The issue of party financing exploded onto the headlines last week after it was revealed that hotelier Silvio Debono had asked the Nationalist Party for his money back, claiming his db Group had been covering the wages of two senior PN officials for some time.

Mr Debono’s outburst, made public by an outraged Simon Busuttil, came soon after the PN leader had called on the Auditor General to probe the St George’s Bay land deal between the government and the group. The PN maintains the public land at the site of the Institute of Tourism Studies was sold way below its proper value, in a deal that stinks.

The PN leader insists the amount of €70,800 that his party’s media arm, Media.link Communications Ltd, re­ceived from the db Group in 2016 was for commercial services rendered. Dr Busuttil rejects the group’s claim that this money was specifically intended to pay the salaries of the PN’s secretary general and its media company’s CEO.

Mr Debono’s request for a ‘refund’, coming after Dr Busuttil’s criticism of the land deal, is a cause of great concern. Did he believe that his payments to the PN had bought him the party leader’s silence? What else do businesses expect in return for their financial support of political parties? That question, which has hung in the air for so many years in relation to party financing, now needs to be asked more forcefully than ever.

Dr Busuttil deserves full credit for criti­cising the land deal despite the financial injection from Mr Debono. Indeed, the PN leader has in the past also criticised other business giants – who must have surely funded the party at some time or other.

On the other hand, while Labour’s accusations of false invoicing and “money laundering” have been flatly denied by the PN, the fact remains that alliances of this nature are unholy. Dr Busuttil, des­pite his legitimate plea that parties can only survive on donations, would do well to be vigilant against being sucked into a similar situation in the future: accepting money with one hand from a business concern which he accuses of shady dealings with the other.

He has now appointed a commission headed by Judge Giovanni Bonello to make recommendations on amending party financing law, promising to include them in the PN’s electoral mani­festo. The 2016 Financing of Political Parties Act was a step in the right direction. The next step is to seriously consider State funding of parties and the inclusion of their commercial companies within the scope of regulation.

The absence of public funding means the parties are dependant for survival on donations from businesses, and to a lesser extent from the public. This is hugely detrimental to the proper functioning of democracy in the country, allowing business donors to wield hidden influence over decisions made by governments.

It is also generally accepted that companies owned by parties could be used to circumvent financing laws. Notwithstanding the PN’s dismissal of the claim that invoices from Media.link were fake, the possibility of using this devious funding method has been exposed to the full glare of scrutiny.

On the other side of the political fence, Labour pats itself on the back for having finally pushed through party financing law. But its delay in registering with the Electoral Commission and publishing the donations it received only raises questions about its financial affairs.

There is a way to go before the financing of political parties becomes truly transparent. The latest twist may well be a catalyst for change. One thing is certain: the parties’ reliance on business interests must be done away with.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.