Titbits

The General Workers' Union has chosen to hold a protest march on the eve of the opening of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Malta this week and during Queen Elizabeth II's state visit and the holding of the Commonwealth Business Forum. Undoubtedly, the union has the right to organise demonstrations, as it regularly does, and to time this week's demonstration to attract the widest international publicity possible, what with the presence of a large number of Commonwealth heads of government, leading foreign businessmen and members of the international press. But is this wise?

Should the union not be joining the rest of the Maltese people to portray a positive image of Malta? To make the best of the large international presence in order to attract investment? An investment that will help to increase economic activity, increase the standard of living and boost job creation - exactly what the GWU is striving for.

This move is petty. Normally, demonstrations held during international events are on issues such as human rights, war and the global environment, not on water and electricity surcharges caused by a worldwide increase in the price of oil, which all countries have suffered from.

This demonstration will not score any points for the union with our guests. They are not interested and will certainly not get involved in Malta's purely internal affairs. How stupid. How irresponsible. The men in red - the unprivileged part of the leftist movement - will undoubtedly be with them.

It will just be a nuisance, which we could do without during one of the most important events in our history. The usual rabble rousing will be a misuse of democracy and only dent Malta's image. Furthermore, it will stretch our security forces further, when they should be dealing with far more important events. But, then, if Tony Zarb & Co. want to harm the country (not the government), that is their choice. It is a loss to their credibility more than to ours.

Talking of democracy, what has happened to our Broadcasting Authority and our Ombudsman?

The first is there to ensure good radio and television broadcasting, safeguarding the principles of balance and impartiality (whether it does or not is another matter) while the second exists to provide citizens with a means of non-judicial redress, having prepared loads of reports and recommendations following complaints registered (whether one agrees with them or not). These are institutions that are very important in the democratic process, and the fact that they are both inexistent at the moment does not say much for our politicians. The Broadcasting Authority chairman and members are appointed by the government after a degree of consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, while the Ombudsman is chosen by agreement with the Opposition.

Should we not at least have persons manning these posts in an acting capacity?

Why was the Broadcasting Authority's term of office not extended, as it had already been, until such time as new appointments were made? Why is there not an Acting Ombudsman such as we had when the former occupant of the seat was away from the island? The Labour Party, rightly or wrongly, has been criticising PBS. To whom does the party have recourse at this point in time?

Where does the citizen take his complaints against the government and other public bodies? This is just not acceptable. We used to criticise the Labour government in the 1970s for not constituting the Broadcasting Authority, and rightly so. Is anything different now?

On a positive note, for a change, I must congratulate the Malta Institute of Journalists for its 15th annual awards ceremony. The number of categories of awards has been increasing every year and particularly in specialised areas, such as cultural and travel journalism. It is heartening to have so many submissions and many of them of quality. And what a change to see so many, mainly young, journalists from publishing houses and stations across the political spectrum come together on this auspicious occasion, with evident pride on their faces, to compete in a truly noble manner. It is also encouraging to see new sponsors from all sectors regularly emerge to promote a new award.

The Press Club, as it is popularly known, has come a long way since its establishment 16 years ago. It was not easy to get it going, but now its engine is clearly well oiled and it truly embraces journalists from all sectors, forgetting any divisions they may have in their professional work. Credit is certainly due to BPC and its chairman Joe Brockdorff who set things going, as well as the enthusiastic chairman of the club, Malcolm J. Naudi, and its hard working secretary, Joe Vella, not to mention the other members of the committee. They are all doing a good job. It is thanks to their efforts and those of their predecessors that we have one of the best and most democratic Press Acts in the world and that Maltese journalists get the protection and standards (for those that behave) they deserve. Keep it up!