In his first speech as Leader of the Opposition, Simon Busuttil explained that the Nationalist Party would carry out its duties loyally in Opposition, keeping a close eye on all that is being done by the Government. We will agree when things are being done well and cooperate when necessary but we will be critical when we feel the need to, fulfilling our duties for the benefit of the country.
The Opposition would ensure constructive dialogue in Parliament
Busuttil explained that within the parliamentary committees that were established by the Nationalist Government, the Opposition would ensure constructive dialogue within Parliament.
We must ensure that what is positive is maintained and nurtured. We will also seek to ensure that our Constitution should be updated where needed but, as Busuttil pointed out, we expect seriousness in every step that is taken for such changes to be possible.
Above all, Busuttil explained that the Opposition would serve as an alternative government that would provide the country with clear and valid proposals built on dialogue with the people.
The new Leader of the Opposition immediately proceeded to, firstly, propose the setting up of a Petitions Committee so that all Maltese citizens could put forward proposals in Parliament.
Secondly, he suggested the reintroduction of a law that had been passed by the Nationalist Government in the 1990s, which had subsequently been removed by the Labour Government. This allowed for the Opposition to have a member on a number of government corporations and entities, not for the sake of running affairs but to be able to closely examine what is going on – May 18.
Regulated markets
In the news, we heard that European Commission officials have carried out spot checks on a number of oil companies in investigations that are underway regarding attempts to tamper with the market, which negatively impacts the consumer.
The allegations are that leading oil companies such as BP, Shell and the company Platts, which regulates the price of oil, had illegally agreed to tamper with oil prices to their advantage, which did not reflect the real conditions of demand and supply on which the price of oil should have been established.
Although I have always believed that the free market brings about great economic benefits, I never believed that the markets alone and unsupervised are ideal.
Such allegations, similar to those regarding the tampering with interest rates through Libor, show that human beings remain human beings and there is a need for public institutions to oversee the markets. They must ensure that the markets function properly, are truly free for all participants and provide transparent information, both for those functioning within the market as well as consumers.
It is therefore satisfying to see that the European Commission is making efforts to ensure that important markets are not tampered with through illegal agreements, cartels or abuse by the dominant position of a few companies within certain markets – May 17.
A passion for politics
Last night, I watched the film Il Divo, directed by Paolo Sorrentino. It critically portrays the life of Giulio Andreotti, who passed away a few days ago at the age of 94.
Andreotti served as Prime Minister of Italy seven times and was appointed minister responsible for various portfolios no fewer than 22 times. He will, undoubtedly, remain a subject of discussion.
Andreotti himself used to say “they accused me of everything except the Punic Wars”. Whatever your views, he remains an important part of Italy’s post-World War II history.
As Italian President Giorgio Napolitano stated: “History will be the best judge. Yet, he continuously represented Italy excellently in international relations and the building of Europe.”
I admired his wit as well as his perseverance, although I must admit that he wasn’t one of my favourite Italian politicians. I preferred Christian Democrats who had more of a social conscience, such as Aldo Moro, Benigno Zaccagnini and Romano Prodi.
Andreotti led the right wing faction within the DC, which was often referred to as the Dorotei. Even if you disagreed with him, you inevitably admired him for his cultural formation and his good nature. Such an assessment was also given by Maria Fanfani, widow of his main rival within the DC, Amintore Fanfani. Andreotti began his political activism within the FUCI (Federazione Universitaria Cattolica Italiana), at the time when Moro served as its president. At the age of 28, he was appointed to Alcide de Gasperi’s Cabinet, who Andreotti continued to refer to as his “political father”.
He had a passion for politics. When he was once asked whether politics was a disease, he stated: “Yes, it is a disease but I have no intention of curing myself of it”.
He wrote several books, some of which were also translated into English. When asked about how he juggled his parliamentary duties while also finding the time to write books, he said: “That is why God gave us a brain with two hemispheres, so that we could do two things at once!”
His book I enjoyed the most was Lives – Encounters With History Makers in which Andreotti talks about a number of personalities that he met during his long life, from Totò to Ronald Reagan. He was able to draw out the most humane aspects of every person but also provided sharp comments when he deemed necessary – May 16.
Is this meritocracy?
It is a fact that over the past two years we successfully transformed the Fisheries Department, making it more efficient in the collection of data and information and, more importantly, more rigorous in enforcement. This transformation was a result of courage and determination.
Although we knew that it would not be popular, we were conscious of the fact that if we didn’t do so, the credibility and very existence of the sector would be brought into question because the EU had attracted our attention to a number of weaknesses.
I am informed that the EU’s Directorate General (DG Mare) is extremely satisfied with the changes that have taken place. This satisfaction was also expressed during official meetings between the EU and Malta. I am informed that they are also happy with the improvements they could observe over the past two years.
The EU had insisted that an administrative inquiry should be carried out regarding the tuna sector because it wanted to see more transparency and efficient control, particularly since Malta is involved in the business of almost 40 per cent of the tuna that is caught in the Mediterranean.
As minister I had no objection to this, rather I assured that we would be committed to the necessary administrative improvements. I only insisted with the Commission that I expected a similar exercise in other countries to ensure a level playing field and to avoid a scenario where certain states would benefit over others.
I am informed that the EU authorities are extremely happy with the outcome of the administrative inquiry and the improvements that have taken place. These improvements are also a result of the decision we took to introduce a new leadership within the Fisheries Department.
With regard to the restructuring and results achieved, I am informed that the Parliamentary Secretary, Roderick Galdes, has also been briefed.
I therefore cannot understand why it was decided to remove the person who has been instrumental in the success and results achieved over the past two years and reappoint a person who had previously been involved in the management of the department.
Recently, Galdes himself also publicly stated in a meeting with fishermen that “the Government had little room for manoeuvre within a sector heavily regulated by the EU”.
So what led to this decision ? Is this the way to treat those that give their best and succeed in making changes that are recognised and praised by the European authorities? Is this Joseph Muscat government’s version of meritocracy? – May 6.
http://georgepullicino.blogspot.com
George Pullicino is Opposition spokesman for energy and the conservation of water.