Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg told Parliament yesterday that the Cabinet had discussed the appointment of a Commissioner for Health to investigate complaints in the health sector while Health Minister Joe Cassar was all for such an office.
Winding up the 10-and-a-half-hour debate on the second reading of the Ombudsman Act (Amendment) Bill, Dr Borg complained that only 25 per cent of the time had been devoted to the Bill itself while the other 75 per cent was what he called “a free-for-all”. He was disappointed that many MPs had referred to matters which were totally unrelated.
Labour MP Helena Dalli had castigated the government for extending the voting time during the last general election, saying that this was the reason the PN had won by a handful of votes. Dr Borg retorted that it was the Electoral Commissioner and not the government that had extended the poll. The PL’s electoral report had admitted this.
It was unfair for opposition members to attribute bad motives to the government in presenting the Bill when it reflected the agreement between government and opposition in the select committee.
He said that Alfred Sant had been contradicted by Carmelo Abela as regards the reasons why the Mepa audit officer was to become a Planning Commissioner under the Bill.
Dr Borg said that the 1970s Labour administration had not established the Ombudsman’s Office because it did not believe in it. After 1987 the Nationalist government had established the Injustices Commission presided over by then Mr Justice Joseph Said Pullicino, who was the present Ombudsman. The commission had introduced the concept of redress against any injustice, even if there was no breach of the law.
The fact that the government might criticise the Ombudsman on certain matters did not mean that it did not trust him or have trust in his Office.
He said that in 2009, out of over 550 cases investigated by the Ombudsman there had been only one case where the Ombudsman’s decision was not implemented by the government. This was a good record even in the context that government action had not been taken in only six cases over the last five years. The government had always given reasons for not implementing the Ombudsman’s recommendations.
Out of the 550 cases in 2009, 124 had been resolved in a short period of time and the Ombudsman had given his advice on 66 other cases. The Ombudsman did not have any authority in 129 other cases, while 47 applications had been submitted after the six-month period established by law. This was surely not a short period of time because it was similar to that adopted by the courts.
There had been only 70 cases, amounting to 12 per cent of all applications, where the Ombudsman had declared that complainants were wrong. In 1998 he had found two cases where the previous Labour government had not accepted the Ombudsman’s recommendations. He had upheld the previous government’s decision in one of these two cases.
Dr Borg said that the University Ombudsman would cover the whole educational sector while the Mepa auditor would be placed within the Office of the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman might also create other commissioners with the approval of the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition. The Health Minister was interested in establishing a Commissioner for Health, he said. Dr Borg said that while Dr Dalli had agreed with the appointment of a Health Commissioner, Chris Cardona had claimed that the opposition was a step ahead of the government.
Dr Borg said that such criticism was unfair because the government was still interested in the select committee. It had even presented proposals on the Electoral Commission. He was sure that the parties would have agreed on other issues if the select committee had kept functioning.
The opposition had criticised the government for not presenting the Bill before, but when the government had presented the Bill, it had said it did not go far enough.
Concluding, Dr Borg said that this was an important Bill, which confirmed the government’s reputation in taking a strong stand against abuse. This was to the credit of various Nationalist administrations that had set up the Office of the Ombudsman, the Commission against Corruption and the Committee for Judicial Review.
The Bill was unanimously approved.