Labour MP Joseph Cuschieri yesterday called for an investigation into the way the joint committee of the local councils of the north of Malta had awarded a contract for street lighting.
He told parliament that he had received a letter from a company, also sent to the minister for local councils, where it was explained that the committee had selected the most expensive of four tenders submitted.
He said that while it was true that there could be cases where the cheapest tender was not necessarily the best, in this case, according to the letter, the quality offered by the company which won the contract was inferior to that of the cheaper tenders. The difference in price ran into thousands of liri and was double that of the cheapest tender.
Mr Cuschieri was speaking in parliament during the debate on a bill amending the Civil Code. The bill introduces the right for one to sue for damages arising from cases of corruption.
Earlier in the sitting, Mr Evarist Bartolo (MLP), resuming his speech from Tuesday`s sitting, continued to speak on different sectors of society which had an important role in preventing corruption.
He said one such sector was the media.
One could understand that the media owned by the political parties had a purpose to attack their political opponents.
But Malta`s independent media may have an interest not to attack the government because its owners had commercial interests.
Even worse, and what was even more dangerous for democracy, was the system whereby opinion makers received sponsorships or contracts from the government. Not only did they not bite the hand that fed them, but they kissed it. Such people never declared their interests in their programmes or contributions.
The code of ethics of journalists made no mention of such conflicts of interest. He could not understand, for example, what interest Gozo Channel had to sponsor a particular TVM programme.
On Tuesday he had argued that judges and magistrates should have a register of their interests, like MPs already had. The same should also apply to journalists and regular opinion makers and programme presenters.
The media had an essential role in the checks and balances expected in a democracy but in Malta, unfortunately, opinion makers were part of a system which amounted to bribery. Such lack of transparency and accountability meant the media was not acting as a watchdog.
The party media, at least, had a declared agenda which was well known. The so-called independent and commercial media had its links hidden in a way which could deceive readers or viewers into thinking there was no partisan interest.
Mr Bartolo also referred to the situation at the Casinò di Venezia and said it was a disgrace that while an MEP in Venice was demanding a ministerial inquiry, in Malta the government was acting like it was business as usual.
Dr George Vella (MLP) said one could not say all politicians were corrupt. Indeed most sought to do what was best in the national interest. Unfortunately, however, it was what was bad which stuck in the people`s minds.
Corruption not only harmed different sectors of society, such as the political class, but it also harmed the country. Investment stayed away when one perceived, rightly or wrongly, that there was corruption.
In most cases, corruption in the lower echelons of departments only took place when employees were given a bad example from above. It was therefore important for the government and high-level officials to set a proper example.
Dr Vella said it was not right for government MPs in this debate to have sought to make political mileage with allegations of past corruption while opposition speakers did their best to treat the bill seriously. These government MPs had not even bothered to substantiate their allegations in court when they had the opportunity to do so, such as the Lay Lay case which the PN media lost hands down.
Dr Jason Azzopardi had mentioned former Labour minister Lorry Sant, but had he forgotten the time when the PN headquarters were built in the 1960s at the time of minister Carmelo Caruana? People still remembered how contractors and suppliers were promised favours if they contributed to the construction of the PN`s headquarters with their free labour.
Furthermore, a member of the present cabinet had even overturned an allocation concerning the construction of the San Raffaele Hospital.
People still wondered how Mid-Med Bank had been sold to HSBC. There were many questions on how Air Malta had bought its RJ Avroliner aircraft, when they were so obviously inadequate, and how the privatisation programme was proceeding.
A particular PN speaker had spoken about what he called institutionalised corruption under the MLP, conveniently forgetting the pricey gifts that had been distributed in his constituency during the last electoral campaign.
No apologies had ever been made for the threats that voting for Labour would lose people their souls. This, too, was another form of corruption.
On the other hand, when in opposition before 1968 Labour had fought tooth and nail for the setting up of the House Public Accounts Committee.
Internally the MLP had set up a commission for proper behaviour in public positions and set up the party discipline and vigilance board.
As minister he had had the honour to host Lord Nolan in Malta to speak about morals and standards in public life (Lord Nolan chaired the Committee on Standards in Public Life in the UK).
Dr Vella asked if the government was ready to change its ways once the bill became law. Every suspicion about grafting and corruption should be investigated. It raised eyebrows when someone who had graduated only five months ago was already a government policy-maker. The first reaction of anybody who got hurt in that sort of process was to advocate emulation.
Unfortunately there was a culture of corruption and nepotism where many felt they could only advance through good contacts with blue-eyed boys or through money. The people must realise that this sort of practice would do no good in the long run, concluded Dr Vella.
Mr Silvio Parnis (MLP) said many people from all walks of life had been hurt by unfounded allegations of corruption. It was to be hoped that the time for such people to be granted redress had finally arrived.
On the other hand, there were thousands of cases where people who deserved some benefit by right had been left without, only to see it go to others who deserved it less or not at all.
The present prime minister used to promise to eradicate all forms of corruption, but had this really been done?
The allocation of housing was certainly not the only form of corruption. Other areas included the granting of jobs, the purchase of cars for ministers and mobile phones for their cronies.
The short-lived Labour administration had sought to inculcate new ideas of how to eradicate corruption.
Mr Parnis pledged that the next Labour government would do justice to those who had suffered simply because of their political creed.
It would also seek clear answers as to how Mid-Med Bank had been sold to HSBC.
Mr Parnis insisted that justice must be done eventually, and the sooner the better because Malta was everybody`s country, and the people deserved a country free of corruption.
Mr Joseph Cuschieri (MLP) said individuals might gain from corruption, but the country as a whole would be losing badly, especially in the long term.
A country`s leaders could not ask for sacrifices from the people while a select few of their friends in the corridors of power were doing well.
As far back as 14 years ago the present prime minister had said that corruption would be eradicated. He said that anybody who kept silent about known cases of corruption was in fact just as corrupt. But there was a gulf between words and deeds; in fact the prime minister had done nothing about corruption since then, and if anything it had increased all over the country.
The sale of Mid-Med Bank to HSBC was a case in point: it had all been so bereft of transparency that the government itself had pledged that things would be done differently next time around.
Another case was the allocation of the contract for the construction of the San Raffaele Hospital, which was worth more than Lm20 million.
Nothing concrete had been heard about the Daewoo case, which had raised so many serious questions.
The recent drops in the price of petrol were certainly welcome, but why was this done when international circumstances pointed to a probable rise in the price of fuel? Was this because someone had come into the world of car importation?
Mr Cuschieri said it was no longer the time for the government to be solely responsible to guard against corruption: that task should be shared by one and all. Nine legislatures since independence had given enough time for serious efforts to be mounted against corruption. Government and opposition representatives should get together and declare that the topic of corruption should never again be used by either side for political mileage, because it undermined the values of society and democracy. A corruption-free society was in the best interests of everyone in the country.
Unfortunately the commission against corruption did not enjoy the confidence of both sides in the House. Corruption should be fought by both sides with the self-same tools: it was the only way to ensure that the country`s resources would be distributed in the most transparent manner, rather than according to what or whom one knew.
Whoever offered himself to serve the country should be seen to be doing so for no self-interest but in the real interests of the country. Any failure in this respect would be wrecking all that the country had built over the years.
Dr Michael Frendo (PN) said he associated transparency, morality and democracy with the Nationalist Party.
Speeches against corruption could be part of a skilfully concealed campaign, but they could also be the precursors of a time when the people could look forward to a better life all around.
Corruption was not only of a criminal nature. Steps should be taken not only against corrupt people but also against anyone who kept silent about known cases of corruption. Democracy did not mean simply going to vote once every five years, but also meant the state ensuring that the taxpayers` money was being used properly.
The way the bill was drafted covered not only public officers but also government employees in the lower tiers and the private sector. This meant that the bill was not solely against corruption but also one in favour of a high sense of public morality. It not only set punishment for anyone guilty of corruption but also introduced the right to compensation for those who suffered damages from acts of corruption.
This bill showed how this country took corruption very seriously and had legislated against it, both through the Criminal Code and now the Civil Code.