Best to do it while you still can. Shuffle through seven years of press releases from the National Audit Office. There has not been a peep out of them for over a year. If proposed legislation goes ahead we may hear even less from the NAO.
The audit office, set up to reassure taxpayers about how their money is spent, could sink considerably from public view if a bill proposing exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act goes through parliament.
Barring public access to National Audit Office documents can only serve politicians while keeping the rest of the nation in the proverbial mushroom farm. The proclaimed vision of the audit office is to be an agent of change achieving excellence in the public sector with its mission to help promote accountability, propriety and best practice in government.
The NAO aims to provide independent information and advice on the way government departments and local councils use taxpayers' money. Public access to environmental statistics is generally protected by other legislation while it is the audit office that reports on loss, fraud, waste or inefficiency.
A mere committee before 1997, the audit office rose up on an amended constitution to acquire a measure of independence from the government. This strengthened the NAO to encourage more accountability of public officers and politicians while tightening management of public funds and resources.
The Prime Minister has said that a new information act would be a "breakthrough". If it breaks through the public's right to know, weakening democracy and neutralising watchdogs, then the legislation will be a blow for transparency, side-stepping good governance.
A 2006 report filed by Malta Environment and Planning Authority auditor Joseph Falzon observed: "It is inconceivable how, in this day and age, Mepa has the audacity to demand that complainants are not informed of the conclusions of investigations carried out as a result of their complaints.
"It is also incomprehensible how Mepa should consider it necessary to shield abusive/inappropriate action of public officers by trying to obstruct the communication of a report to who has the authority to act."
It is the revelation of such happenings that keeps civil society on its toes. It is the lack of it which would see the nation dive into a new dark age of unaccountability in the public eye. After several revealing reports the auditor was relieved of his investigator Carmel Cacopardo whose request for renewal of contract was turned down.
A full year has passed since the Chamber of Architects called for the reactivation of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority audit office with required resources after the authority refused to extend this investigator's term.
A 2003 performance audit on preventing pollution from ships identified weaknesses within the Malta Maritime Authority in ship inspections and the monitoring of certificates.
Malta's response to pollution from ships in the surrounding sea and in ports is documented in the National Marine Pollution Contingency Plan (NMPCP).
Not even the audit office could cut through the fog swirling around whether the plan had been officially approved. It was noted that recommendations following a disaster simulation had not been carried out.
Ownership of the NMPCP became unclear following the merger between the Environment Protection Department and Mepa in 2002.
The audit highlighted issues relating to the ownership, management and operations of the National Marine Pollution Contingency Plan which needed to be addressed and resolved as a matter of priority.
Recommendations to boost efforts to upgrade the Malta Maritime Authority as overseer were made by the Auditor General. The importance of establishing clear lines of accountability and ongoing commitment by the government entities involved cannot be over-emphasised where the nation's water supply would be threatened.
An oil spill clogging reverse osmosis plants would leave the island thirsty with only three days' supply of fresh water.
NAO also confirmed on paper what we know on the ground. The productivity level of employees engaged in rubble wall building and cleaning jobs is low.
It was found that a concession approach adopted by the Environment Development Management Section allowing workers to log off early was not authorised.
Irregularities were also noted in overtime allowance payments made by the Ministry for Urban Development and Roads.
During 2006, the NAO reported how it bit into the functions of the tax compliance unit and took on public debt.
There is little hard evidence so far to suggest that the environmental deficit has been tackled with comparable zest in the delicate balancing act between central co-ordination and decentralisation.
Public interest and the right to know should far outweigh any political disadvantage the government might encounter when disclosing to taxpayers the efficiency or otherwise of their euros in environment and other areas of spending.