It was reported that Malta's EU Commissioner designate, John Dalli, has pontificated on his magnanimous aims and objectives in undertaking his portfolio as Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner.

Initially, it would be interesting to learn whether or not this post is considered as a promotion or a demerit. However, what is not remotely contentious is the ludicrous disparity between his new highly lucrative salary (without allowing yet for the further addition of expense claims, which will, undoubtedly, inflate and exaggerate this bloated compensation package) and his former remuneration.

Regardless of such considerations I must offer my commiserations to the outgoing Maltese commissioner, Joe Borg, who was treated abominably, being unceremoniously and ignominiously dumped without so much as a by-your-leave and without the dignity of being informed in advance of the relinquishing of his post by his peers before the media was.

In outlining his intended role and purpose in his new post, Mr Dalli has rightly let it be known that his main priority would be that health care should be available be all. He also pointed out that, whereas in his former post he was in a position to implement policies and reforms, it fell upon EU member states to adopt their own changes.

One of his so-called "reform" measures, and a parting-shot legacy, was the policy drafted to issue discharged NHS patients from a publicly-funded hospital, with a fully-itemised invoice complete with a breakdown of costs incurred for treatment and medication throughout their stay in hospital, seemingly in order to make them aware of the cost to the taxpayer (paradoxically, virtually all patients being taxpayers in any event).

I put it to him that he would be well advised not to promote,or even suggest implementing, such policy in other EU member states if he wishes to maintain, rather than undermine, any vestige of credibility.

For this absolutely obtuse cost-awareness exercise defeats its purpose from the outset because providing such invoices would further inflict unnecessary costs upon the taxpayer and to speak in terms of a similar policy being implemented throughout other EU member states would greatly lower Mr Dalli's stock in Brussels, except in one crucial area, that of a laughing stock, as I know of no other EU member state that issues such cost-appraisal invoices to patients discharged from publicly-funded hospitals.

He would be better advised to spend taxpayers' money much more prudently and judiciously by making medicines much more available and accessible while greatly reducing the excessive cost of such in Malta. When comparisons of such costs and availability of medicines are made on a like-for-like basis with other EU member states, Malta is unquestionably much more expensive for the consumer in terms of purchasing such and, in far too many cases, exorbitantly so.

In any event, why single out and marginalise only one public entity, the health sector, for itemising the cost to the taxpayer and advising them of such when accessed? (Incidentally, no mention was made of such invoices being issued to patients utilising government health clinics).

Why not go the whole hog in such absurdity and ask the police, the fire service, the Civil Protection Department, the refuse collectors et al to issue invoices detailing the cost to the taxpayer for their services when so utilised?

I still maintain that this stand-alone hospital service isolation through the issuance of invoices to patients discharged from a hospital funded by the public purse is to get us all accustomed to when the government issues them for real and we will be condemned to pay again despite their assurances to the contrary.

I submit that there is a contrived method behind their apparent madness.