Government’s transparency is very much in question.

We see it time and again, through Freedom of Information (FOI) request refusals and also through the refusal to publish certain contracts citing ‘commercial sensitivity’.

The government represents the public. Everything it does is meant to be for the benefit of the public. There are valid reasons to refuse to provide some information to the public, granted, but there is also a public interest argument in knowing just exactly how much funds are being spent on certain things, and what agreements are being made for the use of public land.

Tourism Minister Clayton Bartolo has refused to publish details about the beach concessions given to deckchair operators at Comino, Fra Ben and Ramla Bay, saying that the information is commercially sensitive and cannot be provided. He was responding to a question in Parliament. Rebekah Borg had also asked Economy Minister Silvio Schembri for copies of contracts concerning land rented out at Ramla Bay and Comino, but Economy Minister Silvio Schembri said that while the documents were commercially sensitive and could not be published, he would be arranging for Borg to see them for herself privately, as Borg also serves on the Lands Authority board.

This comes after the Malta Tourism Authority had refused a Freedom of Information request to divulge information about sunbed operators at Comino’s Blue Lagoon for similar reasons, having initially asked for more time to compile the necessary information.

But one must pose the question. Shouldn’t this information be made public? First of all, these operators are taking up part of our foreshore, and as we saw from the action taken by NGOs in Comino, were setting up deckchairs before people would even ask for them. In some bays, it had come to the point where there was barely any room for people to lay down their towel.

And this isn’t the only time transparency has been put into question recently. Let’s not forget the Malta Film Awards saga of refused FOI requests. Even more recently, Tourism Minister Clayton Bartolo refused to divulge details on the partnership agreement and its costs between Manchester United and VisitMalta. Bartolo answered a parliamentary question by PN MP Jerome Caruana Cilia, saying that due to the commercial nature of the contract, the required information cannot be disclosed.

Government deals are public deals. We need more transparency, more openness. We should know how much money is being spent for instance. Shouldn’t the public have a right to know just what exactly the government is agreeing to, and the funds involved? How is the public, the press, expected to scrutinise the government and ensure that it is acting in the interest of the public, that funds are being wisely spent, if the government refuses to publish such information?

Let’s be honest, the government deals the past years have been questionable at best, so the public interest argument for needing to scrutinise government operations is stronger than ever. Perhaps the time has come to review the use of citing commercial sensitivity in not publishing contracts, see whether such use needs to be lessened and to what extent.

While we are at it, FOI laws need to be changed. Far too often does the government find excuses to hide behind. Thankfully, some such decisions are overturned on appeal, and the government then has to provide the information. Reforms are needed to impose a legal obligation on the government to provide information which is in the public’s interest.