The stage-managed resignation of Michael Falzon, the lockdown, freezing of transactions and police swoop on the Lands Department, two court cases filed by the Prime Minister to reverse the Gaffarena deals, the announcement that the Lands Department will be turned into an independent authority: the antics the country has witnessed over the last week have been far too long in coming to be taken seriously.

The fact of the matter is that if the government had been at all serious about the festering situation surrounding the Lands Department and the Old Mint Street scandal, these decisions would have been taken at least six months ago when the Internal Audit and Investigations Department’s (IAID) report was finalised and its contents were made known to the Prime Minister.

Dr Falzon should have stepped down or at least suspended himself from his post as soon as the Prime Minister knew he was so heavily implicated in the Gaffarena deal. The crackdown at the Lands Department should have been carried out from day one, and not several months later during which anyone at the department involved in any funny business would have had ample time to cover their tracks.

Instead, both the Prime Minister and Dr Falzon chose to bide their time until the very last minute – six months later – when the Auditor General’s report on the matter was published this week

The Prime Minister had no need to prolong the situation for as long as he did, having hidden behind a second investigations carried out by the National Audit Office – unless he had truly hoped against hope that the NAO would exonerate his parliamentary secretary where the IAID had not.

The only matter that, perhaps, could have justifiably waited for the Auditor General’s final report into the Old Mint Street scandal was the court cases instituted by the Prime Minister in a bid to reverse the two Gaffarena deals.

But then again there are serious doubts as to the cases’ legitimacy in the first place.  The Prime Minister told this newspaper last October that he would seek to have those deals reversed if they were found to have been irregular and, true to his word he has now launched face-saving court proceedings in a bid to reverse the dirty deals. The case is expected to be a long and difficult one. 

But at this juncture one must question how this case differs from the €4 million Café Premier deal. In this latter case the government said it had decided to settle on the multi-million euro figure, paid out from public coffers, so as to avoid lengthy court proceedings, but in the current case such considerations appear to have been waived.

This is a clear case of two weights and two measures, and the two different approaches have undoubtedly been dictated by the simple fact that the public only learned of the Café Premier deal after the deed was done, while the Old Mint Street deal has been very much under the public spotlight since practically day one.

Instead of the real action that should have been taken at least six months ago, the country was instead treated to this good governance charade acted out over the last week. The government is also attempting to sell the country the notion that Dr Falzon’s resignation was actually a case of good governance in practice. That resignation, unfortunately, was anything but.

Good governance is about have the right checks and balances in place to prevent the situations that led to the Old Mint Street scandal in the first place. Those were very evidently lacking. The government is also speaking of Dr Falzon having taken political accountability for the scandal. That, again, is a far cry from the truth. The time for political accountability in this case passed the government by over six months ago, when it was crystal clear that misdeeds had been committed and that Dr Falzon, in his capacity as parliamentary secretary, signed off on the highly dubious expropriation deals.

Good governance and political accountability have been avoided and evaded and mishandled and fumbled so many times over these last six months that what we are left with is a mockery of the very ideals that this government promised to implement without fear or favour.

To say that political accountability has now been served is more than a joke, it is an outrage – particularly so when Dr Falzon fastidiously continues to actually avoid accepting responsibility for his actions.

We shall not delve into the multiple, damning findings of the NAO report in Dr Falzon’s respect. Suffice it to say that, at the end of the day, it was his signature on the Gaffarena deals, and that signature is not required as a mere formality – that signature is required so that someone at the end of the line is actually accountable for what happens.

But Dr Falzon was saying, up to yesterday, that he had shouldered political responsibility but was refusing to take accountability for his actions. This is all too symptomatic of the way in which the country is being run: mere platitudes on good governance and accountability, while the real thing is a rarity.

What we are experiencing is a breakdown in good governance, and a government that is desperately attempting to give the polar opposite impression.