Recently, Transparency International published a league table of perceived corruption among the nations of the world. Malta’s ranking was 47th, the worst position we have occupied since we joined the EU in 2004, when we were in 24th place.
In the time we have been part of Europe we should have expected that, with the checks and balances imposed upon us by the Union itself, things would have gotten better, not worse. The only countries in the EU who fared worse than we did are not exactly temples of good governance: Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece and Slovakia; august company indeed.
Now this is an index of perceived corruption rather than proven, so it can be asked: is it accurate?
Ever since I can remember – and I am sure it is the same for all readers – I have been bombarded with stories in the television news and the press of one of the major two parties hurling accusations at each other regarding corruption, graft and collusion with big business.
In the last year, since the Panama scandal broke, these accusations have reached a frequency and vigour unprecedented in recent memory. The PL digs out stories of dubious practices during the previous PN administration; the PN hammers home the scandals perpetrated by the current PL administration. And yet, despite this ongoing dialogue of dirt, not once, since independence, has a serving or previous minister been hauled up in front of our law courts to face justice.
So what happened to the evidence, the proof that we, the public, have been short-changed by politicians of dubious character and purpose? Was it all hot air? Were the accusers lying, selling us, in current parlance, fake news? Or has something far more sinister been going on over the years?
Despite this ongoing dialogue of dirt, not once, since independence, has a serving or previous minister been hauled up in front of our law courts to face justice
There is a saying: there is no smoke without fire. It hardly seems likely that not one story of misdeed by our political class has an iota of substance. Too many of them seem to live beyond the means their officially declared income would indicate. So, I repeat, why has no one been brought to account?
Could it be that in the current de facto two-party system we have in this country, there is an unwritten agreement that both parties can hurl accusations at each other till they are blue in the face, yet never follow up with real action once they have the reins of government in hand? Let’s face it, if one party starts doing it, the other will too, and with the current system of revolving door politics it would not do to irritate the future potential ruling party.
Coming back to the dubious benefits of the two-party system, any wily businessman looking to garner future contracts, public land sales at bargain basement prices or development permits outside the parameters of the current rule book would hedge his bets and donate generously to both big parties, knowing full well that one or the other will be dishing out favours in the next electoral cycle. After all, in a two-horse race you can’t lose if you place a wager on both competing steeds…
You may ask, but what about the new laws governing party finance? The problem with the law is that it does exactly that, govern the finance of the parties, not their subsidiary companies – their television and radio stations, their press or anything else. As we have seen in the case of the recent exposures regarding the PN – and believe me, I am sure what the PN does, the PL can do better – the law can be bypassed by giving huge sums for ‘services rendered’ to any of these companies without incurring the wrath of the Electoral Commission.
The situation is a sad one. This country and its people have so much potential. Yet despite the booming economy, very little has filtered down to the general populace, and so many honest people and businesses who could contribute are being shut out.
Yet we can change things. It is time the duopoly of power we are under is broken. A third party sharing government would put a spanner in the works. Big business would no longer be sure they would have total control over the ruling party. Their bets would no longer be a sure-fire win and the main party in government would have someone looking over its shoulder, looking out for bad practices.
It could be argued that a third party could be bought just as easily as PN or PL. True, but only if it operates in the same way. It is for this reason that from the outset the executive of Partit Demokratiku took the decision not to accept donations from businesses and corporations, and to limit donations from individuals to €50.
It will make our job harder, but it leaves us free to do what is right for the country, not for our party or ourselves.
Anthony Buttigieg is deputy leader of Partit Demokratiku.