Corruption must be voted as Malta’s winner of the Word of the Year competition. It is no longer possible to open the newspapers in the morning without it. You will either find a story on alleged corruption or on a briefing where hard questions on corruption were asked (but often not answered).
At breakfast you will be reminded of the dark clouds of corruption gathered over the heads of a government minister, or two. You will sense corruption lurking in your coffee, hiding in your cereal and spread on your toast. A fresh scandal is served up daily.
At this rate, our entire EU presidency will be overshadowed and diminished by the stench of corruption. When the Panama Papers scandal broke last year, many immediately sensed it could be the legendary albatross around Joseph Muscat’s neck. Numerous articles and news items predicted it. This prediction has proved true. And the old albatross is getting heavier and heavier.
Minister for Justice Owen Bonnici has asked us to appreciate the tools to combat corruption put in place by this government, such as the Whistleblower Act. That is fine, but what have these new tools actually achieved? Corruption appears to be growing, or at least the perception of it is.
Documents, contracts, information and details are routinely withheld from public scrutiny. This engenders suspicion of decisions and deals not handled correctly and not in the public’s best interest. People are increasingly cynical about how politicians might use the power of political office, not to serve the country but to take what they can get for themselves.
In politics, as in business, perception and reputation are all. Malta has just sunk by 10 places on the annual Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International, a global anti-corruption coalition.
Malta is now in 47th place, its worst ranking ever. This index is based on various perception factors, but the organisation’s general definition of corruption is “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain”. It comes in many shapes and sizes, and there is sometimes a fine line in understanding what corrupts the political system. Is it only when money exchanges hands? Codes of ethics help steer away from trouble.
Transparency International defines political corruption as “a manipulation of policies, institutions and rules of procedure in the allocation of resources and financing by political decision makers, who abuse their position to sustain power, status and wealth”.
Gangrene has set in and the foot must come off or it will poison and kill the rest of the body
Grand corruption is held to be acts “committed at a high level of government that distort policies or the central functioning of the State, enabling leaders to benefit at the expense of the public good”. At the other end, petty corruption refers to “everyday abuse of entrusted power by low- and mid-level public officials in their interactions with ordinary citizens”.
Transparency International holds that transparency is the surest way of guarding against corruption and increasing trust. This is about “shedding light on rules, plans, processes and actions. It is knowing why, how, what, and how much”. Transparency ensures that those holding power act “visibly and understandably and report on their activities”, and enables the general public to hold them to account.
What a shame! Producing audits about secret Panama accounts at this late stage of the game is unlikely to convince anyone or change perceptions. Gangrene has set in and the foot must come off or it will poison and kill the rest of the body.
Protecting the skyline
In his thought-provoking ‘Midas Curse’ article on high-rise projects last year, Archbishop Charles Scicluna worried about the skyline with the impact of these “cement monstrosities on the soft rambling contours of our countryside and traditional townscapes”.
Soon afterwards, government whip Godfrey Farrugia said the skyline is “a natural heritage domain” belonging to everyone and that no land owner can own the skyline. He was particularly incensed by plans for high-rise buildings at Mrieħel.
In their wide-ranging proposals for the environment launched last week, the Nationalist Party has now committed to achieving a skyline policy for the whole country. It holds that the skyline is part of our common heritage. This is a significant move for any future plans for tall buildings. High-rise is fine when sited appropriately.
The ‘skyline’ is the shape of buildings as outlined by the sky behind them. Changes in the skyline can deeply affect the character of an area. Skylines of well-known places are often unique, and some are protected in planning laws around the world – although not yet in Malta.
Views help us to understand places, and people are emotionally attached to them. This could mean views of the countryside or townscapes, or wider panoramas. Views both into and out of historic areas are relevant to their character or beauty.
To protect skylines, key views are identified. In Malta, Valletta and Mdina are undoubtedly key views, as is the historic line of vision between them.
For example, this is why plans for tall buildings at Mrieħel are problematic. This is high and central ground, where buildings are better kept low. A cluster of skyscrapers there will be widely visible in the surrounding landscape, changing the skyline in Malta as a whole.
petracdingli@gmail.com