Preset agendas at Bank of Valletta?

I refer to the letter by the chairman of Bank of Valletta, Roderick Chalmers (June 23), in answer to Alfred Sant's comments made in his opinion article on BOV.

Firstly, I would publicly like to ask Dr Sant whether his Labour Party is prepared to commit itself, if returned to power in the next general election, to give up the government's dictatorial privilege of appointing, or should I say imposing, the bank's chairman.

Dr Sant, who was obviously reminiscing on past government experience, must appreciate that this privilege is undemocratic, politically motivated and blatantly defies and undermines the basic principle of good governance, which BOV proudly declares it champions.

The fact that the government's 25 per cent shareholding in BOV gives it a legal right to impose the chairman over the 75 per cent of the remaining shareholders inevitably gives rise to allegations of government's "preset agendas" and of being "a driving force" at BOV.

This anomaly is aggravated by a possible situation which may be such that any of the non-appointed directors may be chosen, supposedly elected and thus controlled by an appointed chairman, and this in the best interest of the shareholder he represents.

Mr Chalmers writes that "the government is content to leave the conduct of the bank's affairs entirely in the hands of the board", which unequivocally confirms that the government has the right to dictate its preset agendas and act as a driving force to conduct the bank's affairs, except when it condescends not to do so.

Shareholders may therefore conclude that their investment is subjected to the whims of the government of day, which may not be content to leave the conduct of the bank's affairs out of reach!