Tag: Dalligate

Categories
Campaign 2013 Dalligate Mediawatch Politics

Men of the Moment

“We need a contest”. Prime Minister Gonzi apparently believes that a bit of competition would be healthy for his party. In a way you cannot blame him. The opposition is anything but good competition in that respect given how it seems to be banking solely on the concept of “victory by default”. Joseph Muscat’s schizophrenic approach (the country needs an election yesterday but we won’t tell you our plans because election time is not here yet) does little to force the debate down to practical terms and Gonzi’s team are stuck in an eternal time loop of the clichéd criticism (same faces).

We want a fight from our rightful parties

I’d love to have the parties trade blows on factual positions. Energy for example – not just highlighting what is bad and what has been done wrong but rather what will be done in the future. The same goes for a myriad other topics: water alone takes a prime place in future planning priorities – from floodings to wastage to the cost of providing water services efficiently. Health? Beyond the hospitals is there a concrete position on health care and its weight on the national budget? How do the behemoths fare on that. The nationalist party has been busy waving new “rights” in our faces – and depending on whether you believe new government appointee Antonio Ghio or IT Law Department guru Cannataci it is not clear whether we are getting this business of rights right.

Then there were the recent bandwagons such as censorship. Apparently it is dead and if you believe people like Owen Bonnici it’s thanks to the divorce debate that censorship was finally tackled. You couldn’t make it up if you wanted to (unless you were Robert Musumeci on a tautological aphorism generating trip ). The big issues lie ahead unsafely entrenched in a minefield of fence-sitters and conservative loonies. IVF, abortion (yep the big A), gay marriage, adoption by same-sex couples – don’t be amazed if we get to an election without clear positions on all these points in a manifesto (except for AD of course but they don’t count).

We want positions, we want battles over positions. Instead we get billboards. DWLLWGAF?

Dalligate and its leftovers

Did you notice how John Dalli’s moment in the international limelight petered away quietly? Oh of course, you will get your columnist in some agenda-driven papers trying to highlight the strength of the tobacco lobby or the weaknesses of some EU institution or another but in general terms Dalligate (now termed Snusgate by some) is unfolding into the two-dimensional issue that we had predicted early on. Why?

Well. On a European level Dalli finds himself with little to argue with. All his hopes seem to be pinned on a report that remains hidden from public eyes. On the other hand his random interventions before an ogling public at the height of the news items’ four days of fame have produced such gems as his justification of the use of canvassers as intermediaries for Commissioner business. That in itself negated the need of the results of the OLAF report becoming public. Put simply Dalli had confirmed with his own words that his modus operandi made him anything but unimpeachable. Ceasar’s wife was not above suspicion. We can leave the legal bickering on whether a sacking it was to his lawyers but on a political level Dalli’s way of working – though not illegal per se – was sufficient to raise enough eyebrows and get him kicked out of the Commission.

Does it really matter whether Barroso did it out of spite? Not really. What matters here is that Dalli (with Mr Zammit) left a door open wide enough to create the pretext for his elimination from the Commission. It will be up to his successors (and future Council meetings) to clear this messy state of affairs and to ensure that such situations are more clearly regulated. On a European level the pie is all over the place. A dark cloud remains on the modus operandi of the tobacco lobby, on the workings of OLAF itself, on the potential conflict of interest by some members of the Supervisory board and on the Commission (including its relations with member states). There is also no denying that Malta’s reaction as a state to the Dalli sacking would have been different had it been any other politician than the one who had burnt all his bridges with his own capital. If journalists could come up with probing questions about the iter of the sacking process then I am sure in that in the rear corridors of power a properly placed question regarding one’s own nominee would have been due.

After Dalli

After Dalli we get Borg. Another one. Was he a safe nomination? Well we can never be too sure. Let us start with the party/government that nominated him. The reasons behind the nomination are very evidently based on a mixture of self-preservation and priorities that put Maltese issues firmly above anything European. Nothing that has not happened elsewhere in Europe. Still they must be noted. I’d insist that the most ideal candidate for that position had been “burnt” thanks to the inability of the PN to control its dissenters. That too must be noted. Within Richard Cachia Caruana’s CV there will forever remain the blemish of a parliamentary vote that claims to de facto have found him guilty of having worked against Malta’s interests. No matter that the discussion and vote did anything but prove that point.

Borg goes to Brussels with a heavy baggage that no amount of excess fines can justify. His position within the ideological framework of the nationalist party has clearly been one of the hard-line christian democrat that stops just short of wearing a cassock. Although I would dare say that his views do not necessarily reflect those of the majority of persons of a nationalist persuasion (given the panoply of values that have recently been swallowed like a bitter pill for vote purposes) he still managed to throw them around forcibly like some latter day Savonarola. From the treatment of immigrants to positions on IVF, divorce and gay marriages we cannot really say that Borg is exporting a bit of liberal Malta to the Commission.

In any other time this would be neither here nor there – and this coming from a blog that still sees Buttiglione’s rejection as substantially unfair and legally incorrect. This is not any other time though. This is Malta reeling from pie on its face that results from its last nominee becoming the first Commissioner to resign individually. Even without the greens and socialists giving Borg a hard time the chances of some more pie on the face are quite high. Having said that there is also the possibility that Borg softens his hard-line approach on a European level and keeps his personal views to himself. The Commissioner role after all is about a Commission agenda and not a personal one.

The Contest

And after Borg? Well the John Dalli news must have been a godsend to PM Gonzi. As the nationalist party announces a protracted campaign for the Deputy Leader contest (practically one month including two weeks for nominations) you can see how much time can be wasted on what is essentially a pointless race. Yes, you read right. Pointless.As Tonio Fenech and Mario De Marco giggle away with reporters – “I’ll be your campaign manager” joked De Marco, “Madonna, what’s the rush” replied Fenech, prompting Mario to check if there was someone else in the room – you sense that this is yet another transparent time killing manoeuvre. Yes, this is the moment when the striker for the team that is winning in extra time notices he is about to be subbed so he rushes to the farthest point on the pitch before developing a sudden bout of walking-itis that would make for First Secretary at the Ministry of Funny Walks.

Suddenly the post of Deputy Leader has become the most important position in the universe and even the resignation of iOS6 responsible Scott Forstall pales in comparison (it doesn’t really, Apple’s turnover is many many many times larger than Malta’s economic worth). Previously this Deputy Leader business might have been considered an anointment for the future leader of the PN. Previously though there were much less strands and cliques within the party. Forget the thin veneer of a united face that is about as convincing as a Halloween mask designed by a three year old. This Deputy will be a deputy in any case. Whoever is elected will still have to face a new battle should the place for leader become vacant. I doubt that at that moment there will be any “power of the incumbent deputy” issues to deal with because chances are that “that moment” will be a time of renewal for the whole party.

So as I said. Gonzi is not lying when he says “We need a contest”. Don’t get all confused by the “we need a contest” bit though. The only benefit of this contest is that it is a welcome distraction from the “election today, election tomorrow” uncertainty and, if the rumours that Franco Debono is interested in contesting are true then there’s one hell of a distracted person that can be kept busy at least till the end of November when he will get his first reality check with the PN Councillor votes. (Last time round there were 818 of them voting).

Sandy

Hurricanes like Sandy really give us a sense of perspective. Battered by winds and water New York (and, lest we forget much of the Caribbean and East Coast) has suffered heavy damage and loss of human life. Reactions by Presidential candidates Obama and Romney just a week away from the elections should serve as a lesson to many politicians the world over. When in doubt do the most decent thing possible.

 

J’accuse will be silent over this All Hallow’s Eve, All Saints and Dia de los muertos. It’s wedding anniversary weekend and we’ll be heading to the Languedoc region hoping for the last of the sunny warmth.

Categories
Dalligate

Dalligate avec du recul – (Part II – Regrets they have a few)

The day Dalli resigned from the Commission (or was forced to resign if you prefer) I got a call from Malta. “They’ve just mentioned his resignation on RTK. Is he preparing for the election too?” You couldn’t fault this way of thinking if you wanted to. A man had just resigned from probably one of the highest posts within the European Union and the first thought that probably sprung to the mind of many Maltese was in relation to the forthcoming national elections. Will Dalli be back like a latter-day Schwarzenegger? Slowly, as events unfolded it became more and more clear that Dalli was out through no choice of his own but this did not assuage the thirst for Melito-centric interpretations of the goings-on.

Again, we were still in “hazy-fact” land when the tribal delineations began to take shape. It wasn’t hard to second-guess really though in some cases the conclusions drawn could be surprising. Dalli was the man kicked upstairs by the nationalist party to what he seemed to uncannily consider his “Siberia”. His rather frequent raids into the Maltese political scene were at best described as indecorous (for a Commissioner) and at worst clumsy. Three issues stick out like an ugly wart on a halloween mask: (1) first there was the questionable business in relation to energy and SARGAS (in apparent partnership with a future labour government), (2) then there was his intervention as a witness for Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando in the little farce court held at Dar Centrali, and finally, on a rather different (and perhaps more crucial level) was (3) his baffling intervention during the Libyan Spring that had Barroso fuming at the collar.

Dalli had definitely positioned himself firmly away from the “ungrateful” (in Franco Debono terminology) PN constellation and was busy cosying up to the rebels on the one hand and the opposition on the other. He could have let this all go by and concentrated on fulfilling a prosperous term as Commissioner. This would have done his CV a load of good, even in Melito-centric Malta, and who knows whether by the end of his term he would not have preferred pastures new far away from whatever counts for politics on the island these days. We won’t know though, and never will, and one of the reasons is that John Dalli has Silvio Zammit as an acquaintance, probably has him down as a business partner, more probably still as some form of confidant. I insist on the probably at this stage because I prefer to wait for the concrete proof to come out (as always).

So yes. We were saying. Dalli resigned and next thing we knew it was connected to charges of fraud and trading in influence. What happened next was very telling. I’ll try to summarise a few of the positions:

The Greater PN Benefit

I couldn’t really fathom this one, but that’s probably because I try to think in logical order and not through conspiracy theory smoke. Essentially there were varying degrees within this faction but the underlying theme seemed to be one: Dalli’s disgrace is PN’s gain. Funny that. No matter how much acrimony Dalli had shown to the PN in the past months, he remained a Commissioner nominated by the present Prime Minister. A disgraced commissioner is a disgraced nominee for the country. I had immediately blogged on that point  (The Surreal Case of (ex) Commissioner Dalli) and pointed out what seemed to be the obvious, namely that not only was PN’s nominee disgraced but this was compounded by the fact that it was evident to many that this nomination was the result of the party putting its interests before the nation’s.

The We Told You So Brigade

Which brings me to the “we told you so” brigade that numbers among its ranks the heavyweight blogger on the Runs. Daphne was in a way proved right to have pointed out that Dalli was a problem that should never have been exported. With hindsight the nomination of a volatile figure such as Dalli seems counter-productive. The underlying reason for the nomination was very evidently the exportation of an inconvenience (best encapsulated in the phrase “kicked upstairs”) than the result of a search of the most suitable person for the Commission post. In macchiavellian, “The Thick of It” terms, Dalli had already turned into a sort of untouchable outcast politically speaking and by nominating him to the Commissioner’s post this problem would not simply vanish.

The Conspiracy Theory

Inevitably you had the usual suspects hanging on to John Dalli and praying and hoping that this was some weird conspiracy theory by those evil schemers at PN HQ who needed to rid themselves of this evil economist before the actual election run up. Needless to say that if the people in Pietà are really that stupid to hoist a petard under Malta’s reputation abroad simply to get John and his retinue out of the national election equation then really this country is in the pits. You did have what would become the MaltaToday line of journalism (coupled with ONE News and its corollaries) trying hard on the “entrapment” line – nothing to do with Paul Borg Olivier slyly laying an email trap on Silvio but rather the “Evil Tobacco Industry” pulling a smart one like, you know, they do in Hollywood movies. That case remains a weak case – two days on and is fast running dry of ideas. I still have one question in this respect though: What is John Dalli’s level of interest in MaltaToday? I’m not holding my breath for any answers.

So those were the main battle lines. Poor Dalli was doomed in most cases as a nation of sleuths set to work trying to delve deeper into Dalligate. Interestingly the Dalli bomb relegated many many issue to a secondary level. Parliament and its convoluted agenda were momentarily forgotten, no “iggranfat mas-siggu tal-poter” and no calls for early election. Even Joseph Muscat learnt his lesson and announced a “cautious approach” to the matter.

The first indication of the transmogrification of Dalligate into electoral spin came, unsurprisingly from the nationalist corner of the ring. It was inevitable because Labour were still reeling from the obvious problem of guilt by association. For too long now had they courted the disgruntled Dalli and, worse still, they had often hinted that part of their energy plan involved Mr Dalli and his Nordic contacts (oh sweet irony of ironies). The Nationalist party should have been reeling too. As I explained earlier they were the nominating party for BOTH persons involved in the scandal. A Nationalist Commissioner and a Nationalist Deputy Mayor hailing from that great college of upright councillors that is Sliema. So in the first place we got silence. A whole bloody wall of it.

Which left space for the usual noisy bunch. The first indication of a plan, a suggestion, for making use of Dalligate to PN’s advantage came from Daphne Caruana Galizia on her Thursday column. The plan was the tried and tested “guilt by association” and was built very much on what Labour probably feared the moment Dalli’s resignation came out. It was simple really – Dalli, thanks to his recent dealings and appearances was not really a nationalist Commissioner. No siree, Dalli was to be slammed with the worst label in the nationalist political book: he was “Labour”. It’s just like the Franco treatment of late. You know “he deserves to be with Joseph’s skip, dak Mintoffjan”. The equation worked out the logical leaps for you. Dalli is Labour. Dalli worked with Labour. Dalli’s plans for a future Labour government make him even more Labour. So Dalli’s resignation is tantamount to a full blown Labour loss.

Which is in part true and reasonable. From a Maltese point of view and if you were to ignore all the happenings at Commission level (and the fact that the offer, the bribe and the report relate to many things but to nothing Labour) the recent appearances by Commissioner Dalli made him in the least a “non-nationalist” and at the most someone who comfortably beds with Labour. The script was there for all to see and the Runs made sure that regular postings reminding us of Dalli’s recent supposed ills reinforced this theory. Little surprise therefore that after a trip to Brussels for the latest information Malta’s avant-garde investigative journalist returned to produce a programme sans-guests that seemed to have been ghost written by Daphne Caruana Galizia. I needed more than one ‘kerchief to stop the tears from flowing when Lou spoke of his “witnesses” who could place Dalli and Silvio at Peppis between March and May. Really Lou? Your “eyewitnesses”? Pity Daffers blogged about them first.

Slamming Dalli and slamming Labour might be convenient but it misses one major participant. It depends on Lawrence Gonzi admitting that his nominating John Dalli as Commissioner was with hindsight an error of judgement. You see, no matter how pro-Labour Dalli’s slant had begun there is no denying that he was in Brussels (with Silvio) thanks to the kicking upstairs by our PM. It would seem that the pitch by the DCG-Bondi duo was not to be taken up by Lawrence Gonzi:

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi vehemently refused to pass any comments on Commissioner John Dalli’s resignation but said he is not sorry he took the decision to appoint him Commissioner instead of Joe Borg in 2010. Asked to give his reaction on the negative impact on Malta’s image due to Mr Dalli’s resignation, the Prime Minister only said that he did not want to pass judgement. (…) Asked whether, with hindsight, it was a mistake to appoint John Dalli  Commissioner, Dr Gonzi defended his decision and said he was not sorry for his decision. (Times)

There you go. No regrets. Which means that the prodigal son was not refuted. Once again I agree with Daphne and believe that this is a statement that Dr Gonzi might come to regret – even on a purely political level. Our Prime Minister has other pressing issues in mind though – first among which is the nomination of a new commissioner.

The New Commissioner

First of all let us simply agree that Labour’s calls for a “consensus commissioner” are ridiculous at this stage. They come from the same school of constitutional law as Franco Debono’s or Robert Musumeci’s. The interesting bit is that notwithstanding the fact that the PN might have learnt its lesson about putting the party’s interests before the nation it might find itself in the unenviable position of being unable to do otherwise.

Why? Simple. Whoever gets sent to Brussels is almost definitely out of the running for next election. Not to mention that whoever goes to Brussels is also out of campaign planning. The most suitable candidate has been tainted by the kangaroo court parliament show. Yes, I’m speaking of Ambassador (emeritus) Richard Cachia Caruana. Should Lawrence Gonzi nominate him as Commissioner (a post he is undoubtedly suited to perform) this would be the end of the nationalist campaign and the opening of an unassailable gap in the polls. Worse still, Cachia Caruana is a crucial behind the scenes participant in PN electoral planning and it would be hard to replace such a player at this stage.

Other suitable candidates from among the party giants could also be considered a “waste” in party terms. A Chris Said or a De Marco for example would be an unhappy wastage for the PN. You could consider an outgoing politician but do you really imagine Austin Gatt in Brussels? The good thing is that he would take Delia with him. Or maybe not. Michael Frendo? Tonio Borg? Possibly. Definitely not Simon Busuttil – too many votes to be lost with him away though again his would be a perfect fit. Which leaves us with the least controversial option. Louis Galea, currently sitting at the Court of Auditors, would slide into the job without so much as a whimper. He’s already been assessed for the suitability of holding a high profile EU post, is already up to date with EU institutional workings and hey, he’s a smart politician, which is not so common these days. In a way Galea’s nomination would lessen the impact of what would otherwise be a case of PN priorities trumping national priorities.

Preliminary Conclusions

It’s a tough call and there’s much more to write but this post is already too long for my liking. (A call back to the days of my Indy columns). There’s much more to mull about but one thing is for certain… Dalligate is not short of repercussions on the Maltese side of the scandal.

 

 

 

Categories
Euroland Mediawatch

Dalligate… avec du recul – part I (European Lobbying)

I did say yesterday that the (ex) Commissioner Dalli case smacks of the surreal. With a little less than twenty-four hours time for reflection and with a flurry of statements and press conferences to look at (not to mention the early-worm analysis) we can safely conclude that the case is less surreal and more multi-dimensional.

Strange as it was seeing Lou Bondi among the legion of journalists querying the Commission’s move following the OLAF report, it was a fitting reminder of the (at least) dual dimension of this case. Bondi’s questions (and those of a few other journalists who bothered to research the Malta dimension) represented the Maltese interest in the affair. The TVM talk-show host is undeniably partisan (a “renown fact” some would say) in his approach and this element of partisanship was present in the Brussels Q&A. Even from our point of view, watching the events unfold yesterday we could not resist wearing Maltese partisan glasses – whether you formed part of the “we want Dalli to fail (see we told you so)” brigade or the conspiracy theorist “the evil clique has hit him hard” clan. It is inevitable in our Melito-centric way of thinking: this was happening in Brussels because someone in Malta needed it to happen.

But that is not necessarily the case is it? Here’s why.

European Lobbying after Dalligate

I spoke to a few colleagues who have worked closely within and around the lobbying industry in Brussels. Tucked away as I am in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg I cannot claim to have first hand experience of lobbying (and thank heavens for that since my work depends on not being influenced by outside lobbying  – it IS a court of law you know). Insider information has therefore been crucial to better understand the works.

First there is the business of lobbying. Commissioners meet companies, associations and lobby groups regularly. It is not a hidden fact. You can actually check out a Commissioner’s agenda for such meetings -they are public knowledge. John Dalli has himself shown that he met most of the Tobacco Industry groups in preparation for his next Tobacco Directive in which he has invested much of his time. The trick here is to try to understand and find out exactly how far the Dalli-Zammit connection took this particular type of contact and lobbying. What the journalists were legitimately querying yesterday (particularly to the enigmatic OLAF chief Kessler) was “where is the wrongdoing”?

Industry experts will tell you that lobbying to meet a Commissioner is legit. That a go-between asks for money to set up a meeting “is neither here nor there”. The no-no bit comes when you “trade in influence”. If I understand this correctly it means that the Commissioner and his entourage don’t only deal with access to the Commissioner but also put a price on “changing legislation itself”. Which is where the whole business of proof remains hazy. Kessler told us that the proof was circumstantial and the OLAF report actually concludes that no legislation was influenced while adding that Dalli was aware of the dealings. The emails – the few that have surfaced (one actually) are neither here nor there. What is holding Dalli/Zammit back from publishing all the correspondence with Swedish Match?

An ex-colleague of mine at the Court, now busy on the lecture circuit blogged about Dalligate and its repercussions. Here is what he has to say about Dalli’s position:

These findings of the OLAF do not seem to prima facie warrant Mr Dalli’s resignation and contribute to make its sudden move appear as an overreaction to the questionable behavior of an individual foreign to his office. However, the language chosen by the Commission to convey the findings of the OLAF report is quite ambiguous and opens to speculation: to what extent Mr Dalli knew that he was the object of lobbying by a member of his Maltese entourage? OLAF seems to suggest that he was actually fully aware of this fact. Did he take any action to limit these lobbying efforts? And more importantly: to what extent Dalli’s behavior, even though a inert one, has been such as to breach the duty of integrity to which he was bound under Article 245 TFEU?

These questions cannot be answered easily and without the appropriate proof. In order to build a case for his defence, John Dalli would have to probably do the following:

  • prove that the draft Directive was not influenced by the smokeless tobacco clan (no legislation effected)
  • publish the full exchange of correspondence with any lobby teams (correspondence made in his name and to which he had access)
  • procure a list of witnesses to any meetings that occured
  • show a list of other companies/associations that he met
  • possibly provide a timeline that could show that Swedish Match’s dealings turned sour after a possible rejection.
Until that happens we must bear in mind that lobby relations in Brussels have now shifted to a new paradigm. Dalligate  will have endless repercussions on the lobbying industry in Brussels, because it will mean that a company/association really has to watch out how to approach any Commissioner, how to word emails and more. Meanwhile, the Commissioners and their staff (thousands of them) will have to revise the conditions for meeting industry reps, something which until now has been done, according to industry practitioners with ease and without any stains.Comparisons are being drawn to the “Cash for Access/Lobbygate” scandal in the UK in 1998. (Incidentally it takes quite a desperate bit of research to rely on the impressions of a Daily Mail blogger to gauge impressions abroad on Dalligate -baksheesh? really? Is 1998 really that far back Synon? Rule Brittania fejn jaqbillhom dawn l-iStricklandjani).
On the face of the information that has been made available until now – and barring any prova regina that might still be hiding in the OLAF report – the Commission (and Dalli) seems to have been an easy target for entrapment by an angry lobbyist combined with the presence of an OLAF that is enthusiastic to prove its worth. Dalli and Zammit might be eventually found to be guilty of over-enthusiastically engaging in “cash for access” dealings (not exactly baksheesh Synon) and thus leaving the door wide open for an industry specialist to work it to its advantage. Alberto Alemanno asks a few questions in this respect:
In these circumstances, the sudden resignation of Mr Dalli is somewhat surprising as it is likely to weaken not only his personal position but also that of the EU Commission. While the EU Commission emerges as the looser of this ‘situation’, the prima facie winner seems instead Swedish Match, one of the leader producer of smokefree tobacco products. One may legitimately wonder what has been the exact role played by the company in the birth of the professional relationship between the Maltese entrepreneur and the company. Was Swedish Match a victim or the creator of such a relationship?

Should it turned out that it has been the latter, the trap that Swedish Match seem to have successfully tended to Mr Dalli could turned out to be counterproductive: the benefit it could gain in messing delaying the preparation of the revised directive might be offset by the negative image it gained in originating this scandal. Should instead turned out that Swedish Match was the innocent victim of a fraud (read its yesterday’s press release), nobody will feel very sorry for a company selling tobacco products and willing to hire somebody who was ready to leverage on his personal relationship to steer the outcome of the policy process.

In any event, this episode, although unfortunate for everyone, has the merit to bring to public attention the limits of today’s tobacco control efforts : the lack of an open, evidence-based and non-ideological debate upon the future of tobacco (including snus). My claim is that should such a debate exist neither Swedish Match nor Commissioner Dalli would have fallen victim of the snus’ trap.

 So to conclude part one. Dalligate issue goes far beyond the preoccupations of our navel-gazing island. An important European institution has been rocked by the scandal – the practices of the lobbying industry are bound to be revised and many questions have cropped up that remain as ye unanswered. Prominent among which is the distinct possibility that a lobby group that is sufficiently motivated and irked by a current Commissioner might find a way to use the EU’s own mechanisms to rid itself of an uncomfortable interlocutor.
If this is the case there is much reviewing left to be done.
* J’accuse would like to thanks the persons who under the veil of anonymity provided relevant insight into the world and workings of lobby-groups in Brussels. The next post will focus on the Malta repercussions of Dalligate – from nominating a new Commissioner, to the effect on an electoral campaign to the suspension of Dalli’s “interference” in local politics.