Tag: KSU

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

By Appointment

appointment_akkuzaI was asked recently to give my two cents’ worth for an article being prepared by a MaltaToday journalist. He was looking into the recent history of KSU and more particularly the trend of ex-KSU council members becoming politicians (even more particularly Nationalist politicians). Was the university student council simply a machine geared to churn out potential nationalist MPs? Why only nationalist? Was (is) the university a nationalist party enclave? Is there a reason SDM still win a majority of votes at the elections? And of course… what is wrong with the “first past the post” system?

I will not delve into the answers that I gave here but what intrigues me is the perspective that is taken on the question of what we can call political careerism. Let me just say (I admit rather idealistically) that the whole KSU structure as conceived in the mid-90s only becomes counterproductive when allegiance to representing political party interests takes precedence over the aim of student representation. Back to careerism. The question is, is it only the nationalist side of our great divide that operates a school of aspiring careerists? A place in SDM, eventually a seat on the KSU council, a bit of coverage, maybe a spot of Local Council sparring and then a place in the party mechanism only to be nominated on a board or two once your party is in government. Who knows?

Would it take an anthropologist to really uncover the liens that intertwine in our very local and islandish form of networking that uses certain DNA traits such as “better the devil you know”? Take one step back. Look at the Aaron Farrugia’s of the Labour constellation. Sure they may not have made it to the coveted KSU executive post (though, had they done their representation homework properly they would have discovered that they had quite a role to play in the Social Policy Commission through Pulse). Still, you will find that the current administration is peppered with young, green, inexperienced hopefuls that are projected (many would add undeservedly) onto various committees, boards, and whatnot. All By TaghnaLkoll Appointment you would say. And you would be right.

It’s two sides of the same coin though. 25 years of nationalist administration, plus a petri dish of cliches as is the university population might have meant that SDM had the upper hand and were more prone to scrutiny when it came to careerism in the public eye (particularly after the idealist non-affiliated SDM petered out following its three year stint battling the impossible). This does not mean that what was true for the nationalist greasy pole is not true of the labourite one. People are so obsessed with this idea that there is some kind of nationalist infiltration of the university that they tend to forget that the two “schools” of partisan interference have sown (and reaped) their seeds in the university campus.Whether it is intentional or just an adaptation of the campus to the realities of political careerism is anyone’s guess.

It’s not just university you know. The ivory tower is only one field of recruitment. The networking system upon which our political parties have relied means that in every sector – from business to health to entertainment – there are massive interests that very often verge on the economic. We have seen how in the last few months the Labour government has scarcely been able to hide the web of interests that lie behind every supposed “policy” move. The brazen approach of discovery taken by Caruana Galizia’s Running Commentary is expediting the discovery of a web of interests that is being accommodated. From advertising brochures to insurance contracts to appointments on public boards. As Benigni would say “Qui è un mangia mangia generale”.

Surprised? Surely not. Also today former PN activist Frank Psaila “blogs” on MaltaToday about “The untouchables“. His is a particular slant about “people of trust” being necessarily appointed in particular strategic posts. Strategic to the government of course. Psaila can say a thing or two about what happened during the time of the PN administration because he was part of it. Caruana Galizia will have multiple willing “leakers” eager to disclose the secret entanglings of labour.

The real question is whether had there been an equally popular system of discovery during the previous administrations – one that lends itself to subtle contributions by “international networks” – whether it would have also uncovered a similar web of intertwined interests and favours. We had a former PN secretary general refer to a system of barter to explain how the party works. Combined with the aforementioned “better the devil you know” approach, you get the nagging feeling that just as a series of not too serendipitous connections would link the PM to a newly formed advertising agency or insurance company nowadays,  you could have done very much the same exercise a while back.

True. The Labour system is much more outrageous and ostentatious with its careerist appointments. Competence and relevance (of qualification) are thrown out of the window. Within 21 months we have been able to witness arrogant dog-headedness and a multitude of forms of brazen nepotism. A dark shadow looms on most government tenders and nowadays when you hear the prime minister say that “he respects the court decision” (as in the case of the prohibitory injunction on the transport issue) you get the feeling that the tone is more “I will tolerate for now” than “I will humbly prostrate myself before the decision of the courts of law”.

In essence Labour are much more expert at exposing the ugly warts of the way our democratic system functions. What is sure is that 25 years of nationalist administration failed to strengthen the appropriate watchdogs that would be barking madly at this point. “Authorities” of all sorts are feebler and weaker. Labour fast-forwarded this weakness in the system by exploiting it further and further. The decline and fall of the police and army system under the able (not for good reasons) hands of Minister who has long lost the plot is the most obvious example. Weakened institutions – the ombudsman, the attorney general’s office, MEPA come to mind – abound. Elsewhere ministers disband independent committees with a simple phone call, MPs are suspected of toying around with tender documents… need I go on?

So the tune has not changed. The need for new politics remains greater than ever. The tragedy is that the system is ever so desperately ingrained in its methods that it becomes harder to see a way out. In such a small democracy as ours it it difficult (or impossible) to imagine the ultimate watchdog turning out to be the catalyst for such a change. Who is the ultimate watchdog? Oh that would be “the average voter”. But he might be too busy trying to expectantly get his foot into the gravy train (by appointment) to bother with the complicated nuances of the absolute reform that is ever so urgent and necessary for this country.

That is the sad truth of it all. A truth that Joseph Muscat turned into the secret underpinning of his strategy: That within the vast majority of the electorate lies an illusion of a legitimate expectation to get a piece of the pie by appointment and for free. So long as that illusion lasts the nation will continue to resemble a suicide of lemmings running towards a cliff’s edge*.

 

* Actually this is an urban myth. Lemmings do not really commit suicide** by collectively jumping off cliffs (see here for example). Voters on the other hand….

 

** The collective term for lemmings, though, is actually a “suicide” of lemmings. As we say in Maltese … Ħu il-fama…

Categories
Politics

Smart savings ?

smart_akkuzaHow big a pinch in government spending is €175,000 per annum? That is the figure that Education Minister Evarist Bartolo claims to be saving the public purse by removing the smart card system and transforming that portion of money into a grant going directly into the students’ purses.

There seem to be murmurs of new controls (checks and balances) on how such money is spent by students – such controls seem to have the nihil obstat of the KSU president who suggested a system of providing receipts for purchases. Sadly no one has yet mentioned how much said systems of checks and balances would cost, consequently we do not even know whether the new cost will be cheaper than the above mentioned administrative expenses that are needed to keep the smart card system in place.

Beyond the petty accounting from a government that increased the annual emoluments to its appointees by €25,000,000 last year (had to put the zeroes to give you a sense of perspective), the move to remove the smart card may have been packaged in the attractive (but deceptive) wrapping of a money saving exercise but it belies a hapless approach to the very reason of the existence of stipends (and maintenance grants, and ring-fenced expenses).

As was argued a good 16 years ago by KSU (and yes, I did form part of that KSU) every time you discuss stipends you have to be aware of why they exist. 16 years ago it was convincingly argued by the KSU before the Galdes Commission that stipends were still a necessary incentive to keep thousands of students out of the work market and in the tertiary level of education. The report we produced in 1998 is too long to summarise here but you can get a read on this link.

Now this government does not seem to be questioning the need for maintaining a system of stipends and grants. The changes were simply cosmetic based on spurious economic justifications. It is rather ironic that the KSU should be in favour of the switch away from smart cards while the GRTU expresses its disappointment. Well, not so ironic given that the main flaw of the outgoing system seems to have been the abuses by retailers who were never intended to be part of such a scheme. The idea behind smart cards was to ensure that the expenses strictly related to educational requirements of the students could be controlled. Money intended for books and stationery would not end up spent on vodka and Easter weekends in Gozo.

Nanny state? Maybe. But this was intrinsically linked with the basic policy of why stipends existed. It is easy to take the Daily Mail approach to stipends and start off your average newspaper column with a whinge about how students have it so easy and that it is about time that stipends are removed. Thatt does not mean that you have the bigger picture in mind. it just means that you are willing to ride the wave of public sentiment that is always so popular in Malta.

The truth is that stipends should form part of a wider set of targets and policies that not only effect the educational levels of our nation but also employment and development policy. Bartolo’s lame excuse of saving the equivalent of one-third of the spending on a Joseph Calleja concert is ridiculous when seen from this wider perspective. As things stand, a specific measure designed to ensure that a substantial part of the monies allocated to subsidising student autonomy in tertiary education is used for the purpose for which it was intended has been shot down with no effective replacement in sight.

Sure, the system was being abused – but rather than create a better check and punish abusers the government has chosen an easy way out that utterly compromises the whole idea of ring-fencing the student subsidy system. By saving €176,000 on an imperfect system of checks and balances, the government has now opted for no checks and balances – at least until we are told whether any new system is in place and what it entails (and how much that one will cost).

As for the KSU, they might be applauding this move enthusiastically but policy wise they should be seeing this as a heavy burden to carry next time a new debate comes up as to the necessity of stipends in this day and age. By discarding any possibility of restricting the spending to educational purposes they have also discarded one of the most convincing elements in favour of Malta’s very specific approach to tertiary education subsistence.

From MaltaToday:

The Education Minister added that students were already spending their grant in non-related educational expenses and, in this way, student would learn how to be responsible with their money.

KSU President Gayle Lynn Callus welcomed the reform but called on government to ensure checks and balances are in place on how the students spend their grant.

Also: The KSU 1999 Stipends Survey documents are available here.

 

Categories
Values

Noti waqt elezzjoni tal-KSJC*

Kull sena meta tasal l-elezzjoni ghall-Ezekuttiv tal-Kunsill Studenti Universitarji nispicca nirraguna ma xi hadd dwar sistemi rapprezentativi u l-“winner takes all” tal-elezzjonijiet. Kull sena ma nikkonkludux wisq filwaqt li xi ghaqda politika minnhom “tkaxkar” is-siggijiet tal-ezekuttiv.

Dalghodu tellajt sentenza fuq facebook wara li rajt li kemm Luciano Busuttil kif ukoll Joseph Cuschieri kienu qed iheggu l-istudenti biex jivvutaw ghall-ghaqda PULSE. Ikkumentali Mark Vella u wegibtu b’serje ta’ kummenti li issa sincerament ghajjejt nirrepetihom. (*U wara li gibidli l-attenzjoni Philip Leone-Ganado indunajt li l-invit ta’ Cuschieri u Busuttil kien ghall-elezzjoni fil-KSJC – dan kollu li nghid hawn xorta japplika ghal KSU, fil-kaz ta’ KSJC hag’ohra, jiena nemmen li l-politika qatt ma ghandha tasal sa’ livelli post-sekondarji).

L-esperiment tal-istatut tal-KSU ma rnexxiex sa’ l-ahhar. Ma rnexxiex ghaliex l-indhil tal-partiti baqa jizdied u ma rnexxiex ghax l-immagni li tinghata hija wahda annwali ta’ xi glieda PLPN fil-mikrokozmu ta’ tal-Qroqq. Pero irnexxa f’hafna oqsma ohra. Kont fuq il-Kampus xi gimaghtejn ilu u rajt kampus  biezel – hafna hwienet vera – pero wara l-bibien tal-kuriduri t’isfel ta’ Dar l-iStudent smajt lil min qed ihabrek ghall-ghaqda tieghu, rajt noticeboards mifqugha avvizi u rajt hafna u hafna ideat iduru. Wara l-istorbju tal-influenza partitarja hemm hafna qed isir u dan ukoll grazzi ghal strutturi tal-KSU il-gdid (issa ghaddew 17-il sena imma ejja nahsbu li l-esperiment ghadu ghaddej) li bejn kontroversja u ohra hadem u halla lil min jahdem. Wara l-akkuzi u l-ghajjat ta’ partit u oppozizzjoni hemm min jibqa jtektek u ghaddej fil-hajja universitarja tieghu itella eventi u jirrprezenta filwaqt li jista jserrah fuq dak il-monolit li huwa l-eqdem kunsill raprezentattiv fl-ewropa.

Inhallikom bit-test tad-diskursata (vera iktar qisa monologu tieghi imma insomma), u nittama li jekk (bhal kull sena) ikun hemm x’tiddiskuti dan isir b’mod infurmat u minghajr wisq pregudizzji.

stipendjishah1

JRZ FB STATUS : Luciano Busuttil and Joseph Cuschieri would vote PULSE. Just so you know where your vote should be going …
#studentrepresentation #notomanipulation

MV Naħseb aħjar tikkampanja għal KSU aktar rappreżentattiv u mhux monopartitiku totalitarju kif inhu bis-sistema tal-lum

JRZ Perswaz li tahseb hekk. Kif ukoll perswaz li l-KPS hija manifestazzjoni cara ta rapprezentanza wiregha mahsuba ghat-trasparenza fit-tfassil tal-politika studenteska.

MV Ma nafx x’inhi l-KPS. Imma KSU ideali, bħal ma huwa Parlament ideali għalija, huwa korp proporzjonalment rappreżentattiv tal-ilħna kollha fl-Università, u mhux winner takes all li jispiċċa jirriproduċi l-partitokrazija ‘tal-kbar’.

JRZ Iva Mark, u bhalek hafna ohra ma semghux bil-KPS u xorta juzaw termini bhal “sistema monopartitiku totalitarju” u “winner takes all”. Il-verità (u l-ironija) hi li s-sistema mahsuba proprja fuq zewg principji importantissimi li huma ir-rapprezentanza u l-partecipazzjoni. Meta inhasbet is-sistema il-gdida tal-KSU, din kienet hsieb radikali u kienet mfassla proprju bl-idea li kemm jista jkun l-“indhil barrani” partitarju ma jibqax hemm, specjalment fit-tfassil ta’ kull politika li mahsuba li tirraprezenta l-istudenti.

Il-KSU ma hux biss l-ezekuttiv izda (u qed nghid dan minghajr ma nikkonsidra xi tbaghbis li seta sar mill-1996 ‘l hawn) huwa maghmul minn grupp ta’ organi rapprezentattivi – kull wiehed b’rwol car u specifiku.

Il-KPS (Kummissjoni Politika Socjali) thaddan fiha kull ghaqda u organizzazzjoni politika u mhux li hemm fil-kampus u ghandha rwol li tohloq u thejji pozizzjonijiet politici fuq kull qasam extra-kurrikulari. Meta thaddmet sew il-KPS harget b’pozizzjonijiet politici cari u determinanti (speci ta’ set ta’ principji) – ghadni kburi hafna bil-pozizzjoni li hadet il-KSU a bazi ta’ dokument tal-KPS qabel l-elezzjoni tal-1998. Huwa il-KPS li jiggarantixxi l-idea ta’ Parlament u li sahansitra lanqas ma hu proporzjonali fis-sens li kull ghaqda ghandha vot – jekk xejn dan huwa shortcoming illi kellu jiddahhal. Idealment jigi elett proporzjonalment ukoll organu bhal dan.

Il-KE (Kummissjoni Edukazzjoni) hija organu iehor li fiha tigbor awtomatikament ir-rapprezentanti akkademici kollha tal-istudenti (Faculty Reps u Senat u Kunsill). Ghal darb’ohra din tfassal politika li tirraprezenta l-wesgha kollha studenteska.

Ir-ras tas-sistema, kif ukoll il-magna hija l-ezekuttiv. Dan inholoq bit-tir li jhaddem politika maghmula mill-KE u KPS. Ma johloqx politika imma jwettaqa. Il-falliment tas-sistema kien (u ghadu) li l-organi ma jintuzawx kif suppost – b’mod partikolari l-ezekuttiv u l-elezzjoni ghall-membri tieghu. Dan jigri minhabba l-indhil tal-partiti politici li minghalihom qed jaghmlu xi gid meta jibdew idarru liz-zghar bil-metodi meskini taghhom. Ma tlumx l-istudenti f’ghaqdiet bhal SDM u PULSE illum li jaraw din bhala xi fast track ghal kandidatura jew xi post “fil-partit”. It-telliefa hija r-rapprezentanza studenteska iva. Mhux tort tas-sistema tort tal-“indhil”. L-istudenti ftit li xejn qatt irnexxielhom jeghlbu din il-gibda lejn il-partiti (zmienna kien eccezzjoni lampanti nahseb u malajr ghebet).

Illum ghandek lil Luciano u lil Joseph jtellghu fb status li kieku jivvutaw PULSE. Malli tellajt dan l-istatus jien gie retweetjat minn David Agius ghax minghalih li qed niehu sehem f’xi battalja diviziva u nilghab il-loghba tal-PLPN fil-grawnd ta’ tal-Qroqq. Dejjem jghiduli li diska mkissra din tal-PLPN, pero iktar ma jghaddi zmien iktar nahseb li hija realtà u qed ninghata ragun.

J’alla l-istudenti jivvutaw ezekuttiv kompetenti li kapaci johloq sinergija mal-kummissjonijiet u tabilhaqq jirraprezenta l-istudent l-ewwel u qabel kollox. U din ma hix retorika.

 

Categories
Politics

The Auditor General’s Report and KSU

On the 3rd July 2012, the Auditor General presented the Report ‘University of Malta – Concession of parts of University House to the Kunsill Studenti Universitarji’ to the Speaker of the House. The report had been commissioned by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee. You can access the report here. Here is a summary of the report as may be found on the website of the National Audit Office:

The Auditor General presented to Hon. Speaker the Report ‘University of Malta – Concession of parts of University House to the Kunsill Studenti Universitarji’ which was commissioned by the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee. The investigation addressed the concern from two separate, but inter-related, perspectives:

a) a legal/conceptual deliberation of the concession and the eventual use made of the conceded property; and

b) an analysis dealing with the leasing and related operations as run by the Kunsill Studenti Universitarji (KSU), coupled with the University of Malta’s (UoM) involvement in this regard.

The Report concludes that as KSU was never granted any title over the conceded property, it was not in a position to lease out parts of same. Shortcomings on the part of UoM, especially the failure to regularise the position over years, are also discussed.

The Investigation also revealed deficiencies in the manner with which KSU manages the leasing function, with processes deployed not being best practice and not being conducive to accountability and transparency. UoM’s reluctance to deploy a control and monitoring function to ensure its property, as conceded to KSU, is being made good use of, is also reported upon.

National Audit Office (NAO) recommends that steps be immediately taken to ensure the status quo does not prevail, and that a regularisation process be embarked upon. Apart from the definition of a legal framework, an administrative supporting framework and a set of documented procedures should be designed and deployed.

On a wider scale, the Report voices NAO’s concern that the Disposal of Government Land Act does not preclude autonomous (public) bodies from disposing of immovable assets without the monitoring of competent authorities.

I read the report and was immediately inspired to prepare a counter-report that would consist of my observations and comments on the Auditor General’s operation and finding. The main inspiration for my writing the report lies in the fact that I see this kind of review as a misuse of the institutional structures of our nation. This misuse is symptomatic of a deeper malaise that has come about with the abuse of the higher institutions of our country that is in turn based on a misconstruction of such principles as are intrinsic to a system functioning on the basis of the rule of law.

J’accuse has already documented why the recent happenings in Parliament proved to the public that the principles and traditions of our hybrid legal system were being flaunted and sacrificed for political expediency. The request for the investigation into the matters existent between KSU and the University by Owen Bonnici was misguided because it took the matters of an autonomous public body and made them the business of government. This request came from the same corner of the progressives who were scandalised when somebody went running to the police for the latter to censor publications on campus. They are also the same corner of progressives who periodically call upon “the powers” to censor or even shut up bloggers and opinion writers.

This is the kind of Malta that believes that just because you have “freedom of expression” then that means that when exercising that expression you must be automatically right. It is the Malta of rash proposals to restructure a judicial system and attempt to sound like some modern day Hammurabi when the very same “reformers” seem unable to decipher the basic tenets of constitutional politics.

But back to Owen’s request for investigation. The Auditor General had a job to do once the Public Accounts Committee requested him to do it. He gave them a report that we found to be scantily based on (a) the reply to an earlier parliamentary question and (b) the legal advice of a party that had a direct interest in the outcome of the investigation. In the end J’accuse finds that the whole investigation is ultra vires and goes beyond any of the powers that the National Audit Office has.

Incidentally this is not a defence of the practices of the KSU executive whenever they are procuring services for Students’ house. I am fully aware that they have to operate in a minefield of legal uncertainty and that they also have to watch their back from a University Council that might be hungry to reclaim its rights on Dar l-iStudent. Which is why the executive is duty bound to be more transparent in its economic operation and this transparency must always show a student union that is working for the greater good of the student body.

The purpose of the J’accuse report is not only to point out the anomalies of the Auditor General’s findings but also an attempt to highlight the dangers of confusing the roles of our institutions of review. I hope that that purpose will be achieved.

Click here to read J’accuse’s report in reply to the Auditor General’s Investigation.

Categories
Politics

Il-palazz demokratiku

Ilbieraħ

Meta isseħibt fl-għaqda ta’ l-iStudenti Demokristjani Maltin kont fit-tieni sena tiegħi fil-kors tal-liġi. L-esperjenza tiegħi politika sa dakinhar kienet fl-MŻPN Għawdex (kumitat distrettwali) fejn fost l-oħrajn ħdimt għal żmien twil ma Chris Said u Nathaniel Attard. Il-politika li konna ħaddimna ġewwa Għawdex kienet kostruttiva u lokali -qabel ma waslu l-Kunsilli Lokali. Għal bidu kont isseħibt mal-Għ.S.L (tal-liġi) iżda il-ġibda lejn il-ħajja politika kienet kbira wisq u wara insistenza ta’ ċertu Fabio Pirotta (illum Brussel) dħalt f’din l-għaqda u għall-ewwel darba kont affaxxinat mill-ideat u twemmin politiku. Kellna ktieb ta’ Rafael Caldera maqlub għall-Malti li kien jitratta il-ħsieb demokristjan. Qaxxartu minn qoxra sa’ qoxra. U laqatni. L-iktar li  laqatni kien il-ħsieb bażiku u lajk li ma kontx qed nistenna li insib.

F’dak li kien jikkkonċerna id-dilemma ta’ politika konfessjonali li inkwetatni mhux ftit dak iż-żmien, solvejt il-problema. L-interpretazzjoni tiegħi ta’ Caldera kienet waħda li tasal biex tara l-politika demokristjana bħala waħda msejsa fuq l-element soċjali tat-twemmin nisrani. Element soċjali li joħroġ mill-prinċipju essenzjali tal-filosofija nisranija – fejn il-viżjoni soċjali hija intrinsikament marbuta madwar is-saħħa tal-individwu u l-kapaċita tiegħu li jirrispetta lil għajru.

Ma domtx ma integrajt ruħi fil-grupp u ma domniex ma bdejna rivoluzzjoni ċkejkna fi ħdan l-SDM. Konna grupp magħqud illi ħsibna illi din l-għaqda għandha skop edukattiv u propożittiv li jmur lil hinn mill-menu politiku offert fil-pajjiż. Fuq kollox kellna viżjoni. Bdejna billi għamilna ftit “spring cleaning”. Għamilniha ċara li ma konna se niddependu fuq ħadd u ma konna ser inkunu l-vużċi ta’ ħadd ħlief tal-prinċipji li inħaddnu. Kien ovvjament l-idealiżmu taż-żgħażagħ. Parti importanti tal-bidliet li għamilna kien li għażilna logo ġdid u motto ġdid meħud minn Caldera. “Il-palazz demokratiku ideali ikun magħmul mill-poplu sħiħ“.

Min jaf kemm issarajna bejnietna biex naslu għal dawn il-bidliet. Il-bidliet pero kienu bażi ta’ programm usa’. Bħala għaqda politika il-missjoni tagħna kienet ċara li inwasslu messaġġ. Kien madwar dak iż-żmien li seħħew ir-riformi fl-istatut tal-KSU. Biex inkunu ċari dawk ir-riformi kienu qed isiru xorta. Li għamilna (jew forsi nista ngħid li bdejt nagħmel (mhux biex nitfantas imma biex nerfa’ r-responsabbilta) hu li offrejna li nikkontribwixxu fl-emendar tal-istatut. Il-programm tagħna kien wieħed ċar u trasparenti imsejjes fuq prinċipju doppju kruċjali: ir-rapprezentanza u l-parteċipazzjoni.

Forsi taraw issa minn fejn konna ġejjin. Ma kienx kliem fieragħ ta’ Caldera. Il-palazz demokratiku ideali kien wieħed li xtaqna inwettqu fiċ-cokon tas-sistema rappreżentattiva tal-istudenti. Il-mudell li spiċċajna adottajna kien wieħed maħsub fil-konfini ta’ dawn l-ideali. Inutli nerġa intenni dak li spjegajt elf darba. Eżekuttiv elett biex ikun kompetenti fil-management tal-istrutturi rappreżentattivi. Żewġ kummissjonijiet maħsuba biex jirrapreżentaw kemm jista’ jkun kull interess studentesk – hux politiku soċjali jew edukattiv u kummissjoni oħra li bħala studenti universitarji ma ninsewx id-detto “All work and no play….”

Biex tħaddem struttura bħal dik trid tifimha u trid dejjem titlaq mill-kunċett li kull ma jsir isir għall ikbar interess tal-istudenti. Il-palazz demokratiku ideali huwa palazz għax iħaddan lil kullħadd u jaħdem f’isem u għal kullħadd. Il-palazz demokratiku ideali m’għandux bouncers mal-bieb.

Illum

Dak il-proġett tagħna issa wasalt biex ngħid li ma ħadimx. L-ideali li kellna ma tħaddnux minn min ġie warajna. Din m’hix kundanna. Hija stat ta’ fatt. Ironikament is-sistema ilha ħafna tiġi ikkritika minħabba il-“first past the post” għax fl-eżekuttiv jitla’ blokk wieħed ġeneralment – u allura jgħidu li hemm kriżi taż rappreżentanza. Ironikament ukoll bosta huma għaqdiet li għandhom leħen u post awtomatiku fil-Kummissjoni Politika Soċjali li (suppost) tfassal il-politika tal-Kunsill illi jgorru dwar ir-rappreżentanza.

Falliet l-iktar is-sistema għax rebħet mentalita li diffiċli tikkumbattiha. Il-mentalita partiġġjana illi toffri iz-zunnarija ta’ karriera fil-partiti bħala kunsilliera jew membri parlamentari żgħażagħ via il-fast track ta’ xi post fuq it-think tank ta’ partit meta l-inka fuq iċ-ċertifikat tal-gradwazzjoni għoddu mank kellu ċans jinxef.  Iż-żmien fl-universita meta ż-żgħażugħ (jaqq kemm nobogħda dil-kelma) suppost qed jifforma l-ideat tiegħu u jaħseb b’rasu issa bdew jgħadduha bħala estensjonijiet robotiċi tal-falliment politiku. Jimitawhom kuljum. Il-jiħadisti tal-poplu partiġġjan isinnu l-azzarini tal-gwerer ta’ ħaddieħor fil-palazz tal-istudenti. Dażgur li falliet is-sistema.

Erħilhom allura meta jasal żmien l-Laqgħa Ġenerali Annwali jibdew bit-tfiegħ ta’ tajn u ħama. Hekk jagħmlu l-kbar u hekk tgħallmu ż-żgħar. Ilbieraħ segwejt ftit li ġara fl-AGM bejn nostalġja u oħra. Hemm qiegħdin. Sistema lesta biex timplodi imma li ma timplodix għax ikun hemm xi ħames mitt bażużlu jitilgħu għar-rent-a-vote. Parteċipazzjoni? Falluta.

Imbagħad issegwi il-mini “dibattibekki”. Għandu punt min qed jitlob iktar trasparenza fl-accounting. Wara kollox jiġu eletti managers biex imexxu bil-għaqal. M’hi skuża xejn li għaqda li tħaddem eluf ta’ ewri ma żviluppatx sistema miftuħa ta’ tendering – u anki immur lil hinn u ngħid li imisshom għandhom kumitat indipendenti aġġudikativ elett minn fost il-KPS. L-istupidaġni tal-kjass li inqala fuq xi kummenti dwar il-GUG kien xempju tal-partiġjaniżmu sfrenat. Mejtin biex joħolqu il-Julian Galea fatto in casa qabdu ma kumment frivolu ta’ Kummissarju Edukattiv fuq Facebook. Issa ħalli li l-kummissarju wera nuqqas ta’ maturita u inġenju f’dan il-każ imma il-punt kruċjali hu li li kieku l-Pulse jafu x’isarraf l-istatut kienu ikun jafu li l-liasion kollu li għandhom bżonn l-Għawdxin jitwettaq fi ħdan il-Kummissjoni Politika Soċjali. Imma le. Irridu nitfgħu il-bżar fl-għajnejn u kullħadd jaf kemm jiswa l-block vote Għawdxi hux sur Mercieca?

Oltre il-block vote hemm il-possibilta ta’ riforma. Reġgħu ċiku briku. M’għandi xejn kontra riforma. Kif diġa għidt… nasal biex naqbel li s-sistema falliet. Il-ħasra hi li nara wisq djufija fis-sejħiet tar-riforma. Jekk ir-riforma hija ibbażata fuq xi kunċett imwiegħer ta’ fair meta fair ifisser li jkun hemm xi rappreżentanza proporzjonali kemm biex kullħadd ikollu biċċ mill-kejk allura lura sejrin mhux il-quddiem. Mingħajr prinċipji sodi immirati lejn garanziji taż rappreżentanza u parteċipazzjoni it-triq tista twassal biss gżall-mera kompleta tal-politika falluta nazzjonali li tilfet kull tip ta’ kredtu mal-poplu. Dik il-politika li twassal biex ikun hemm rekord ta’ nies li jagħżlu ma jivvotawx għax il-paroli medjatiku kollu ta’ Wenzu u Ġużi ma jservux biex jikkonvinċu lll-votant b’garanzija ta- rappreżentanza xierqa.

Riforma iva. Kombrikola biex ikun hemm ċejċa għal kullħadd le. hemm bżonn li l-istudenti jgħarfu x’ifisser tkun student b’ideat innovativi. Hemm bżonn jiftakru x’inhu l- iskop tal-eqdem Kunsill f’Malta u jaħdmu biex l-istrutturi tagħha jerġgħu isiru denji li jħaddnu fosthom il-mexxejja u l-idealisti tal-futur. Fuq kollox dawk il-fehmiet bażiċi li slitna minn Caldera hemm bżonn jaslu fuq fomm kullħadd.

Il-palazz demokratiku ideali ikun magħmul mill-poplu sħiħ.

 

addendum: VoxPop magħmul minn Insiteronline

 

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Carmen’s Regressive Thoughts and the Labourite’s Obsession with Government Control

Back in January 2012 Dr Carmen Sammut a specialist in media studies succeeded Aaron Farrugia as Chairperson of Labour’s Think Tank “Fondazzjoni Ideat”. Farrugia had presumably been kicked upstairs (downstairs) and filled the new enigmatic role of secretary to a manifesto. Meanwhile we had high hopes for Dr Sammut who judging by the quality of her input in her “blog” on MaltaToday (more like a regular column Carmen – for someone specialised in media you should know) was brimming with promise for some reasoned discourse.

That was then. Now, only a month later we have an article entitled “PN and civil society: a relationship of convenience“. All in all it’s not a bad article and the observations regarding the PN’s on and off flirtatious attitude with civil society are not quite off the mark. The problems begin when Dr Sammut falls into the commonplace trap of attempting to blame GonziPN for everything she does not like and disagrees with. Even worse, her prescription for what she claims to be a shackled training ground is “government intervention”. Yesterday we had Owen Bonnici inviting the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor General to ride roughshod over any pretentions of autonomy the student body might have, today Carmen Sammut, Chairperson of Labour’s think tank, believes that a Prime Minister should intervene and change the statue and workings of the autonomous student body. Here’s Ms Chairperson:

We can also observe that some valid groups are being shackled so that they do not have enough oxygen to flourish. Take student politics at University as one very clear example. The University should be a training ground for political and civil society leaders. Yet, government has never lifted a finger to ensure that many student organizations do not continue to be blocked-voted out of the Students’ Council. It never intervened to help replace an outdated first-past-the-post election that secures a majority of votes for government sympathisers in the executive committee.

There’s something seriously twisted in Labour’s way of thinking. It definitely cannot get to grips with the basic elements of student representation. Forget for a second this particular prescription by Carmen Sammut. What is really worrying is how Labour seems to perceive the role of government in civil society. It is a gilt-edged invitation for Big Brother to step into places where he is definitely not wanted. Is this how a Labour government will work? In the absence of concrete proposals we can only go by what the Chairperson of their think tank seems to think is the best mode of action.

“Block-voted out of Students’ Council”? What bullshit. Has Ms Chairperson bothered to read the statute? Does the fact that 50+1% of voters opt for a particular grouping (no matter how twistedly incompetent) suddenly make it a no-no? Funny, I thought that is how we get a government – that is just what Joseph Muscat is aspiring to achieve come next election: a block vote into government. Outdated first past the post eh? Pinch me, I must be dreaming. Again, Dr Sammut, as one of the persons directly responsible for drafting the statute in question I dare you to state that you looked beyond the complaints of a few Pulse members. In any case your assertion that government should “lift a finger” in this issue is frightening. Terrifying even – in that it exposes the huge chasm between your thinking and reality. Progressive party?

With thinkers like this the only way is back….