Tag: scandals

Categories
Rule of Law

The Daphne Files

 

Joe Bloggs returns to J’accuse. The series in which he examines the Government’s spin is on hold. This time he kicks off a parallel series where he takes a look at the main controversial themes tackled by Daphne Caruana Galizia on the Running Commentary in recent years.

It’s been 7 hours and 15 days since they took your pen away… since you’ve been gone they can do whatever they want, they can see whomever they choose,  they can eat their dinner in a fancy restaurant…

While part 1 of the Serial examining the Government’s Spin (and by now obvious efforts to shove it all under the rug) in the aftermath of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination last Monday simmers away in your minds (plus I’m gathering information), I thought it worthwhile to write this parallel series of posts: The Daphne Files: An essential guide to the now frozen in time Running Commentary and the wealth of stories that it contains.

“There are crooks everywhere you look now. The situation is desperate.” 

These final exasperated words in a post uploaded just mere minutes before she drove off into the sky provide a glimpse into the world that Daphne saw. A world that she illustrated to us and tried, at times with increasingly evident frustration, to shake us into understanding time and time again.

This final post was in relation to the utterly bizarre situation of the Chief of Staff (Keith Schembri), the left hand man of the Prime Minister of Malta (Joseph Muscat) and effectively the power behind the “throne”, not only refusing to resign or be removed but brazenly suing the ex-leader of the opposition Simon Busuttil for libel for daring to call him corrupt. This is a man who is named in the Panama Papers as having set up a Panamanian company sheltered by a New Zealand trust days after having been appointed as Chief of Staff, who engaged in a series of dealings with the ex-CEO of a newspaper (Adrian Hillman) that led to it teetering on the edge of bankruptcy and that directly or indirectly is the subject of 5 concurrent magisterial inquiries including about graft.

We have not heard anything about the results or progress of these inquiries (and likely will not) but hey at least the libel law suit is proceeding! Enough to make a less doped population’s blood boil, but the Labour government’s propaganda machine would have us believe that it is (pick one or more): (a) negative, (b) a fabrication, no “proof”, (c) all a Nationalist plot, (d) unpatriotic to think or speak badly about Malta (i.e. we will “deal with it” quietly) or (e) (my all time favourite, by an adjudicator no less) “kickbacks are not illegal”.

So, how did we get to this pathetic point? Welcome to the world of the Running Commentary. It really is a pity that the darn thing cannot be viewed in reverse order and is so primitive in navigation since it truly documents the dramatic changes that Malta has undergone since 2008 when it was set up.

From a catholic and perhaps innocent Malta (with rumours or undertones of shady operators operating on the fringes) that had just about adopted the Euro, to a Malta in 2017 where everything goes. A Malta that over the years has become numb and normalised the abnormal. A Malta where a series of civil society protests out of frustration over the broad daylight execution of a journalist and the ineffectual police commissioner and attorney general get twisted into “it’s a PN thing” and “the police are offended”. A Malta that (prompted by politicians in the shadows) organises an impromptu mass meeting in Rabat to show support to the Prime Minister, AG and police commissioner (if it’s an apolitical issue why organise a pathetic public show of support?) and another (it seems) in the offing on 10 November. A Malta that has lost control of its government and that, in times of utter distress, fear and frustration, looks to the current Opposition for solace and support and now sees that it is led by someone that at best carries a check-in baggage as opposed to a commercial cargo.

Worse, the government, who (likely sniggering) during the leadership election held off from attacking him (Adrian Delia), has now unleashed a barrage even attempting to point public suspicion towards the current leader of the Opposition by frantically drawing links to Libyan oil smugglers (who started the wild goose chase rumour that it was Semtex?) and, as a result, his circle of supporters and friends.

But I digress. Let’s leave this frustrating story and how we got here for another day.

What were the main stories and themes that the Running Commentary returned to time and time again? The Times and Lovin Malta each carried a quick article about these stories but it’s worth subdividing these thematically:

  1. The Loose Money – Henley & Partners and the acronyms (IIP – Golden Passport Programme & MRVP – VISA programme on steroids)
  1. Muscat’s meddling with the big boys including the Energy Masterplan – The Silk Road Economic Belt and Azerbaijan’s power play
  1. Sheiks and Hidden Hands – Vitals, AuM (Zonqor) and now Shoreline
  1. John Dalli (Snus and Lady Bird’s pensioners’ money)
  1. Everyone’s finger in the pie, the bribery of a nation
  1. The rise of Adrian DeLiar

Let’s look at each in turn:

The Loose Money – Henley & Partners and the acronyms (IIP – Golden Passport Programme & MRVP – VISA programme on steroids)

A scheme fiercely guarded under unforeseen levels of centralised control and secrecy (the core concession contract to Henley and Partners is so redacted that it looks like a cartoon prisoner’s outfit, to this day the names of new citizens are kept hidden and at this point is immune from freedom of information requests on grounds of national security lest it create a diplomatic incident),  Daphne instinctively knew a good story when she saw one.

So what do we know about the IIP scheme (and its child, the MRVP which got a steroid boost after the 2017 election) so far?

There should be little doubt in anyone’s mind that this scheme, which was sprung up on an unsuspecting nation back in 2013 (it wasn’t in the 2013 electoral manifesto), was something that had been planned for a while.

Designed by Henley & Partners (who then went on to win what seems to be a pre-ordained tender), the IIP scheme hit a sweet spot with on the one hand the Maltese fixer mentality (initial objections appear to have been based on Henley getting the bulk of the booty rather than sustainability and reputation) and on the other the government’s thirst for a quick buck to be able to hand out sweets to the electorate.

A far cry from Minister Edward Scicluna’s bumbling statement in the EP’s budgetary committee meeting in December 2013 that this scheme “had nothing to do with the deficit or with financing”, “we put in a token of Eur 15m and the Commission is saying this should be down to Eur 8m” and is “just a token we can do without it…”, we are only just discovering the extent of our country’s increasing dependence on the sale of passports.

In the space of 4 ever so long years, the IIP scheme has (net of undisclosed Henley fees as well as kickbacks) so far purportedly brought Eur 309m into the mysterious “National Development and Social Fund” (which is included in the general government budget, and which figure does not include income / liquidity from mandatory bond purchases and add-on fees), is the sole reason for the #surplusgeneration hashtags you’re seeing on twitter and the budget ads still boasting about surpluses and is touted as the source of funding for Muscat’s 7 year road (re-laying) map.

Even Moody’s picked up on this and in its revised Credit Opinion of 9 May, 2017 (which was widely shared during the election as a feather in Labour’s cap without mentioning this part) noted that: “The result was mainly driven by stronger than expected revenues from both companies and households, notably due to more buoyant economic conditions and stronger than expected proceeds from Malta’s golden passport scheme, the Individual Investor Programme”.

No wonder Muscat accepted Henley’s advice to extend the cap agreed with the EU Commission indefinitely!

Besides the murky financial arrangements, the Running Commentary also drew a number of stark parallels between Malta and another Henley-owned country, St. Kitts & Nevis both as regards rents and as regards electoral campaigns.

In the next part we’ll take a look at Daphne’s (justified in my view) suspicion that, erm, perhaps all was not right with the ever increasing frequency of Malta-related news items on this Azeri website: http://en.apa.az/search?keyword=Malta&t=xeber .

Categories
Constitutional Development Mediawatch

The Blame Game & Simon

blame_akkuzaOpposition leader Busuttil was lambasted from some quarters for having dared suggest that the whole Enemalta procurement scandal was actually abused of as electoral fodder by Muscat and his men. What Busuttil suggested was really not too hard to understand – if the information was available long before the election loomed ominously, why was it withheld until a time when it would pay Labour in opposition as an extra baton to imply government corruption?

Busuttil was not implying that the information should have been kept quiet until after the election (who would think such a thing anyway?) but rather that it should have surfaced when it was discovered and not much later. While the PAC continues on its fishing expedition trying to pin the whole scandal onto Lawrence Gonzi Busuttil’s kind of assertion will fall on deaf ears or attract the playground type of response that the Labour machine has been honed to give.

The HSBC Swissleaks now adds to the intrigue of the Farrugia Brothers discoveries in that it provides an easier target with the cliches straight out of conspiracy theory books – which is not to say that there is nothing underhand going on in the world of procurement, government permits and the like. The problem lies elsewhere. In Malta there is no such thing as investigation beyond politically motivated with-hunts. The politically motivated is also limited in its extent since oftentimes the investigators have a huge interest in making sure that they do not in turn become investigated.

We just have to look at what happened in Italy in the early nineties to understand what I am getting at. Our political parties have developed a system of self-preservation that became ever more evident during the last election. Rules and laws of the overall system have gradually been adapted to ensure the survival of the two political parties – not just politically but also financially. Hidden behind these rules is a system of favoritisms and expectations that link the political aspect to the economy in general on the one hand (from employment to contracts to tenders to permits) and to the social on the other (medical rights, entertainment “elites” and circles).

It would not just be limited to the parties. Institutional flaws would also surface – authorities controlling pieces of the market suddenly hold strong cards for bargaining: which is where I suspect the whole Enemalta picture fits in. From the most expensive multi-million euro tender to the smallest warden with fine giving powers there is an alternate currency of favoritism and favour. Of course if you are the party in government you and your men have a stronger bargaining power. Everybody gets their unjust desserts.

Mani pulite in Italy uncovered a clear system where bungs were paid to the pentapartito (five main parties from DC to PC) whenever anybody anywhere wanted to merely conduct business. No bung (tangente), no party (tender). Does this happen in Malta? The evidence seems to be pointing to it having happened on a regular basis – not necessarily with the blessing of politicians – and that it can still be occurring to this day.

Labour seems hell-bent on institutionalizing the system further. There is no longer a need to hide the “debts” owed to supporting lobbies. It is translated immediately to enabling laws or worse still – as the forthcoming threat of an amnesty for all MEPA violations shows – an actual conspiracy to render the illegal legal. Illegal constructions will enjoy a bonifico of huge proportions and consequences – all so as to appease the debts that got Labour into power. The network between social and business interests intertwining with government is becoming more and more dangerous. We do not have a pool of inquiring magistrates as the Italians did and in some way we can consider that a blessing of sorts given how some people here tend to interpret the laws.

Simon Busuttil was right though in turning up the heat on Muscat. The whole Enemalta investigation is misguided if it turns into a fishing expedition on Lawrence Gonzi. If, rather than speculating in the style of our tabloids, proper questions were asked as to how our whole system is beginning to stink of favoritism, cronyism and party-instigated corruption then, maybe, we could be getting somewhere.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

Truth be told

The Eagle Party held a mass meeting this morning in Zabbar and it turns out that there were more than a handful of people who were willing to go along with the farce. I wouldn’t worry much about all these people voting for Nazzareno when push comes to shove, they were just there for the fun of the outing and for doing what Maltese do best: make fun of the village idiots. Tomorrow the village idiots will be out in force at the respective mass meetings of the two parties who are currently embroiled in a battle of scandals and finger pointing.

Which is where we left them. The parties I mean. In my last post I complained about the surreal obscenity of the fact that every election campaign will peter out into a series of scandals and counter-scandals. All that promise at the start of this campaign what with saving money on energy bills and tablets for all soon changed into mud-slinging of the highest order. The charade unfolds as I type and it’s like seeing the Emperor’s New Clothes – only this is the whole political establishment prancing around naked and ugly for all to see. Recordings? Ministerial Swiss accounts? Oil? Enough. Really. Enough. And here’s why.

Truth be told I still believe that Austin Gatt did not touch a penny of whatever was  going on in the procurement business. Truth be told I believe that there really is a web of corruption surrounding the oil procurement but I also believe that this was a group of persons taking advantage of a loophole  in supervision that was as wide as a house. Truth be told I believe that the Labour party knows that and does not want to admit it because it is politically convenient to “raise eyebrows” about Gatt’s involvement.

Truth be told I cannot digest Austin Gatt’s excuse that he “forgot” to declare his family accounts in Switzerland since 2005 – inherited or not. Truth be told I find the double standards in this respect to be glaring when contrasted to the treatment of AD’s chairperson in 2008 for having forgotten to pay some VAT dues over a defunct company.

Truth be told I find Joseph Muscat’s ridiculous throwing of “leads” to his former work colleagues with regards to a Minister who supposedly freed someone from a chip or a lock up disgusting. Truth be told I would prefer that if  he had such information he would be the one to bring it out. Truth be told it turns out that the alleged act was never done by a person qua Minister but earlier in his career – which means that Joseph Muscat was lying when he implied that a Minister used his powers to free someone from the lockup (also not necessarily from prison). Truth be told this is not the first time that Muscat has been economical with a lie in order to imply an inexistent truth.

Truth be told I find the nationalist party’s assault on Toni Abela yawn-inducing and so blatantly a diversive tactic from its moment of panic. Truth be told I do agree that Abela should be responsible for his actions, particularly covering up of illicit activity in Labour’s kazini much the same way as I expect those responsible in the nationalist party to take the hit for any illicit activity in their kazini. Truth be told I still ask the most important question with regard to the PN’s recordings: Why now? Truth be told the nationalist party sat on this information for three whole years and only now felt sufficiently indignant to do anything about it.

Truth be told I have had enough of watching valuable pre-electoral debate time wasted in this battle of “your scandal is bigger than mine” or “oil purchasing is more important than drug trafficking” when it is blatantly obvious to anyone strong enough to wash off partisan blinkers that our supposed political elite is one big mess that is long past its sell-by date. Truth be told I have had enough of hearing snide comments about the hard-working folk at AD who can never yell about their presence loud enough so long as the village idiots are busy with their partisan banging and yelling about the inadequacy of the other side.

Truth be told this campaign is now expecting its final “election bomb”. It will be another “scandal” from each side announced close enough to the election date in order to hinder any possibility of throwing light and clarity on what it really is all about. It will be the mother of all messy mudballs slung by the mother of all slingshots. It will be as useful to our informed election of a proportionally representative parliament as a swimsuit in Alaska and yet the village idiots will indulge the parties with their Oohs, their Aahs and their chest beating.

Truth is, truth will never be told.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

Snapshot # 3: The voters anonymous

The noise from the election campaign is becoming just that. It’s just like listening in to a mass meeting by a storm of locusts – noisy as ever but rarely makes sense. It happens every election. We kick off hoping to discuss issues, plans, projects and directions for the economy and society but more often than not we end up discussing scandals, allegations, ad hominem accusation and more such filth. This time round there is no shortage of finger pointing: amateur sleuths, wannabe lawyers and born-again-doubters are suddenly all into scandals and -gates. I’d pinpoint the genesis of this particularly heavy wave to the moment when the Sliema Local Council began to fall apart.

Now we have Oil Procurement gate replete with presidential pardons and alleged implications at ministerial level. We have Abela-gate with secret recordings allegedly uncovering a politician openly admitting what could amount to influencing the police force. We have the double edged sword of Zarb-gate: on the one hand a union caught trading in influence and on the other hand an alleged collusion between the businessman involved and the nationalist party. Meanwhile serious accusations of suspect funding to both parties have been swept under the carpet conveniently as each party prefers to concentrate on its scandal of choice – leaving questions about how millionaire campaigns are funded suspended in thin air.

This post can easily be misconstrued as being an attempt at minimising the importance of having an efficient system that uncovers any kind of fraudulent activity. It is not my intention to do so. What I intend to point out though is that much of this caravan and circus will eventually peter out come the 10th March. The horror, the shock and the awe that some politicians feign when confronted with proof (as demonstrative a proof as is available) will soon be relegated to the general “forget-me” bin only to be recycled five years down the line. Honestly. Do you remember the fuss and fantasy generated by Mistragate last time round? What of it?

The truth is that such shenanigans and uncovering of modus operandi of politicians and friends of politicians only SEEM to have become nastier. In reality our political system is geared to co-exist with the circles of power that surround it. Whether it is the police, the legal system, the big business or the unions, alliances are made and broken and fool you are if you think that any of the lot is innocent of such tomfoolery. The charade of investigations and holier-than-thou pronouncements (or as Toni Abela would have it… my banana is cleaner than yours) is just that.

My question and next point is how much does that influence the voter. All these theatricals are for the voter’s inconvenience in the end. They are meant to point out the inadequacy of the other side because the other side is Corrupt/Hapless/Undisciplined (take your pick). Does the voter care? Reading Roberto Saviano on La Repubblica I had a chance to confirm what could be a Mediterranean or even a European trait. Oftentimes the voter is just as enmeshed in the power circles that are at work. The difference in the voter’s case is that he falls further down the line of enjoyment but still feels the compulsion to confirm his participation and thus develop a legitimate expectation. It’s all about a job, a sick relative or a parking space.

Yes. Often the voters’ priority (beyond the obvious partisan impulse) is based purely on one particular service (or inversely is the result of one particular disservice). Is it a refused MEPA permit for altering one’s balcony? Is it a refused rebate on a taxed imported car? Is it a refused access into a school? When you hear the opposition complaining about the “power of incumbency” what they are complaining about is the fact that they have less clout in this not so covert black market where promises to fill gaps in voters’ needs are traded. Do not be deceived. The trading is across the board – opposition or government. The promises are there for everyone. Because Malta Taghna Lkoll is really a euphemism for the politician’s position in the system of cogs and wheels that gets this republic going. It’s not just Labour’s slogan. It’s everybody’s.

Voters will not really be impressed by the many -gates. They either had made their mind up before the scandals surfaced or had their ideas confirmed by the plethora of accusations. In some quarters pundits will try to sell the idea of a “responsible” vote one that supposedly is made in the best interests of the country. It’s a load of bull really. Those very pundits are motivated by the cogs and wheels that get this country going. Knowingly or unknowingly their vote is pre-conditioned by this state of affairs.

A responsible vote is one that tries its damn best to change the system. It is one that requires at least 2000 anonymous voters in one district voting on the basis of what the nation needs and not on the idea that they will get some form of personal reward. Sadly the power of incumbency of the old style politicians will probably mean that the responsible voter loses out. Again.