Mozzjoni f'waqtha - Michael Briguglio

Il-Mument 14 ta' Jannar 2018

“Ghandu jkun hemm talba formali lill-Gvern sabiex sabiex jieħu l-art fiż-Żonqor lura mingħand Sadeen u jagħtih lura lill-Maltin”.  Dan kien il-messagg tal-kunsilliera tal-Partit Nazzjonalista fil-Kunsill Lokali ta’ Marsaskala, f’mozzjoni imressqa din il-gimgha.

Din il-mozzjoni takkumpanja mozzjoni imressqa mill-grupp Nazzjonalista fil-parlament ta’ Malta, u hi konformi ma’ dak li qed jitolbu ghaqdiet ambjentali bhall-Front Harsien ODZ, Din l-Art Helwa, Flimkien ghall-Ambjent Ahjar u r-Ramblers Association of Malta. Dan qed jitolbuh ukoll partiti ohrajn ta’ l-oppozizzjoni, gazzetti indipendenti u nies ta’ rieda tajba. Ta’ min infakkar li fl-2015 Malta rat l-ikbar dimostrazzjoni ambjentalista ta’ kull zmien, bl-iskop li z-Zonqor jigi protett.

Ilkoll nafu li minkejja l-pompa ta’ propaganda mill-Gvern Laburista u minkejja l-preferenzi li inghata Sadeen minn fuq dahar il-poplu Malti, l-American University of Malta falliet bil-kbir milli tilħaq il-miri tagħha u saħansitra ukoll naqset dawn il-miri bin-nofs. Nafu li l-Universita’ s’issa gabet biss 15-il student u qed tkecci bosta akkademici.

Nittama li l-Partit Laburista jisma l-ghajta popolari li tezisti sabiex iz-Zonqor jigi protett. Minflok ma jirreagixxi b’negattivita’, jista’ jkun pozittiv u jipprova jaghmel l-almu tieghu ghal kunsens nazzjonali. J’alla l-Universita’ taghmel success, izda sa dan it-tant m’ghandniex nissagirfikaw art daqshekk prezzjuza. Sa fejn naf jien is-success ta’ Universita’ jiddependi minn kriterji akkademici u sostenibbli, u mhux minn kemm hemm veduta tajba tal-bahar.

F’dan l-artiklu, pero’, nixtieq naghmel emfasi fuq ir-rwol tal-Kunsilliera fil-politika. Fil-kas taz-Zonqor, il-grupp ta’ kunsilliera Nazzjonalisti kien proattiv u pprezenta mozzjoni ghal-gid komuni. Nemmen li din il-prassi ghandha tigi addottata iktar frekwentament b’hidma kongunta ta’ kunsilliera Nazzjonalisti u ohrajn li jixtiequ jinghaqdu maghhom.

Jezistu bizibilju ta’ kwistjonijiet ta’ importanza kemm lokali kif ukoll nazzjonali fejn il-kunsilliera jistghu ikunu proattivi. U jekk dan jaghmel sens f’kunsilli fejn il-Partit Nazzjonalista ghandu minoranza ta’ siggijiet, ahseb wara kemm jaghmel iktar sens f’kunsilli fejn tezisti maggoranza Nazzjonalista.

Qed nitkellem mhux biss dwar kwistjonijiet ta’ kostruzzjoni u zvilupp, izda ukoll fuq kwistjonijiet ohra li jolqtu direttament lir-residenti. Dawn ivarjaw minn infurzar sa’ sigurta, minn devoluzzjoni ta’ art pubblika sa metodi ta’ finanzjament, u minn introduzzjoni ta’ bye-laws sa l-importanza ta’ politika ibbazata fuq evidenza, nghidu ahna permezz ta’ social impact assessments u community profiling.

Ghalhekk tajjeb li fil-hidma ghall-elezzjonijiet tal-kunsilli lokali tas-sena d-diehla, ikun hemm emfasi sabiex il-gruppi nazzjonalisti fil-kunsilli rispettivi jibnu fuq it-tajjeb li diga’ qed isir u fejn hemm bzonn  ikunu iktar proattivi permezz ta’ mozzjonijiet kongunti, hidma mas-socjeta’ civili u prezenza kontinwa fuq il-midja.

Il-Partit Nazzjonalista introduca il-kunsilli lokali 25 sena ilu. Jemmen fis-sussidjarjeta’ biex b’hekk ma jkunx hemm eccess ta’ poter f’idejn il-Gvern centrali u biex il-residenti ikollhom vuci akbar f’kwistjonijiet lokali. Ghall kuntrarju, il-Gvern Laburista qed ihott dan bil-mod il-mod u qed jiccentralizza l-poter f’idejn grupp zghir ta’ nies. Jehtieg li nergghu naghmlu l-kunsilli konformi ma’ l-iskop originali taghhom.

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.

Amend Constitution to make local councils more effective, says EU body

Times of Malta reports that according to the EU Chamber of Local Authorities, Malta still faces numerous challenges in the context of conformity with the provisions of the European Charter of Local Self-Government.

You can read more on this here.

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.

The Panama Paradox

Times of Malta 18th April 2016 http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160418/opinion/The-Panama-paradox.609235

There is so much to say about the global Panama Papers controversy. It is the talk of town everywhere you go around Malta. Really and truly, it seems to be part of the perfect storm of bad governance overshadowing the Labour government.

In a way this is a pity, when one considers that despite its situation, Labour does have a good number of decent politicians within its ranks. Some of them are standing up to be counted on Panamagate, others are probably working behind the scenes or are being conspicuous by their absence from the everyday spectacle of politics.

Arguably, the more Labour procrastinates in taking concrete action on the mess it is in, the deadlier will be the blow on its long-term electoral prospects. But the political context of Malta’s Panamagate is so fluid and volatile that things can change by the day, if not the hour.

There is another aspect of Panama Papers which I find so striking. And Malta fits in squarely within this framework.

Indeed, isn’t it ironic that while so much money is being hidden, laundered, recycled, what have you, and while so much tax is being avoided or evaded, Malta has a Third World infrastructure?

Take the state of Malta’s roads. Were it not for EU funding, most of Malta’s arterial roads would be in a terrible situation, as is the case with many residential roads. One main reason for this is that local councils simply do not have funds to cope with the requirements of proper road resurfacing and maintenance. Henceforth, we end up with roads which are carried out with inferior materials, or with roads which are partially resurfaced in their most damaged parts. And these are the lucky roads.

Isn’t it ironic that while so much money is being hidden, laundered, recycled… Malta has a Third World infrastructure?

The same can be said with pavements. Some pavements are simply not fit to walk on, courtesy of damages by contractors and heavy vehicles, sundry signage and obstacles, and do-it-yourself substandard works. Once again, local councils simply do not have the funds to fix all pavements, so yet again, some pavements end up being more equal than others.

Unfortunately, local councils – even those which are efficient in their management – end up bearing the brunt of residents who demand adequate infrastructure in their localities. Isn’t it paradoxical that local authorites are deprived of funds while millions of euros are hidden in the clouds?

A cursory look at the terrible state of various public sports facilities, from Marsa to Mtarfa, as well as their surroundings also confirms this trend.

What about the general shabbiness of the Maltese islands? Wires galore, abandoned buildings, cars fit for scrappage, and aesthetic incongruence. New mega pro-jects surrounded by substandard infrastructure, ramshackle practices, the odd brick here and there, and innovative methods to occupy parking spaces.

Not to mention the disparity of financial realities. Only last day, a friend of mine was speaking about the few euros extra costs incurred due to the new bus ticketing scheme. Another day, I overheard other parents speaking about costs and making ends meet. Not to mention pensioners who tell me that their pensions are simply too low.

I can also mention the precarious situation of patients who rely on television shows and voluntary organisations to collect donations. Or the exploitative situations of workers – from Ukraine to North Korea – in precarious employment or in modern-day slave labour courtesy of pseudo-massage parlours, gentlemen’s clubs and not-so-leisurely clothing.

All this is carried out in a global context of Panama Papers and other similar cases. Governments lose millions and billions in revenue, and common people lose out. Peanuts give you monkeys. In Malta it gives you Third World infrastructure and more.

And yet, Joseph Muscat boasts of Malta’s economic growth.

The Panama Paradox is therefore not only about politicians who should be responsible and resign from their posts, but also about a global context of huge inequalities which are played out in the everyday life of citizens in their respective societies. And while money flies freely out to tax havens, people cross borders, fleeing war and misery, in search of a better life. Only to find closed borders.

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.