Last Wednesday I was having a night out with some friends.  All was going well until my mobile, in an attempt to spoil the evening, intervened.  A friend on the other end of the line broke the news that Michael Falzon, the former Parliamentary Secretary, had made a scathing and vicious attack on the National Audit Office during the House sitting.  To hell with Michael and his antics I thought.  I have no particular interest in what the disgraced Parliamentary Secretary has to say about the NAO, or anything else for that matter.

The rest of the evening passed pleasantly by.  

But the day after, this newspaper reported the fiery speech that Hon Falzon had made.  Amongst the issues he touched on, he referred to the Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.  Joseph was known for his public speaking skills, and his antisemitism.  He braced the extermination of the Jews in the Holocaust.   As Germany faced defeat, Joseph and his wife committed suicide, after poisoning their six children with cyanide.  In what context this reference was made was not very clear. 

In his furious speech, he even saw fit to draw me into his line of fire.  For this reason, I am compelled to give him a piece of my mind.   Dr Falzon was reported verbatim as having stated of some NAO officers, including my wife: "These people should not even be allowed a position in the civil service, let alone at the National Audit Office".  I do not have any reason to doubt the reporting, as otherwise Dr Falzon would have asked for a correction. To my knowledge, this has not been done.      

Dr Falzon is at odds with the NAO because of the damning report which forced him to resign his Parliamentary Secretary post.  His speech in the House revealed his true colours and what he stands for.  To begin with, his statement is a threat to industrial democracy which is tantamount to an attack on human rights and an attempt to coerce NAO employees and their families.    

In the last general election I contested unsuccessfully on the PN ticket.  I decided to quit politics soon after.  However, this should not make me or any other member of my family vulnerable to politically-motivated attacks.  It never crossed my mind that once a person decides to contribute towards the national good his family members will be exposed to despicable attacks for the rest of their lives.   

During his speech, Dr Falzon sounded very bitter.  To be fair, he has every right to be.  He undoubtedly compares his doings with that of his colleagues, and it is abundantly clear that the Prime Minister used two weights and two measures.  Others should have been kicked out too.  But it seems that Michael is not on the good books of the Premier, to the extent that he was summarily dismissed while others were retained, or indeed kicked upstairs despite their involvement in the Panama scandal.        

Indeed, politicians should enjoy parliamentary privilege, but under no circumstance that privilege should be abused.  Hurling wild accusations and threatening workers with their livelihoods is appalling.  The PN should take it upon itself to report this incident to the International Labour Organisation.   

Perhaps it would have been wise had, before unleashing his vile attack, Dr Falzon sought the counsel of one of the former trade unionists currently holding positions in the Muscat administration. Mr Mario Cutajar, currently Principal Permanent Secretary, and Mr John Bencini, Chairman of the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development, are both well- experienced in conducting industrial relations.   I have no doubt that both could have steered him away from making such an irresponsible speech in Parliament.  Politicians do not have a right to threaten, coerce or portray workers in bad light because a member of their family was engaged in the political arena.  

Employment in the public service is regulated by the Public Service Commission, an independent statutory body that is protected by the Constitution of Malta.  Michael, a lawyer by profession, should have been aware of his extremely irregular comments.  Trampling on workers’ rights is not only abusive but is an attempt to supress the rule of law, exposing workers and members of their families to untold harm.   

It would do Dr Falzon a deal of good if, rather than speak in riddles while in the House full of privileges, he goes to his boss and talk things over in private, since he does not have what it takes to speak his mind in clear terms in public.  I am sure Dr Falzon will be entertained if he plays his cards well.  It is strikingly clear that his harsh words had another person in aim.  In the meantime, Michael should either withdraw his statement or be forced to do so.

Perhaps Michael should obtain a list of the immediate relatives of all ministers, parliamentary secretaries and permanent secretaries engaged in the public sector.  And once at it, he may wish to have a look at their date of engagement.

[email protected]