When lack of good governance has become so pervasive, instances of impropriety or slippages, even when these involve taxpayer money, are not made much of. Governing standards have now sunk to such a low level that almost every impropriety or wrongdoing is practically being considered above board.

See, for starters, how the Prime Minister skillfully ignores key issues at his Sunday morning speeches. This may not be surprising, given that he is a politician, but failing to answer, or even recognise, the people’s concerns is becoming a standard feature in his Sunday outings.

Two burning issues hitting the headlines are the plans for the transfer of the 30-year concession from Vitals Global Healthcare to Steward Health Care, an American company, and the other over the American University of Malta, originally meant to give a big boost to the economic prospects of the south. Both deals have turned out sour or, at least, vastly different to those envisioned by the government at first.

Yet, in light of hard facts suggesting that the government acted rashly in both deals, the Prime Minister still tries to give the impression there is absolutely nothing wrong with them and that they will both work out fine. Few share his confidence.

Even as the government strenuously fights off sharp criticism over the two deals, more and more evidence of lack of good governance continues to emerge, confirming that the situation is now becoming endemic, certainly not a good sign for present and future generations.

There are also growing concerns on the number of direct orders given out by public entities falling under the responsibility of three ministries over the past two years. The total, €30 million in this case, may not be all that extraordinary considered against the overall amount the government spends annually.

Public procurement regulations do allow direct orders but only in exceptional circumstances. Bypassing calls for quotations or tenders on pretexts other than exceptional circumstances may give rise to serious abuse, a matter that does not seem to be bothering the authorities unduly considering the number of direct orders being given today. In the circumstances, people can hardly be blamed if they harbour serious suspicion over the award of certain director orders or, more specifically, what lies behind them.

Sports Malta, for example, has so far issued no fewer than 19 direct orders for the building of a national shooting range at Ta’ Kandja. Irrespective of whether or not the contract amounts involved fall below the threshold laid down in the procurement regulations, if taken separately not globally, were they really all required to be given out by direct order? Defending the decision by saying speed was essential given the international shooting competition being held here in summer holds very little water if any, especially in view of the fact that this has been known for quite some time.

For the sake of good governance, direct orders ought to be kept to the barest minimum to ensure an even playing field to all. Yet, it would seem the exception is becoming the rule.

May the government be able to prove this is not the case but, judging by the kind of direct orders being given, the perception is that too much laxity has now taken a firm hold.

This is a Times of Malta print editorial