The Nationalists were simply left stunned by the resounding Labour victory in Australia. One moment they criticised us for not having sufficiently exploited the ALP’s success at the polls for domestic consumption, and the next they tried to rubbish parallels that we drew with the Australian scenario where some of us, yours truly included, made the point that by simply boasting that the economy is doing well is no guarantee of success at the polls, particularly if there is no real trickle down effect.

I could sense this early last week in my contacts with constituents of different political hues and orientation.

While the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development meeting on the cost of living subject that my party helped trigger ended up in a chorus line of approval for the government’s efforts to address the issue, hardly any of those present bothered to stop and ask whether the government was really doing all that could be done to counter inflation.

Analytical papers by the government and the social partners on the issue were conspicuous by their absence during the meeting. Instead those present had to make do with a power point presentation that obviously provided a flimsy excuse for doing without an in-depth analysis of the problem.

Three issues were definitely not addressed:

•What is being done to ensure that price rises imported from abroad reflect the same trends in other countries and are not being used as a pretext for excessive price hikes on the local front beyond comparison to what others are experiencing? Whether economies of scale come into play or not?

•Who among those present queried why inflation regarding certain items in Malta is accelerating faster than in the same countries from where we import them?

•When is the government going to take the issue of medicinal product prices seriously since this is impacting so negatively on middle to lower income families in general and pensioners in particular?

In the days that followed the MCESD meeting, all those I met considered the meeting a joke. If anything, it merely served to fuel further the public perception that the government is living in a state of denial, unaware how high the cost of living issue happens to be on the man in the street’s personal and political agenda. Until recently the PM used the claim that it was an issue invented by the MLP. In plain English – a non-issue. Now he is trying to convince us that he has done his utmost to address it!

The cost of living issue was an election winner in Australia. And something tells me that it is likely to be the case in Malta. As had happened in 1971. Particularly since the government is so reluctant to take the bull by the horns and enforce measures that can cut down abuses without infringing EU rules of the game regarding fair and free competition.

Emulating Rudd (2)

It is now a given that a new Labour government will put zero tolerance against corruption at the top of its agenda. But it is equally important that the new parliamentary group – particularly the Cabinet itself – should be a disciplined lot, with full respect for the rule of law and by that I also mean law enforcement itself and the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive.

Loose cannons must be told in no uncertain terms that whatever their personal views on hunting, fireworks, immigration and any other sensitive issue they must follow the official party line or else be subjected to party disciplinary mechanisms. Has-beens or wannabes should not be allowed to act as ventriloquists for friends, colleagues or irresponsible voters.

This is an issue many voters – particularly floating voters – have raised with me, seeking reassurances that we would be tighter on law enforcement than the PN has been over the years. A case in point has been government’s foot dragging on health and safety regulations and standards regarding fireworks factories in order to not to lose votes in sensitive areas like Birkirkara and Lija. As well as MEPA’s allegedly accommodating role regarding mega-contractors.

One might ask but what does the Rudd government have to do with all this?

Yes, dear readers – it does.

Prospect magazine, which is the closest thing to an intellectual centre left wing magazine with full respect for liberal values, recently stated in a commentary on Kevin Rudd that he intends to be ‘brutal’ in reviewing his ministers’ performance and would sack anyone who fell short of certain expected standards as well as that it will not be a premiership of primus inter pares.

One might call this a technocratic governing style. But even so what is wrong with that?

He is fond of referring to his commitment to an ‘evidence based’ assessment of his cabinet and has already indicated that policies (and ministers) will be judged by clear performance achievements and shortcomings.

In other words Rudd’s measure of a good government is its contribution to efficiency.

People expect a fair measure of social justice from a Labour government since it has been badly lacking under this administration. But for us to succeed this must also be accompanied by enhanced efficiency if we really want to be a result oriented and hands on government. Which I am very confident that Alfred Sant’s new administration will turn out to be.

Shameful

It was indeed shameful that no Cabinet members chose to attend the highly interesting and moving annual meeting of FITA – the Foundation for Information Technology Accessibility, which this year dealt with ICT as a means to equal employment and education.

From documentary evidence in hand it seems that for different reasons the invited ministers – Dr Austin Gatt, Dr Louis Galea and Parliamentary Secretary Edwin Vassallo – were unable to attend. The net result being that while I represented the MLP throughout the meeting there was no representative from the government side on the panel by the time the discussion was formally wound up. Except for a Permanent Secretary in the audience.

Sadder still that even the MITTS chairman who usually attends regularly was unavoidably absent and had to be substituted at the last minute by the organisation’s CEO. Ironically the DOI website featured a speech reportedly delivered by the Parliamentary Secretary Edwin Vassallo but by the time we broke up for drinks he had not even turned up yet. If he did so later when pastizzi and drinks were being dished out I simply do not know and it does not interest me in the least. Even if he did, such an occasion called for an address by a senior Cabinet member. Particularly given the emphasis both parties attach to those with special needs.

When arrogance

knows no limits

In a parliamentary reply to a question of mine Minister Austin Gatt:

•once again failed to take up my challenge to publish a comprehensive list of all mega ICT tenders on which his Head of Secretariat sat on the adjudication or evaluation board by merely claiming that this was already public domain.

•Distorted our pledge to review the PC leasing tender by claiming that we promised to cancel it once elected.

•Failed to deny that the financial analysis of the said tender had – as I revealed in Parliament – not factored in costs related to implementation and installation tasks.

•Offered little comfort by claiming that Microsoft’s strategic alliance with the Maltese government merely saw the bulk of the committed Lm20m package taken up by mere software subsidies rather than enhancement of our ICT capabilities and infrastructure

•Accused me of launching a crusade against the Director of the MCAST Institute of ICT when I merely sought details in parliament regarding his financial package and whether there was any truth to reports that prior to Maltacom’s privatization his package was part funded by the major telecom firm to help make it more generous than Education Ministry norms allow.

By the time of writing no parliamentary info on the matter was provided either by Minister Gatt or the Education Minister Louis Galea to help clarify matters.

e-mail: [email protected]

Leo Brincat is the oppositions spokesman on Foreign Affairs & IT