There was no mention of Gozo whatsoever in the bill presented to Parliament last May entitled Public Administration Act 2008 and which has now been reported to the House for its third reading.

However its exclusion does not mean that the proposed Act would not have any relevance to Gozo. Indeed, the Act as presented could have two very serious negative effects on the administration of the island.

The present government has been harping for some years now to ensure that the Gozo Ministry focuses not only on the day-to-day running of its departments but also on the economic and social development of the island, the ministry will be restructured so as to be in a position to address future challenges and to provide a more efficient and effective service to the public.

Apart from the fact that gone are the days when Gozo through its ministry and Parliamentary Secretariat had become the showcase of the Maltese islands, the present government seems not to be aware of the fact that the Gozo Ministry had from its inception been focusing not only on its run-of-the-mill functions but also on the economic and social development of the island.

Indeed, between 1987 and 1996, the ministry implemented an action plan that covered all the socio-economic sectors of Gozo. Between 1996 and 1998 the Parliamentary Secretariat drew up and started implementing a Cabinet-approved Development Plan for Gozo as a region – a first for Gozo. In 1997 it launched a White Paper on the setting up of a Regional Council for Gozo and in April 1998 Cabinet approved the relative Bill for presentation to Parliament. In 2002 the ministry was instrumental and took a very active part in the drawing up of a Special Needs Assessment Study on which EU co-funded projects for Gozo were and are still being selected.

Then, in 2003, the ministry drew up a Business Promotion Policy for Gozo. In conjunction with ETC, in that same year it drew up an employment strategy for Gozo. Moreover, in 2004/2005 it drew up a socio-economic development plan for Gozo.

Regrettably, the government must have abandoned these last three plans and strategies and the ministry is now focusing only on the day-to-day-running of its line departments to the detriment of the socio-economic development of the island.

Everyone should have realised that a major flaw of the ministry is that all its stakeholders, all Gozo residents, are the political constituents of the minister. Parish pump politics could take over macro policies.

With the proposed Public Administration Act, this unhappy situation could be perpetuated, not remedied.

The Constitution gives a minister the general direction and control of departments, agencies and other entities under his responsibility. It is quite obvious that ‘general’ here refers to the macro, to what is applicable to the whole and not to the micro, not to what is applicable to the individual person or to a particular group.

Premising its introduction on a wrong interpretation of the Constitution, the Public Administration Act proposes the inclusion of a quasi-dictatorial concept and contemplates that a minister “may give directions directly to the head of department, chief executive officer, board of directors or any other employee falling within his responsibilities, on any matter” with some rare exceptions. So under the Act the minister would be empowered to effect transfers, to give allowances, to allocate overtime, to appoint the chairperson and members of boards for the recruitment, promotion and punishment of staff, for the adjudicating of tenders...

The scope would be vast and a Pandora’s box of misuse and abuse of power would be opened wide. One dreads to think what would happen in Gozo.

However, as if to add insult to this injury to the administration of Gozo, the departments in the ministry would be automatically abolished on the coming into force of the Public Administration Act and agencies would presumably be established instead.

This substitution of departments with agencies could turn Gozo into a fiefdom.

The Act gives absolute freedom to the government for the appointment of an agency’s chief executive officer.

There are no constitutional and other statutory safeguards as to fairness, merit and procedure for his appointment as there are for the appointment of directors/heads of department and other public officers. Moreover, the CEO “shall be under the general direction and control of the minister responsible for the agency”, according, of course, to the new interpretation of this provision. As if all that was not enough, the same minister may establish an advisory board and appoint the members thereon to assist the CEO in the discharge of his duties. They could therefore be vested with executive power.

The end result of the proposed Public Administration Act could have Gozo administered by kowtowing political stooges.

One trusts that the government sees the negative consequences of all this and makes specific provisions for the proper administration of the island, taking its regional character into account.

Frank J Psaila

Victoria