When silence is not golden

It is quite clear that the Prime Minister has set himself and his government a policy based on the understanding that silence is golden.

It can be that, especially at times between couples who understand that they shouldn't up the ante tit-for-tatting each other. It is not that at all where governments are concerned, at least not in a country which boasts democratic credentials.

Government members are accountable for their actions. More, they are also accountable for what goes on under their watch. That is the meaning of political responsibility by ministers. Some countries extend it to resignations even when shortcomings are very distant from the minister concerned.

Without taking things that far, it remains essential that government members reply to criticism. That has to go beyond the political cut and thrust of parochial politics as practised in Malta.

In that context Lawrence Gonzi can say that he replies to opposition criticism every Sunday, and on each photo opportunity. Ministers will claim they reply in the House of Representatives, and that their spokesmen very quickly issue statements to counter opposition comments.

Never mind that such statements are all too often weak exercises in banal attempts to spin away from the points raised. Never mind either that the Prime Minister and ministers at times reply in the manner of political argy bargy and not on a serious basis even allowing for the tendency by the political class to politicise every argument.

The policy of selective silence is extending beyond opposition criticism. It is clearly being extended towards the non-political sector where there may be those who disagree with the way the government is doing things.

Take the controversy that has arisen over the sudden revelation that the government has been negotiating for 18 months with a British consortium to hand over to them some 221 tumoli of prime land at the White Rocks.

The proposal was projected by the Parliamentary Secretary for Sports as some philanthropic exercise by the consortium. They are not involved in an investment, he said. They are building a sports and leisure complex which would hugely enhance sports facilities on the island.

As an afterthought, almost, he said that to make the project feasible the consortium would be allowed to build 300 apartments, a four-star hotel and commercial outlets. The Prime Minister followed up, declaring airily that the sports complex would not cost the government a penny.

The spin was too blatant to be allowed to pass. I gave an estimate that the land being handed over to the consortium is currently valued, once real estate development is at its heart, at €500 million. Others, notably Michael Falzon, a former Nationalist minister, worked out that the consortium would make a handsome profit from the deal. Philanthropy was not involved.

Nothing wrong with that - business is business. Bill Gates went into structured philanthropy after he had made his billions. But to try to make the people believe otherwise was too much, even from hardened politicians.

Gonzi and his merry men did not reply to the non-political observations on the White Rocks, including Falzon's estimates. Instead the Prime Minister turned on the opposition, heatedly ac0cusing it of trying to scupper a marvellous sports complex.

The effort was brazen but weak, and ignored the fact that in the past the Nationalist government, both when led by Eddie Fenech Adami and when Gonzi took over, had been against real estate development at the White Rocks. What had changed? Gonzi et al stayed studiously silent, continuing to spin the political line instead.

Now there has been a fresh development. Paul Abela, writing in The Times on behalf of Costa San Andrea Ltd, pointed out that the company had a binding agreement with the government on the White Rocks, through the Ministry of Tourism, going back six years.

He maintained it was still in force. He also observed that the government - under both Fenech Adami and Gonzi - had turned down the company's request to include some real estate development in their project.

That was not all he said -Abela also took the government on the sports complex factor, arguing that his company could easily factor that into the project, given the conditions mysteriously extended to the British consortium, without any call for tender.

Abela's article was devastating. It quoted chapter and verse, though it did not go into the fact that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority was being made to review the planning strictures it had laid down for the area years ago. It was a business reaction by a Maltese businessman to a government which declares it wants to encourage enterprise.

Not only that. Aside from the article, Abela told The Times that he was a long-life Nationalist supporter and had also served the PN as a local councillor. He could not understand how what was now going on over the White Rocks could happen.

It all boils down to the fact that the issue is not political. There are questions about the White Rocks that demand clear and honest answers before it is concluded. Gonzi is obliged to give them. Effectively, his government stands indicted. Leaden silence only raises more questions.