The confrontation between European Commission president Josè Barroso and former commissioner John Dalli at the European Court of Justice could not have brought the two men into sharper contrast with one another.
On his part, Mr Barroso made the very forceful argument that his decision to ask Mr Dalli to resign was purely a political one. He found the meetings Mr Dalli held with tobacco lobbyists hundreds of miles away from Brussels unacceptable. Mr Dalli admitted to those meetings and for Mr Barroso the choice was clear: he could either resign or get fired.
Mr Dalli has put forward arguments on whether he was pushed or had jumped, has contested the EU anti-fraud agency OLAF’s report and has insisted he was never given the opportunity to defend himself. Mr Barroso, a lawyer, said the presumption of innocence was vital to him but what he was looking at was the political implications. It was not a matter of rights, on Mr Dalli’s part, but of his duty to uphold a code of conduct. In Mr Barroso’s eyes he had failed.
Clearly, over the issue of standards in public life, the two men do not see eye to eye and hold different benchmarks.
The question that arises is: how many of our local politicians and holders of public posts share Mr Dalli’s viewpoint? The government has committed itself to approving a Bill on standards, ethics and proper behaviour in public life by the end of the current legislature. The Opposition accuses it of dragging its feet.
The UK Committee on Standards in Public Life lists seven principles that apply to anyone who is a public office holder. They are: selflessness (working for the public interest); integrity (avoiding placing themselves under anyone’s influence); objectivity (impartiality, fairness and merit); accountability; openness (transparency); honesty; and leadership. Significantly, last November, the committee drew up a report on strengthening transparency around lobbying.
Without a Bill even on standards in public life, Malta has still a long way to go. Over the years, ethical issues have arisen not just on the behaviour of politicians but also of magistrates and judges, heads of public authorities and even over the behaviour of a police commissioner which had led to his resignation.
Transparency is key to ensuring correct standards in public life because it and high ethical standards are mutually supportive. Until this is recognised by the political class, we shall, no doubt, continue to hear statements such as those made by Economic Services Minister Chris Cardona in Parliament who said he could not reveal whether the Lotteries and Gaming Authority’s chairman received a car allowance because the government had agreed to keep the details of the contract confidential. We will also continue to hear the Prime Minister saying that issues like the financial package of Sai Mizzi Liang “could have been handled better”.
Such controversies undermine public trust in the government and its institutions. Secrecy also often leads to abuse. Transparency should be the rule and not the exception. Information should not be fought for every step of the way.
Malta’s smallness , compounded by the fact that politicians and public officers are easily accessible to anyone with a vested interest, makes a strong case for more and not less diligence. However, official codes alone will not suffice.
They need to be coupled with a culture change in the mindset of public office holders and increased public intolerance of unethical or unbecoming behaviour of any sort by those who hold such posts.