Labour, the most transparent government in history, has taken dodging questions to a new level.
But when you look closer, it boils down to three simple ploys.
Ploy no. 1: Refuse to publish any details, particularly potentially incriminating documents like contracts
Of course, Labour never refuses flatly. It gives excuses. The favourite is that the contract involves commercially sensitive information, even though such information usually covers only a fraction of a document. Another tactic is to say such documents were not published by the previous government: A blatant lie.
A third tactic is to promise to publish… at the opportune time. That’s what Joe Mizzi, the Transport Minister, has said about the contract for the new bus service. Never mind that he had dealings with the chosen company during the tendering process and that he trebled the previous subsidy. It’s Joe Mizzi, not Joe Public, who decides what’s ‘opportune’.
If really pushed, the government publishes a summary of the actual contract, as it did with the power station agreement for the debate in Parliament. But the devil, as we know, is in the detail.
Ploy no. 2: Accuse the Opposition of politicising an issue and hide behind non-politicians
We saw Chris Fearne, the parliamentary secretary for health, do this the other week after I raised questions about the safety standards in the corridors of Mater Dei. It occurred again this week in parliament, after the government confirmed another patient referred to a death occurring in a particular corridor. Dr Fearne responded by getting the grieving family to say that their loved one had received the best possible care.
It was Dr Fearne who used a grieving family as a human shield in the political crossfire. I gave my word to the family that I would not use them the way he did. Which is why, I have avoided taking this particular case further.
However, it’s a completely different matter to ask questions about conditions and standards at Mater Dei Hospital. That is an area for which the Health Minister, Konrad Mizzi, and his parliamentary secretary, Dr Fearne, are politically responsible. To say it’s not a political issue is the same as saying they’re not responsible for Mater Dei.
I have had several reports, from ordinary families, of patients who died in a hospital corridor. Not a ward extension, mind you, but a corridor. Corridors are not medically equipped. They do not have suction points, oxygen points, bed alarms, patient monitors, etc. Of course, medical staff do all they can and nobody is blaming them for these deaths.
These deaths are symptomatic of a health system which is deteriorating fast at the expense of ordinary people’s health and dignity. If that is not a political issue, then what is?
Ploy no. 3: Get another minister to speak instead of you
That way he can give an irrelevant answer while counting on the audience to understand that he cannot know all the details as he’s not the minister in charge.
Only this week, Chris Cardona, the Economy Minister, turned up on a discussion programme to debate energy policy and fuel prices. Dr Mizzi was the minister invited (it’s his portfolio as we all know) and he had accepted. But Mr Mizzi’s image is being protected against questions on the shambles of the power station project, fuel prices and health.
An even odder situation occurred in parliament. I asked Dr Mizzi about his visit to China. It was reported in the China Daily but no information about it was given in Malta. I simply asked who formed part of the Maltese delegation.
It seems I asked for highly classified information. Instead of being told who the Maltese were, I was given a list of the Chinese who met them. Oh, and the visit was organised by Sai Mizzi. (With luck we might soon be given her office address, or at least a list of the real estate agents she has met.)
More puzzling still, the reply was given by the Tourism Minister, Edward Zammit Lewis. Dr Mizzi was (once more) not present for question time, but his deputy, Dr Fearne, was.
Dr Zammit Lewis defended Dr Mizzi on a subject he evidently knew little about. Dr Fearne sat quietly observing the charade as supplementary questions by David Agius and by myself remained unanswered. Today we are no wiser than we were on Tuesday.
Three simple ploys. Each a Labour sneer at the idea of accountability.
Labour’s definition of transparency: The government decides when you can scrutinise what it’s done and how much information you can have about what it’s really done.