Parliament has passed a bill that would see Parliamentary scrutiny through a committee for individuals nominated by the government to certain public posts. The bill saw a number of amendments agreed to by both sides of the House.
The roles that would be scrutinized by the committee include chairpersons, ambassadors, and commissioners in high positions who are normally politically appointed.
Regulatory bodies that are affected by this include the Central Bank of Malta, the Malta Financial Services Authority, the regulator for Energy and Water Services, the authority for Transport in Malta, the Malta Communications Authority, the Malta Gaming Authority, the Planning Authority, the Environmental and Resources Authority, the Commissioner for Voluntary Organisations, the Lands Authority, the Malta Competition for Consumer Affairs Authority, the Malta Medicines Authority, the Malta Tourism Authority, the National Commission for Higher Education and the Financial Intelligence Analyses Unit.
During committee stage the PN had proposed that individuals nominated by the government for public posts should personally appear before a parliamentary committee. The government had initially proposed that the committee would send and receive questions in writing.
Now the government agreed that all nominees would appear before the committee.
The government was also supporting other proposed amendments, including that; the committee members should increase from five to seven and on how the committee would give advice to the minster.
However, the PN said, the government was still refusing to increase the number of roles that would need to be scrutinised by the committee, the PN said in a statement, namely: the Commissioner of Police; the Commander of the Armed Forces of Malta; the Attorney General; the Chairman of the Public Service Commission; the Chairman of the Employment Commission; the Chairman of the Broadcasting Authority; the Principal Permanent Secretary; the Head of the Security Service; the Commissioner apppointed for the purposes of the Security Service Act; the Director of Correctional Services; the Chairman of the National Coordinating Committee on Combating Money Laundering and Funding of Terrorism; the Chairperson of the Malta Statistics Authority; the Executive Chairperson of the Executive Council of the Planning Authority and the Chairperson of the Occupational Health and Safety Authority.
The PN had said that while it will be voting in favour of the draft bill, it will be moving an amendment calling for these roles to be included in the list.
Parliamentary debate
Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, during the Committee stage in Parliament this evening, said that government and the Opposition sat down for many hours, and are now in a position to propose amendments that reach 90% consensus.
The first change is that the number of committee members was increased from five to seven. The second change makes it so that career diplomat ambassadors do not need such scrutiny, but non-career diplomats do.
When it comes to chairpersons, those appointed under the old system will remain under the old system, and future appointments would go through this new system.
He mentioned that the second round of questioning will no longer be obligatory, as the person would now officially be required to appear before the committee, unlike the situation as was in the original draft
Turning to acting appointments, a minister would be able to appoint a person as, for example, an acting Chairman for six months, and within that period government must appoint an official person to the post – meaning that they must appear before the committee.
PN MP Karol Aquilina confirmed what the minister said. “I met and spoke with the minister at length regarding amendments. Government was open to discussion on this law. The biggest positive step was the most important one. It was a law regarding public scrutiny and in the original bill there was no obligation for the person nominated to appear before it, and now this person would be required to appear.”
The reason for the change in the ambassadors’, is as the PN were not looking to scrutinise people already in the diplomatic corps, as their career is focussed on this work. ”Our worry is that a government would appoint someone to Ambassador just because they want that person. So we clarified that non-career diplomats must be scrutinised.”
He mentioned a number of other changes, but said that if government had not agreed for the nominees to appear before the committee, there would not have been agreement.
Aquilina then mentioned the areas of disagreement as highlighted in the earlier PN statement.
Bonnici, responding to the areas of disagreement, said: “We don’t agree that an executive chairman for example, appear before the committee. We pledged to grill chairpersons of regulatory bodies and non-career ambassadors. That is the line we put to the electorate and what we have a mandate on. What Aquilina wants is different. An Executive Chairman is another word for CEO. He said government doesn’t agree that the CEO be grilled as the aim was not for the executive arm to be grilled, but the Chairpersons.
He said he cannot agree to add those persons as it is different from the philosophy and rationale of the bill.
Owen Bonnici and Simon Busuttil
The PN also filed a separate amendment requesting that the aforementioned roles government refused to include in the list that would see such Parliamentary scrutiny by the committee be included in the law.
At this point, PN MP Simon Busuttil made a final appeal for government to change its mind on this, saying this bill is a step forward to introduce scrutiny for those entering public office, where they will pass through a Parliamentary filter. He questioned what criteria government used to say yes to include some posts, and no to others.
He mentioned the controversy surrounding the current police commissioner. "If we are to appoint a new Commissioner, wouldn't it be better for him to appear before the committee? We want a lot more than this, but through this law we are at least asking for Parliamentary scrutiny of this position. Referring to the MEP's rule of law conclusions, he said that they highlighted that the Prime Minister should no longer remain the one who chooses the Police Commissioner. My appeal is for the Commissioner to at least appear before the committee."
He mentioned that the AG is facing the same kind of public scrutiny. "So will we not include the appointment of a new AG in the list to appear before the committee?"
"The minister is including the FIAU Chairman in the list, and rightly so, but the AG is the FIAU chairman. Imagine the new AG would not need Parliamentary Scrutiny, but to be the FIAU Chairman would have to and not pass."
He asked why the Chairman of the Tourism Authority, Gaming Authority and Communications Authority were included, but the Chairperson of the Occupational Health and Safety Authority was not included.
He said that the bill is good, but would be better if done well on the whole, and believes these changes would make it so.
Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, in response, said that Busuttil must decide what he wants. "First he said he wants the AG appointed by 2/3rds, and now by Parliamentary scrutiny instead. We are not playing with marbles here. The AG is a crucial office."
The current AG, he said, had been appointed by a PN government.
He said that the argument that the AG had derelicted his duties is because no investigation order was made, but said that everyone in court knows that this investigation order must be issued on a reasonable suspicion.
He said that the present PN leader, when asked about John Rizzo's appointment to the Permanent Commission Against Corruption, said that the Attorney General is the person who can easily confirm that Rizzo is eligible. "I am pleased the Opposition have enough trust in him."
Busuttil retorted, and said that the position of the Opposition is that the highest positions in the country should be appointed by a 2/3rds majority, including the police commissioner, the Attorney General and others. "That was and is our position. Today we are talking about something different. We are talking about allowing Parliamentary scrutiny for positions aside from how they are appointed. That is what we are talking about. Because we agree with such an idea does not mean we do not agree that the highest positions should be appointed by a 2/3rds majority."
Busuttil said the Opposition believes the AG failed in his duties. "Everyone knows he was appointed by the PN administration. So what. So then we can't criticise him? It is more credible if we criticise him as yes we had appointed him. If the AG failed in his duties do we shut up as we appointed him? We would fail in our duty if we do not criticise him."
Turning to the MEP report, Busuttil said that the AG came out as a laughing stock in from of the MEP Committee.
He said that the AG told MEPs that he must be in possession of concrete evidence to go before the courts. "When MEPs asked him if several media reports of serious money laundering by PEPs were not enough to request such investigations, he answered no. For the AG having reports from the FIAU that he leads, which say that there is reasonable suspicion on money laundering, and yet it is not enough for him?"
He mentioned that the Chief Justice, who is a former Attorney General, told the MEPs that the roles of legal councillor for government and public prosecutor should be separated.
PL whip Byron Camilleri stepped in and highlighted that this is committee stage and that this is not the kind of debate one awaits at such a stage of a bill.
The agreed upon amendments passed, however Aquilina's further amendment regarding including other positions into the previously proposed list by government, did not.