The Labour Party has called on the government to shoulder its responsibilities after the Mepa audit officer declared that the direct appointment of Petra Bianchi as the planning authority’s environment director without a public call for applications was irregular.
“The chairman is, with the board, jointly responsible for this as he took it upon himself to select and appoint the person on the basis of unknown criteria and did not follow the proper procedures as established by law,” audit officer Joe Falzon said.
Malta Environment and Planning Authority chairman Austin Walker rejected the conclusions and justified the head-hunting exercise, adding it was a faster process than a public call for applications.
However the Labour Party in a statement signed by Roderick Galdes, said it had always insisted that the manner of the appointment was wrong and lacked transparency.
Mr Galdes, a member of the Mepa board noinated by the PL, said he had voted against the appointment because it lacked transparency. The head-hunting exercise, he said, had taken place with the approval of the prime minister.
The post of Director of the Environment was never considered to be a political appointment, he said. The government, therefore, should shoulder political responsibility for what had taken place.
Mr Walker in comments to The Times this morning argued that the post was a position of trust and the law allowed for such appointments to be made in these cases.
Dr Bianchi was appointed head of Mepa’s Environment Protection Department in February to succeed the outgoing Martin Seychell. She is the former director of heritage group Din l-Art Ħelwa.
Her appointment was approved by the Mepa board with eight votes in favour and one against on February 4 after she was hand-picked by Mr Walker. No call for applications was issued.
In its report, the authority’s Audit Office said it received a complaint from veteran environmentalist Edward Mallia over the method used to appoint Dr Bianchi.
On February 8, Mr Falzon asked the authority for more information on the appointment, which he received 10 days later.
However, Mr Falzon noted that Mepa only asked the Employment and Training Corporation for clearance on February 15 after the appointment was made.
Mr Falzon said it was “very unusual” that the selection process had been completed and the person appointed before authorisation from the Employment and Training Corporation was obtained.
However, he added, the ETC did not delve into whether Mepa’s assertion that the post was a position of trust was justified but it simply stated that the onus of responsibility for such a decision lay with the authority.
Minutes of the board meetings where Dr Bianchi’s appointment was discussed reveal that no discussion was held on her qualifications or suitability for the job.
One board member asked why no call for applications had been made and Mr Walker is quoted saying that the position of director was one of trust and outside the remit of the collective agreement.
“The process of employment through a call is lengthy and the authority stands to lose if the post is left vacant for a long time,” Mr Walker told the board.
This line of defence was repeated in Mr Walker’s reaction annexed to the auditor’s report. The chairman noted that three years elapsed before Dr Bianchi’s predecessor had been appointed after numerous calls for application did not yield satisfactory results.
“Recruitment through headhunting as a general rule can lead to identifying and engaging a suitable candidate within shorter time-frames,” Mr Walker said.
However, the auditor criticised this reasoning, insisting Mepa was not a private company.
“The way the post has been filled is a very dangerous precedent which can have undesirable effects including using it as means to exclude persons on political beliefs, sexual orientation, gender... and does not necessarily result in the best person being appointed because head hunting is limited to the people known to the person making the appointment.”
Mr Falzon said it was not the function of his office to judge Dr Bianchi’s qualifications but insisted it was neither the prerogative of the chairman.
The outgoing environment director was also quoted in the minutes saying that, with a public call, EPD employees who would have applied for the post were likely to be disappointed.
In a similar argument to justify his decision, Mr Walker told the audit office that from experience “public calls also frequently give rise to claims of discrimination”.
Mr Falzon rebutted this argument, insisting this was only true if a call for applications was worded to unreasonably favour particular candidates.
His criticism did not end there and in a “personal remark”, which he described as irrelevant to the contents of the report, Mr Falzon said he failed to understand why the environment protection director should have experience working with non-governmental organisations.
“Indeed, I would find this a handicap as accusations can easily be levelled that the particular person is favouring a particular NGO against another,” Mr Falzon said.
The auditor also highlighted relevant sections of the Public Administration Act which were not yet in force that showed how the legislator did not intend to make distinctions between positions of special trust and other posts.
While the auditor insisted this obliged Mepa to appoint people to positions of trust after a competitive process, Mr Walker insisted the law was not yet in force and Mepa had no obligation whatsoever.
The report was vetted by a legal adviser from the Ombudsman’s office.
Dr Bianchi was appointed for four years with a one-year probationary period.