission. Mr Dalli categorically rejects these findings.

Mr Barroso has decided that Vice President Maros Sefcovic will take over the portfolio of Mr Dalli on an interim basis until a new Commissioner of Maltese nationality is appointed in accordance with article 246 (2) of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.

Mr Giovanni Kessler, Director-General of OLAF will be available in the press room after the midday briefing tomorrow.

Categories
Campaign 2013

Future views

Until I find time to post about “the issues that aren’t” I’d like to take a quick look (and provocation) at the idea of “the future” that has slipped in among the top hit concepts in Maltese political discourse.

“The future” and its natural antithesis “the past” feature prominently both as the centre-stage of marketing spin as well as the obvious underpinning building blocks behind most arguments. It is of course inevitable that if you are plugging change from a situation of quasi-inertia you will be pushing an agenda that automatically projects you to a future that is (another catch-word) different. This is a key question at this point in time since change and difference are strong selling points once you accept that the current situation just won’t do.

On a superficial level – one that is easily pricked into reaction by billboards that provoke and appeal to the instant idea – being associated with the past is supposed to be an immediate point-killer. You’re stuck in the middle ages, you’re backward or you’ve failed to shed some heavy luggage. Unless of course you manage to retaliate that too much talk of the past implies a misplaced nostalgia or, worse still, a deceptive lie. The bad thing about the past – in marketing terms – is that it lies there like a giant wart for all to see. It has happened. It is a fact. Indisputably so. You can hardly contradict it without engaging on a principled level – without talking politics.

The future? Now that’s something else. Campaigns built on the future appeal on a number of levels. Look at Obama’s hope-filled “Yes we can” campaign. It’s all about what could be done in the future. It builds on aspirations and desire for change. Look closer to home. Sarkozy’s “Ensemble tout est possible” cloned to the PN’s “Flimkien kollox possibli” relied on a promise that working together could make everything possible. That was when the promise was still a future possibility. We’ve seen how that “together” quickly crumbled to an impossibility – that future is now another past, another wart crying out to be analysed.

Joseph Muscat and Labour are trying hard to portray the image of having a project for the future. Their language is replete with concepts such as the famous “road-map“. The Labour party relies heavily on the sale of dreams – a future that is not only unquantifiable but also one that cannot be assessed. The selling of a dream involves simply being careful enough not to step on anyone’s dislikes. It is a combination of band-wagon politics and fence-sitting. The final key to this strategy is the reliance on the electorate’s general disgruntlement with the current band and their apparent inertia. In order to promise everything to everyone Joseph Muscat simply has to sit back and promise nothing. At least not tangibly.

The moment there is the danger of being associated with a fixed idea Muscat will shy away into the clouds of non-commitment or denial. He will return with words about road-maps and consultation. It’s less of a case of leadership with direction and more of a case of blind man’s bluff. The excuse of not being in election campaign is wearing thin. Especially when Muscat’s party has long delivered the judgement that (a) PN is no longer fit to govern and (b) Labour is.

Nationalist futures are worse than bleak at the moment. With a 12 point gap in the polls and a seeming inability to take control of the pre-electoral agenda setting it will take a miracle to get back into a fighting chance at this stage. Much will depend on the PN machine’s ability to bring Labour down to discussing the real and now. If the language of politics is shifted into the present temporal dimension – ignoring the histrionics of back-benchers on the way out and the media circus – then the tired party of government might (might) be back with a fighting chance. This will require stronger displays of clarity of vision, brutally honest introspectives that reflect upon past mistakes and a strong sense of determination that would finally eradicate the deep-seated doubt that has entrenched itself in the popular mindset.

The intangible politics of the future might only be eclipsed with a presentation of the very tangible politics of the present. It’ll be a hard trek but given the alternative scenarios and possibilities it is not only worth a try… it is their duty to do so.

Categories
Campaign 2013

Election fever

Recent events in the holy of holies that is parliament are beginning to make the Council of Trent seem like a walk in the park. I have already registered my consternation at what seems to have been a missed opportunity by the PN to take the initiative following the summer recess and to finally call the damn election. My observations seem to have found an echo in (of all places) Franco Debono’s latest rant (Gonzi had planned an October election) – and I am not sure whether this is a good thing. It would seem that the initiative was not taken because of a +12% gap at the polls that did not augur well or a snap October/November scrutiny.

Whatever the case may be and no matter how much of my guesswork was actually right I would like to look at another element in this pre-election frenzy and that is the magic BUDGET. I do not have the powers of foresight that the late Spiridione Sant proclaimed to have with much rasputinian fervour and cannot claim to be privy to the content of the forthcoming budget. What I can do is ask a few questions with regard to the budget and how it places itself in an eventual election run.

Some pundits are assuming that a PN budget is planned as some sort of “show and tell” exercise with the electorate. In this scenario, Gonzi and Fenech would present a budget that clearly shows the direction that the PN is taking with the management of the country. Bar any contradictory hiccups (St. Philip’s being the prime candidate for contradictory hiccup material) we would have a budget that doubles as a practical electoral manifesto that would presumably contrast greatly with Muscat’s pie in the sky lists of “ma nindaħlux lill-business” style.

The grand underpinning point in this plan is that Gonzi’s PN knows full well that Franco Debono is bound to hijack the budget and will be lying around in wait like a taliban strapped to his panties with dynamite, semtex and more ready to blow the project to smithereens with his (now openly declared) vote against the budget. The idea here is simple (pace the spinmeisters at Pieta)… a lovely budget that will most likely be endorsed by Brussels (we have to get a nod of sorts because of the concerted austerity plan – there IS a world beyond Joseph and Lawrence) that might even tickle the fancy of the doubters but that gets shot down by the new villain in the story – Master Debono of Għaxaq. Q.E.D.

Now I am no master of the polls and statistics but I do have a legitimate question to ask. What weight are we supposed to give a budget that is very evidently being presented with the extreme likelihood that it will not be adopted or accepted? I mean, in the long run it’s a case of “You know that I know that you know” and Fenech & Gonzi’s hopes about the Franco party-pooper business are not exactly secret. So with that perspective don’t you think that this budget would be a budget lite?

We might not get to answer the question should Franco and Labour continue with the barrage of motions trying desperately to alter the orders of the house. On the other hand it is beginning to seem extremely likely that the current interpretation of the house rules will lead us to a November Budget as the first real vote that would make the PN’s plans re Franco and his sabotage come true.

Whatever the case don’t forget to ask yourself – is it a budget or the modern PN equivalent of a trojan horse?

 

Beware of the nationalist finance minister bearing budgets.

Categories
Campaign 2013

Digital Lies

Only yesterday Austin Gatt and two of his sidekicks were busy presenting a White Paper that was almost being hailed as a quantum leap in the state of digital rights on the island. Essentially Gatt, IT Claudio and Arriva Delia were promoting a suggested new constitutional provision that would enshrine the digital rights of every Maltese citizen – the digital right amendment. Kudos to all this sci-fi and all that but J’accuse’s feet remain firmly entrenched in the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” approach to legislation and we will not be easily impressed by the special effects of a proposed provision.

Not too far from the realm of digital rights is the issue of data and its protection. We do not need new rights to be enacted for that – we already have a snazzy Data Protection Act. The basic principles of this act are quite easy to grasp. Consider first of all that data is any information related to an identified or identifiable person. You then have the principle that in order to gather “data” that is yours or that identifies you, the potential gatherer (or “controller”) requires your permission. Once he has obtained that permission he can only use it for a specific purpose and for that purpose only.

Why am I saying all this? Well. Here’s the thing. I decided that it is high time I should log onto mychoice.pn and subscribe to updates so that I would be able to analyse what everyone else seems to be receiving. I proceeded to the lovely page and was asked to register. I gave the page my real name and my real surname as well as my email address (there’s always the spam folder). I did not wish to give the PN a remote chance of having my mobile number so I input what I believed to be a credible but phoney mobile number. No probs there.

Then came the ID Card business. I figured that if I subtract one from the progressive number allocated to me when I was registered I would come up with a credible ID card – not mine but credible enough… so if for example my ID was 500075 – the 5000th registered kid in 1975 then all I had to do was input 499975 and hey presto mychoice.pn would let me in.

Let me in my digital rights arse! Imagine my surprise when the validation system on mychoice.pn told informed me that the ID card number input does not match the name or surname provided. Wow. Let’s see what happened there. Essentially the ID number was checked against a database that mychoice.pn OBVIOUSLY has and the validation process checks whether the ID card corresponds to the right name and surname. Lovely. I was never asked by the site whether I acquiesced to the use of my ID number and name (the only box to be ticked is the one were you accept to recieve PBO’s updates). So mychoice.pn is in possession of a database (little need to guess that they are using the electoral register) that contains MY INFORMATION and are actively using it for data processing WITHOUT MY CONSENT. Without your consent either.

So what? I hear you say. Don’t we all know that political parties regularly use the electoral register in their day to day meddling. Sure. But they are definitely going out on a limb here and stretching the rubbish exception that they planted in the Data Protection Act to an incredible extreme. In any case, whether or not they manage to find some loophole to the Data Protection Act in this case what does this really say about the ever so grand initiative of DIGITAL RIGHTS and the white paper?

You’re right. Digital rights? They don’t give a rat’s arse. So much for all the high falutin’ consultation process.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

This order of the house

Random thoughts on parliamentary democracy.

1. October 9th. Luxembourg’s parliament reopens after the summer recess as does Belgium’s senate. L’essentiel reports that 30% of the members have sat in parliament for over 15 years. A commentary on Belgian radio remarked that it will be a slow period of work for the Belgian lawmakers marked by a series of long delays that will hamper any new progress on important legislation. Local elections are expected to give more bargaining clout to the nationalistic Flemish movements.

2. Yesterday’s session in the Maltese parliament was overshadowed by the need for Speaker Michael Frendo to consult the Standing Orders in order to rule about a motion of adjournment related to the Opposition’s pressing need to discuss a shelved plan for the privatisation of the management of public car parks. The Hon. Franco Debono also seemed rather concerned that his motion of no confidence in Minister Austin Gatt should be given the priority that he believes it deserves.

3. Much high talk was wasted on the ether as a few political aficionados spoke of a crumbling democracy, a government addicted to power or an opposition that busied itself with causing trouble. A road of bollocks, I hasten to add because, to corrupt the words of Trapattoni “bad democracy it is when the will of the majority as expressed in parliament is not respected”. The day of the showdown has not come yet. The car park excuse is not working wonders for either government or opposition. Government loses points for the image being portrayed of a decision maker that does not involve the parts (councils) and ignores issues of subsidiarity (Mosta Council, Rabat Council and more would rightly expect more involvement). The opposition has had its eagerness for power come what may unmasked by insisting on discussing plans that have been shelved.

4. Some signs of a revision of Opposition strategy in today’s papers. Joseph Muscat distanced himself from the Debono No Confidence motion. A sly move. It could go some way in abating the growing perception that Muscat is just as power hungry as the man who is supposedly clutching desperately to the seat of power. We’re in no hurry to present such a motion – said Muscat. What he did not obviously commit to is whether his party would vote in line with Franco should such a motion see the light of day before the budget. Given that the motion is based on the spurious car park issue then the holier than thou approach could be hoist by Franco’s petard.

5. Petards and fireworks is what the current government is specialising in. J’accuse remains of the opinion that government on life support will be ultimately perceived as a weak government. The summer plans should have culminated in a Sturm und Drang announcement of an election around the time of the reconvening of parliament. The key here was initiative. By taking the initiative and redrawing the battle ground (including the erasing of Franco, JPO and any dithering backbencher such as Mugliett) the PN would have regained precious ground in the eyes of public perception. Instead by hanging on to the power and leaving gaping questions as to the fabric and workings of democratic representation among Joe Public the PN is fast losing the perception game.

6. New issues such as the lease/sale of St. Philip’s (well documented by Carmel Cacopardo on his blog) or the retaining of the title of ambassador by Richard Cachia Caruana (what the hell were they thinking? noblesse obligée?) will not help settle this dust cloud of confusion. The failure to take the initative and the misplaced trust in the magic effect of such things as the 5+5 conference might be rued later on when the campaign really hots up (will it ever?). Furthermore the PN tantrums with regard to the Broadcasting Authority decisions regarding Public Broadcasting programmes will not help sweeten their image either. Meanwhile AD continues to be consistently ignored by the paladins of the future of journalism on PBS’ main programmes.

“Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy, the whores are us.” – P.J. O’ Rourke

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

Car parks

For the record, just for the record, there is a difference between selling off the MANAGEMENT of car parks and selling off the OWNERSHIP of car parks. Yep. Before we rush off to create petitions and cry about the sale of public land to private entrepreneurs let us just make sure we got this one right.

The SALE of public land to a car park company would entail the actual transfer of ownership on land rights. As far as I know no such deals ever happen and the government retains ultimate ownership of public land. Land that the government itself owns in trust for the people. See MCP. See agreement to extend lease in order to allow for further investment in MCP (conditional on public garden).

The transfer of MANAGEMENT entails the simple reasoning that while government (and therefore you) remains the ultimate owner of the land, such land is managed as a car park by a private firm/individual who will (hopefully) also be obliged to make such improvements (considering advances in technology) as necessary to make the actual use of a car park worthwhile. This would probably (you never know with our politician’s brilliant ideas: see Arriva planning) entail the installation of machines for tickets, security cameras and the usual small print that waives the responsibility of car park management if you decided to leave your brand new laptop/ipad/camera in the car. At no point in the duration of a management agreement is the ownership of public land alienated to a third party.

Tant biex jaghraf jixrob l-Earl grey bilmod.