Riforma fil-Kunsilli Lokali - Michael Briguglio

Il-Mument 10 ta' Dicembru 2017

Il-Kunsilli Lokali f’Malta ser jaghlqu 25 sena. Dawn qeghdin jaqdu l-htigijiet tal-lokalitajiet rispettivi taghhom?

Aspett ewlieni f’dan ir-rigward huwa l-finanzi. Il-Kunsilli Lokali ghandhom ghazliet limitati dwar kif jistghu jiggeneraw id-dhul. Id-dhul ewlieni jigi mill-Gvern centrali. Hemm ukoll possibilita’ ta’ dhul minn fondi ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea, minn skemi specifici tal-Gvern u minn reklamar u certi permessi.

Politika ta’ riforma fil-kunsilli ghandha temfasizza li persentagg tad-dhul Governattiv mill-VAT, turizmu u oqsma ohra jigi maqsum mal-kunsilli.

Izda huwa car li hemm bzonn li l-Kunsilli jkollhom iktar opportunitajiet biex jiggeneraw id-dhul. Dan huwa necessarju biex jigi ffinanzjat xoghol bhal dak infrastrutturali u gbir ta’ l-iskart, kif ukoll inizjattivi bhal dawk  edukazzjonali, socjali u kulturali. Dawn ta’ l-ahhar huma importanti sabiex ikun hemm iktar sigurta’, integrazzjoni socjali u sens ta’ komunita’.

Idealment, l-agenda lokali ta’ Malta temfasizzja id-dicentralizazzjoni sabiex l-ebda gvern ma jkollu poter eccessiv. Permezz tas-sussidjarjeta’, decizzjonijiet li jistghu jittiehdu mill-kunsilli lokali m’ghandhom jittiehdu minn xi Ministru.

Din il-filosofija tista’ twassal sabiex il-kunsilli ikunu iktar sostenibbli. Per ezempju, art tal-gvern tista’ tigi devoluta lill-kunsilli. Parkeggi, bini pubbliku u siti storici jistghu jigu mmanigjati mill-kunsilli, u d-dhul iggenerat jista’ jintuza ghal htigijiet lokali. Biex naghti ezempju prattiku: il-car park pubbliku tax-Xatt ta’ Tas-Sliema huwa ikrah ferm u biex wiehed jipparkja jigi ‘mitlub’ ihallas. Mhux ahjar kieku dawn il-flus imorru ghand il-kunsill sabiex il-car park jigi msebbah u flus ohra jintuzaw ghall-bankini u htigijiet ohra?

Riforma fil-Kunsilli Lokali ghandha tizgura ukoll li l-Kunsilli ikollhom rwol ewlieni fit-tehid tad-decizzjoni ta’ l-Awtorita’ ta’ l-Ippjanar. Decizzjonijiet li jistghu jittiehdu mill-Kunsilli, bhal dawk ta’ enforzar dwar kostruzzjoni u ta’ street markings, ghandhom jittiehdu mill-Kunsilli, u mhux minn entitajiet centralizzati.

Importanti ukoll li skemi lokali bhal dawk ta’ parkegg ghar-residenti ma jkunux diskriminatorji. Ma jistax ikun li pajjzina jibqa karatterizzat minn lokalitajiet b’dawn l-iskemi u ohrajn minghajrom.

Qasam iehor ta’ importanza huwa dak tas-Social Impact Assessment. Jehtieg li l-Kunslli ikollhom fondi u access ghal servizzi professjonali bhal dawk ta’ socjologi, ekonomisti u esperti kulturali sabiex ikun hemm taghrif car dwar demografija, realtajiet socjali, komunitajiet u aspirazzjonijiet tar-residenti. Dan kollu jghin sabiex decizzjonijiet jittiehdu fuq bazi ta’ evidenza.

Il-Kunsilli ghandhom iservu ukoll ta’ centri ta’ servizzi u informazzjoni bhal tfittix ta’ impjieg, kura u pariri professjonali. U l-istess Kunslli ghandhom ikunu mharrga kif jahdmu ahjar ma’ l-istampa u s-socjeta’ civili.

Sfortunatament jidher li l-Gvern Laburista miexi lejn direzzjoni ohra. Iktar ma jghaddi zmien, iktar qed jahtaf poter taht idejh, b’iktar poter f’idejn il-Ministri.

Ezempju ta’ dan huwa l-enfurzar. Filwaqt li l-Kunsilli ta’ kuljum jaffacjaw abbuzi f’oqsma bhall-kostruzzjoni, skart, parkegg abbuziv u storbju, l-istess kunsilli qed jispiccaw jittalbu mal-Gvern biex ikun hemm enforzar.  Dan mhux sew.

Ezempju iehor hu l-kisi ta’ toroq. Hemm min qed jghid li l-programm ta’ seba’ snin tal-Gvern ser jikkonsiti minn kisi ta’ ftit pulzieri fit-toroq madwar Malta u Ghawdex. Jekk dan huwa l-kas, mhux ahjar kieku dan ix-xoghol isir mill-Kunsilli u jsir b’mod olistiku?

Iktar ma jkun hemm poter f’idejn il-Ministri, iktar ikun hemm tentazzjoni ghall-koruzzjoni . Tista’ tinqatel is-sens ta’ inizjattiva fil-kunsilli lokali.

Minn naha l-ohra, id-dicentralizzazjoni tista’ twassal ghal Kunsilli iktar incentivati biex ikunu kreattivi u innovattivi. Dan jista’ jinkoragixxi iktar sens civiku u iktar sens ta’ komunita’. B’hekk ikollna Kunsilli Lokali attivi u b’ruh socjali, u mhux Kunsilli Lokali tallaba tal-Ministri.

Localise not centralise

Times of Malta 10 July 2017

Are local councils equipped to meet the needs of their respective localities? Do they have enough funds and authority to govern? I believe these are key questions which need thorough debate, especially when local councils are so close to citizens’ everyday needs.

Government funding of local councils has increased in the past years. Indeed, in 2017, Malta’s 68 local councils received a total of €35.5 million from government, an increase of €3.5 million from 2015. High earners include St Paul’s Bay (€1,684,906), Birkirkara (€1,283,056), Mosta (€1,185,524) and Sliema (€1,110,593).

The government will also engage in a road-building programme in the next seven years. It recently announced that it would take over this responsibility from local councils, which are finding it increasingly difficult to cope with hefty demands in this sector.

One expects that in the near future government elaborates on its intentions and consults accordingly. For example, will the road building programme covered by the government include pavements? Will the  government’s plans affect local council funding? Will local councils be responsible just for patching of roads, or would councils still be expected to budget for full-road asphalting? And who will decide on which roads will be prioritised?

Going back to the original question of this article, let us keep in mind that local councils have very limited options for the generation of other revenue. Sure, local councils may apply for EU funds and for discretionary government schemes. They may also generate some revenue through permit fees, adverts and the like.

But it is more than evident that something has to be done to ensure that local councils may adequately cover their growing demands and needs. These include not only infrastructure and waste management, but also educational, cultural and social initiatives which are very important for social cohesion, integration and community building.

Ideally, Malta’s local agenda should emphasise decentralisation to ensure that no government, entity or sector has excessive power. This should be accompanied by subsidiarity, where decisions are taken at the lowest level possible, meaning that decisions which can easily be taken by local councils needn’t be taken by ministers or authorities.

In addition, more state-owned land should be devolved to local councils. This may include public car parks, public buildings and heritage sites. Local councils can then manage such areas in the best interest of the locality, possibly generating funds in the process. Such funds can then be used to help finance local programmes and initiatives.

Unfortunately, Malta’s government is progressively moving towards the other direction. Apart from discretionary schemes referred to earlier in this article, we are witnessing increased centralisation of power.

One key example of this is enforcement. Local councils are frequently at the receiving end of complaints related to illegal street vendors, abusive parking, careless construction practices, noise pollution, illegal littering and so forth. Given that wardens are now under central government control, there is not much that local councils can do to ensure that enforcement takes place. The same applies with regard to other enforcing agencies such as the police, the Building Regulations Office and the Planning Authority.

Centralisation of power gives excessive strength to ministers, who in turn are omnipresent at macro and micro levels in Maltese society. Thus, a local council may require enforcement against abusive practices which affect residents’ quality of life, but this may be prohibited from taking place due to partisan political reasons and patronage.

The centralisation of powers makes citizens and local councils increasingly dependent on ministers, and this can erode the dynamics of local governance. It can also result in increased apathy and lack of initiative.

On the other hand, decentralisation, subsidiarity and devolution can incentivise both local councils and citizens to be more creative and innovative in the governance of localities. It would also help diversify power. In a politically-charged society like Malta, this could enrich democracy, giving more value and legitimacy to local council elections and other similar appointments.

Sliema 2017 Budget

Sliema Local Council draft budget allocation for the coming year (2017) is briefly explained through a presentation which can be accessed by clicking here

Feel free to submit comments and suggestions.

Sliema annual locality meeting

The Sliema Local Council would like to invite all residents, whose names appear in the last Local Councils Electoral Register, to attend the Annual Meeting to be held on Thursday 15th December, 2016 at 1800hrs at the Imperial Hotel in Rudolph Street, Sliema.  

All residents are more than welcome to attend and share their views with the Council.  This meeting is according to the Councils` Procedures Act No. XV of 1993 Art 70 (1).

An 'F' for local councils?

Michael Briguglio

Times of Malta 12 December 2016

‘Local councils get an ‘F’ in accounting from NAO’, read a Times of Malta headline on December 5.  Have local councils really hit the pits?

Had this statement been made by certain state authorities that are embroiled in Malta’s governance deficit, I would have ignored them. But the National Audit Office happens to be one of the most upright and credible institutions in Malta, and I know Auditor General Charles Deguara to be a man of integrity.

Indeed, the NAO report on local councils’ performance in 2015 makes various claims which are very difficult to ignore.

For example, it transpires that the Vittoriosa, Kirkop, Mosta and Qrendi local councils accounts lacked documentation, were improperly recorded, missing key components and sometimes contained conflicting figures.  Effectively, this prohibited the NAO from analysing their performance. Surely, this is not something such local councils should be proud of.

Three other local councils – Valletta, Għaxaq and San Lawrenz, and the Gozo and northern regional committees were unable to provide audited financial statements by the original deadline.

The NAO also stated that around one-third of the 66 local councils had negative working capital and registered a deficit, which is similar to the situation in previous years.

The report also questions various expenditure line-items of different local councils.

While I have no doubt that the NAO is justified in making certain queries, I also think that the public should be made aware of pertinent characteristics and changes concerning local council finance.

For example, local councils spend quite some money on professional services for architects, accountants, lawyers, contract managers and the like, which are vital for smooth functioning. Similarly, increases in employees’ salaries are often justified by  statutory increases in the cost of living adjustment or by the engagement of new staff which, in turn is governed by public service procedures.

Councils effectively have no authority over wardens and make very little money from the system

Besides, some councils face costs which often have more to do with lack of civic pride. This includes vandalism and unruly waste disposal which tends to increase during the tourist season as well as damage to infrastructure by some contractors.

On a positive note, the NAO notes that central government has committed itself to follow up the issues raised in the report.

In the meantime, in October 2015 the wardens system was centralised under government control, with 10 per cent worth of contraventions paid at council premises being allocated to the respective councils. In my view, this is hurting councils doubly. Councils effectively have no authority over wardens and make very little money from the system.

At the same time, the total allocation for local councils has now increased to €45 million, an increase of €4 from the previous year. Yet, many councils are still underfunded when one considers their responsibilities; and various new council schemes are subject to government approval. This type of centralisation may increase councils’ accountability, but it can also result in temptations for favouritism and in too much power in the hands of ministers.

Another change concerns the national reform programme, which has national targets that are to be met by 2020. Regional committees and respective local councils are part of the plan in matters relating to economic, social and cultural policy, and plans have to be submitted by March 24, 2017.

I think that a change which is really needed to help improve council financial performance is more subsidiarity and decentralisation. In this regard, why shouldn’t councils be able to generate their own revenue on specific local needs such as non-residential parking and enforcement? A measure which can easily be carried out in this regard concerns the devolution of public car parks and other public properties.

The former remain under the remit of parkers employed by government, some of whom ask car drivers for ‘donations’ when parking. Wouldn’t it be better to have such money collected by councils and used for infrastructure, embellishment and other local needs?

Having increased local council responsibility for their revenue can help make them move away from dependency on ministerial decisions. Some councils might still mismanage their finance, but others may device novel ways of generating much needed funds to cover local needs. The public can then grade local councils and councilors in subsequent local elections.

Why are roads so bad?

Michael Briguglio
Times of Malta 29 February 2016 http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160229/opinion/Why-are-our-roads-so-bad.604132

Why are our roads so bad? This is a question so many people ask in Malta. This does not only include drivers, cyclists and pedestrians who have to bear the brunt of potholes, shoddy works, bumps and poor infrastructure, but also first-time visitors who are usually surprised to see a Third World infrastructure in an EU member state.

This is a question I myself have been asking for years and which I have been trying to verify ever since I have been a local councillor since 2003.

Like many residents, I have witnessed the disproportionate influence of various contractors who overload their trucks with bricks and debris, thus causing damage to roads and pavements. I also witnessed some examples of bad road works, which were later on tested and found to be in violation of existing standards, thus forcing proper resurfacing. At times, newly resurfaced roads had to be opened up, sometimes due to lack of coordination from government authorities.

I have also witnessed some examples of good workmanship, especially when there is a professional working relationship between council administration, architects and contractors, and when there is proper supervision. Yet, as more time passed, I also witnessed the growing financial constraints of local councils despite having huge responsibilities such as those related to residential roads.

Hence whenever I see roads around Malta in a very bad state, I relate this to one or more of the reasons above. The lack of council funds to maintain degrading roads is however becoming increasingly the case.

Therefore, even when local councils do have professional contractors and architects and proper supervision, the lack of funds may be a limiting factor as regards quality of roads.

Local councils usually have enough funds for the resurfacing of around one or two roads a year

In real terms, and on average, local councils usually have enough funds for the resurfacing of around one or two roads a year, given that council funds must also be used for a myriad of other expenses. At the same time, local councils have no fiscal autonomy and are increasingly dependent on government discretionary schemes.

A normal sized residential road costs around €100,000, including tarmac and new pavements (which would cost, for example, between €15,000 and €20,000), but the cost may vary depending the current state of the road surface. The worse its condition, the higher the cost.

Longer residential roads cost more, with costs going up to between €200,000 and €300,000, and arterial roads obviously cost much more, though the latter can benefit from State and EU funding.

Financial constraints and urgent priorities in different roads sometimes influence local councils to choose to resurface parts of different roads instead of a whole road. Such ‘boxes’ are costly too, sometimes costing between €10,000 and €20,000 each. Besides, local councils also have to pay for smaller patching works, which, cumulatively, cost quite a lot, too.

Besides, there are also other factors which do not seem to help the situation. For example, when developers carryout construction works, they pay Mepa for road works close to the developed site. Most of these funds are transferred to Transport Malta – the authority ironically responsible for arterial roads. So much for decentralisation and local council empowerment.

Is Transport Malta using all such revenue for residential roads? Or is it using some of the money for arterial roads? Or is it using it for other purposes?

Judging by the terrible situation of various roads in localities characterised by ongoing construction, something does not seem to fall in place.

Or maybe Transport Malta is utilising all such funds for residential roads, but there are not enough funds to make up for damages to roads caused by the construction industry. Yet, given that Transport Malta and the Ministry of Transport are not exactly shining examples of good governance and transparency, it really needs to convince the public that the quality of roads is really give the priority it deserves.

Will Minister Joe Mizzi provide comprehensive information regarding what is being done with funds earmarked for residential roads?

Auditing Local Governance

The Times of Malta, 11 January 2016 http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160111/opinion/Auditing-local-governance.598374

According to the National Audit Office, almost half of Malta’s local councils did not provide fiscal receipts to cover expenditure of almost €400,000 during 2014. To put things into perspective, about €39,500,000 were allocated to local councils for 2016.

The same yearly report shows that certain local councils lack updated financial records, exceed budgetary allocations under certain categories and have shortcomings in certain procurement practices.

The NAO also highlights the lack of audited financial statements of Malta’s nine regional committees.

As an independent State institution, the NAO enjoys universal respect and there is no reason to doubt its findings.

If anything, it is one of the few State institutions which, to date, have not been usurped by a government characterised by too many partisan appointments as well as a deficit in good governance.

Local Government Parliamentary Secretary Stefan Buontempo, who does not usually hit the headlines in terms of media coverage, was quick to react to the NAO’s report. He was reported by the press as stating that the situation is worrying, that he cannot accept the various shortcoming and that “from next year, we will bring the law to bear on councils’ operations”.

Buontempo also criticised executive secretaries of regional committees and local councils, adding that many were not doing their job well. Needless to say, the association of executive secretaries, Ansek, was not amused by Buontempo’s uncharacteristic drive.

Association secretary Paul Gatt acknowledged the worrying shortcomings highlighted by the NAO but added that its frequent appeals to have better governance fell on deaf ears. This includes lack of proper training for new executive secretaries, cases of mayors authorising expenditure without council approval and questionable guidance from the Department of Local Government.

Where do common citizens and residents stand in this situation?

I am sure many taxpayers would expect that their money is being spent properly and that all public expenditure should be covered by fiscal receipts. But, likewise, I am also sure that there are others who think that local councils are holy fountains with unlimited resources and which are accountable only to voters’ whims.

I suspect the tirade against executive secretaries is an excuse to take more power away from local councils

Those in the second category might not really care about the NAO’s recommendations. But the same cannot be said for people with a sense of civic pride and who expect good governance from the authorities.

Such individuals would expect proper enforcement on matters such as tables and chairs on public land, construction practices, usage of bus lanes, abusive parking, vendors abusively occupying public space and so forth.

The only problem here is that local councils have very little enforcementpowers and often rely on action by the police and wardens. And the latter have now been centralised into a government department, as far away as possible from local council control.

Those who expect good governance would also expect that all public funds are used in a proper manner and not just those of local councils. They would not justify local councils’ fiscal shortcomings of €400,000 in a year, but, likewise, they would not justify the millions of euros spent by the government on questionable activities, ranging from Cafe Premier to Australia Hall or the numerous partisan appointments in the public service. And, above all, they would always respect the NAO’s findings and not only when it suits them.

Indeed, given the government’s deficit in good governance, I suspect that Buontempo’s tirade against executive secretaries is an excuse to take more power away from local councils. The government is already weakening the real value of funds given to councils and making councils dependent on government schemes.

The government’s consultation with councils on various matters, from enforcement to planning, leaves much to be desired and some State entities hardly give importance to local council recommendations, requests and complaints.

By all means, make councils more responsible for their financial expenditure. But this should be matched with more rights for executive secretaries and more rights for councils themselves. This would mean subsidiarity and decentralisation, where local councils would have increasing fiscal autonomy.

In the prevailing circumstances, things are going in the opposite direction, with the government taking powers from local councils, centralising various aspects of policymaking and governing poorly in the process.

New Responsibilities as Councillor

In yesterday's Local Council meeting, Sliema Mayor Anthony Chircop re-assigned resposibilities to councillors. My responsibilities are as follows:

Chairperson Education;
Chairperson Committee for Accessibility and Disability;
Member - Committee for Public Gardens, Playing Fields and Promenade;
Member - Finance Committee;
Member - Tenders Committee;
Coastal Environment;
Environmental Pollution (Air, Traffic, Noise);
Member - EU Funding Committee

Those willing to assist in any of these areas are welcome to contact me at mbrig@hotmail.com

Money for Local Councils

Michael Briguglio
The Times, March 9 2015
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150309/opinion/Money-for-local-councils.559069

A few weeks ago, the National Audit Office highlighted various financial shortcomings in local council governance. These ranged from lack of procurement procedures by some councils to budgetary deficits.

Such reports are of great value and it is important that local councils adhere to established procedures to ensure proper financial governance.

It is also important to note that, though some local councils appear to be experiencing immediate financial problems, others might not be in such a situation even though accounts report a deficit.

For example, a local council might use financial reserves to make up for one-off expenditure programmes dealing with infrastructure. Trouble crops up when local councils become increasingly dependent on such shrinking reserves, thus resulting in unsustainable expenditure programmes.

Here one should note that local councils are almost totally dependent on funding from the central government to cover their expenditure. Some councils have been successful in tapping EU funds but, other than that, they have almost inexistent fiscal autonomy.

This is problematic on two fronts.

In the first instance, it appears that government funding is not being realistically updated to meet councils’ needs. This is especially the case when the population of a locality grows or when a council is assigned the upkeep of a project carried out by the central government – such as a park – without being given adequate funding for the purpose. Such projects tend to crop up closer to elections, with little financial consideration to their upkeep and maintenance.

In the second instance, almost total reliance on government funding is rendering councils dependent on central authorities, with no room for initiatives that can generate revenue. Such top-down dependency runs contrary to the principles of subsidiarity and decentralisation as it keeps financial authority in the hands of ministers and their loyal bureaucracies.

Besides, as things stand, this system is already showing cracks, possibly leading to an increased number of councils with unsustainable financial situations in the years to come.

I think the time has come to revise legislation so local councils can generate funds for certain initiatives and services. Those who thrive on cheap partisan propaganda will say that this will result in ‘new taxes’ but, to the contrary, this can result in citizens being given their money’s worth through better infrastructure and services.

A basic example in this regard concerns public car parks currently administered by Transport Malta. It is an open secret that car park attendants – who are paid for their job by the State – expect a tip. If one calculates the amount of money generated through this ‘informal’ system, one can reach obvious conclusions. If such tips are formalised through a system run by local councils, the revenue generated can be used for public purposes, such as road maintenance.

The same holds for construction projects. Current legislation and proposals in the 2015 Budget are totally out of synch with the regular damage to roads and pavements caused by developers. Residents frequently complain about such damages and rightly so but councils can only do so much. Relative fiscal autonomy in this regard could ensure that councils use rigorous financial tools to ensure that those who damage the infrastructure pay for it.

Similar examples can be given with respect to sanctioning and enforcement in matters such as waste, pollution, usage of public space for commercial purposes and so forth.

Local councils can also ensure better financial governance through internal procedures. Trust and reciprocity among councillors and staff is a key aspect in this regard.

Sometimes, (petty) partisan bickering, even among councillors coming from the same political party, hinders councils from acting properly. The same holds for the assigning of responsibilities to councillors who do not have the necessary experience or expertise in the area concerned.

In this regard, the role of the mayor is of vital importance. While some can be too divisive, narcissistic or lacking in leadership skills, others can have more positive attributes.

An effective mayor should be inclusive, assigning responsibilities to councillors in line with their interests, experiences and skills and, as far as possible, beyond narrow partisan interests. Committees featuring councillors from different political parties can work well provided there is genuine trust among those sitting on it.

Such a mayor should also give utmost importance to the recommendations of the executive secretary, to councillors within the finance committee and to professionals giving services to the council in their respective fields. This would ensure that financial management is sustainable and according to procedures.

Still, the challenge of subsidiarity is key for sustainable financial management by local councils. As things stand, many councils simply cannot cope with demands related to infrastructure and local services. Limited government funding and almost inexistent fiscal autonomy are simply hindering councils for being as effective as they should be.

My responsibilities in Sliema Local Council 2013-7

In the first official meeting of the Sliema Local Council (2013-7), I was assigned the following responsibilities: Maritime Affairs, Education; Disability Issues. I chair the Education Committee and I form part of the Finance, Public Offers and EU committees.

I invite those interested in being active in Maritime Affairs, Disability Issues and Education to contact me at mbrig@hotmail.com .