Minister for Gozo Giovanna Debono yesterday told Parliament that some 150 jobs had already been created in Gozo as a result of a restructuring exercise of the public sector.
Speaking during the debate in second reading of the Public Administration Bill, Mrs Debono said that she hoped that as a result of centralisation, more back office employment could be offered to Gozitans to work in Gozo and avoid having to travel to Malta.
Some private entities such as banks had noted the socio-economic advantages of such a move and opened back offices in Gozo. Apart from increasing the economic activity this would be more cost effective as it would do away with the problem of travel.
Mrs Debono said that the government had decided to pilot a new Bill, tailor-made to fit Malta's needs, because times had changed too much for simple amendments to existing legislation.
The Bill provided the framework of how the public administration should function in the modern world. Above all, it aimed to improve the sector so that Malta, as an EU member, could attain excellent levels.
She said the prime minister had referred to the main aims of the Bill as increasing efficiency and accountability and creating a stronger sense of leadership. An effort should be made to train individuals to make the most of human resources.
The idea of a main permanent secretary to coordinate the public service, answerable to the Prime Minister, was another advantage of this Bill as it ensured that decisions taken conform with government values.
The setting-up of the Merit Protection Commission, to scrutinise the recruitment process, was another positive aspect.
The Bill was an important step which gave the Public Sector the tools to meet the needs of the people.
Earlier, Labour MP Helena Dalli said that the Bill must be seen in the context of the past electoral campaign because when it mattered, the government had thrown away the values of transparency and accountability and started dishing out promotions, further increasing injustices in the public sector.
She said that the PN administrations had never heeded these values as evidenced by the party's internal report after the defeat it suffered in the elections for the members of the European Parliament. During the last electoral campaign, graver sins had been committed. When people complained, the government used the last interview as its safety net.
How can one believe the government about its good intention on the whistle-blower when all that was dedicated to it was just 10 lines? Also, it was dubious whether employees in the civil service could report the wrongdoings of ministers without being victimised as there were no guarantees. Those who, in the past, had done so ended up being hounded.
Referring to the dockyards, Ms Dalli said that government funds had not only subsidised the workers but also for the winning of contracts and then, people "who had made millions" escaped from Malta. Were these not Maltese taxpayers' monies? she asked.
Former prime minister Eddie Fenech Adami had also criticised the Ombudsman when he found against the government in the case of promotions in the armed forces. It could well be that the government would circumvent this legislation to give more promotions to Nationalist sympathisers, the more so that a minister had declared that the public service had to be politicised and tow the line of the government of the day.
Minister Austin Gatt had also moved that the House Public Accounts Committee investigate the Auditor General in the case of Radio Mediterranean.
She asked why the Bill had completely ignored the rights of the workers. Through its permanent secretaries, the government wanted to take complete control of the civil service. Dr Gonzi himself, she said, had told an unsuccessful applicant that he could not have chosen him for a post because he was not politically acceptable.
Ms Dalli said that in committee stage, the opposition would move amendments.
Concluding, Ms Dalli asked whether the Merit Commission would receive claims against its decisions and how would employees seek redress.
Labour MP Leo Brincat described Mepa as a three headed monster, with its gods, political appointees and directly-appointed civil servants on its board. He called for a suitable balance which led to sustainable development, pointing out that the silent majority in Malta favoured the environment.
He criticised Mepa for continuing talks with developers even when these deviated from the original plans. A case in point was the approval of a rabbit farm on an outside development zone of hydrological importance five days before the election.
Unfortunately, the Prime Minister was allowing situation to prevail, and Ramla was again facing possible development, nine months after the permit had been withdrawn. There were also the cases of Spin Valley at Mistra and the Safi supermarket.
The environmental organisation Din l-Art Ħelwa pointed out that the way the Mistra village application had been treated showed inconsistency in policy making.
Mr Brincat said that everyone agreed with the dream of Gozo becoming an environmental island. It was positive that this government had placed the environment as a priority of the administration and this was also on top of the agenda of the new MLP leader.
But the government had a track record of lack of good governance and there were matters which were difficult to prove but which smelled horrendous.
What happened during the debate on the Fort Cambridge project was one such example. The media had been treated very badly during this hearing just for doing their duty. Mr Brincat clarified that he was not saying that all development should stop but sustainable development should not remain just a buzz word.
There could not be good governance with authorities like Mepa which used two weights and two measures being strong with the weak and weak with the strong. It used dubious way in the issuing of certain permits especially in the run-up to the election. New structures, new mechanisms and a new mentality were required to show that the reform was real.
Mr Brincat said that, for the people to take Mepa seriously, the Prime Minister had to take concrete steps and implement a reform which should lead to accountability and transparency in as short a time as possible.
He warned that there could not be good governance when the authorities did not enforce EU laws the country was obliged to follow. The time had come, he said, for a regular parliamentary scrutiny of the operational effectiveness of Mepa, including of the report drawn up by its own auditor.
He referred to the Transparency International corruption index which expressed concern at the fact that the situation in Malta had turned from bad to worse. The Prime Minister had said this conclusion was based just on perception.
Mr Brincat warned that the public sector reform on its own would not lead to better administration. There needed to be constant exposure to public scrutiny. This was the case in Finland. Contrary to many other countries in the EU, even professional diaries and all public records were open to public scrutiny in Finland.
An element of self responsibility in public administration should be introduced together with a new mentality and the implementation of a new administrative culture which showed knowledge of the changes constantly taking place.
Jean Pierre Farrugia (PN) said that the fact that the Public Service Committee was submissive to the Merit Protection Committee was encouraging. He pointed out that there were instances where the PSC had not heeded the Injustice Commission's decision to make amends to people who had suffered an injustice. However, even this Bill did not provide for such redress.
He said that at the time of a caretaker government employees in public service had decreased by 10.
Referring to gender issues, Dr Farrugia said that 868 women had been promoted, compared to 449 men. The gender situation was improving even when it came to university graduates and in A-level results.
This Bill, he said, had its good points, such as the revision of examination papers, interviews by video conferencing, the chance for re-employment when one reached the age of 50 and the changing of fixed term contracts to indefinite ones.
However other aspects were not so positive. Out of 30,000 employees, only 10 civil servants had been found to be neglecting their duties, or doing private work during their working hours. This was not probable and if this was the number the PSC had uncovered, then it must have been asleep.
Worrying was the fact that there were only two optometrists in government service and only 11 psychologists were available in the whole civil sector. Although there were 147 therapists doing home visits, there were 430 patients who requested transport to get to hospital for a therapist.
Although there were 13 home visits by physiotherapists, 29 patients had requested transport to receive physiotherapy in hospital. He called for more home visits to be made to alleviate the pressures from the hospital.
He felt that the issue of sick leave was being abused and should be controlled.
Another advantage on the Bill was that it gave the opportunity of retraining surplus staff.
Agency employees had to be made aware that any allowances they received did not count when it came to calculating their pension, he said, so they would not be disappointed.
He also said that the list of authorities which the minister could not interfere with had to be amended.
Other speakers will be reported in later editions.