Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1085429
25 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 24 FEBRUARY 2019 OPINION have to say. So here goes. De-e-e-e-p breath. One… two… three… four… five… six… seven… eight… nine… 10. Lo-o-o-ong exhalation…. And… WHY THE [BEEP!] DID YOU NOT TABLE THAT [BEEP!]ING REPORT WHEN IT FIRST [BEEP!]ING CAME OUT 10 WHOLE [BEEP!]ING YEARS AGO?!!! (I mean, for [beep!]ing [beep]'s sake, etc…) There. Now I need another de-e-e-ep breath…. and to repeat, for as many as times as necessary… "I-will-not- smash-my-keyboard"… "I-will-not-smash-my-key- board"… "I-will-not-smash- my-keyboard"… Well, what do you know? This anger management thingie does work after all. My fit of rage is over, and… oh look, I still have a key- board to finish this article on. So… where was I? Ah yes. The small matter of why an investigation into Malta's tuna industry took place all those yonks ago in 2010, but was unaccountably (in all senses of the word) kept under wraps for the next decade… and even, to be sprung out of nowhere only because it serves a partisan- political purpose for the MP tabling it in Parliament... And that is but the first of many questions: probably not even the most important one (though I must confess it does feel that way to me, because… well, that information would have made a somewhat humungous difference to all those lawsuits I mentioned earlier, don't ya think?) But there is also the one about how an investigation could find so many serious ir- regularities in a multi-million trade involving what was, at the time, an endangered spe- cies… without anyone seem- ing to face any consequence or repercussion whatsoever, ever since. There is now abundant evidence – not that there wasn't in 2008, but anyway – that a substantial quantity of bluefin tuna was illegally taken from the wild, and exported under the guise of legal, authenticated catch. And in 2009, the bluefin tuna was on the IUCN Red List of critically endangered spe- cies… On a separate level, there are also questions about how other media approached the same issue, all those years ago. As already noted: these things have all been in the public domain since 2007 at the earliest. Some of them were even picked up by the international press. Yet how was the entire matter report- ed by other sections of the local press? I won't bother with other independent newspapers, because quite frankly it's up to them to decide whether, or to what extent, to report anything at all. But the na- tional broadcaster is a slightly different kettle of fish. And I distinctly remember a news report on TVM – around December 2008, or therea- bouts – which claimed that the European Commission had looked into the export discrepancies… and had con- cluded that they didn't exist. Naturally, I can't blame PBS for being entirely ignorant of the 2010 investigation – it hadn't actually been commis- sioned yet. But for the same reason: how could TVM news report that the Commission had investigated the matter, when (with hindsight) we now know that it hadn't? And how could the Commission conclude that the irregulari- ties were non-existent, when its investigation had yet to even begin? Looked back upon all these years later, only two possibili- ties spring to mind (three, if you cater for the possibility of time-travel). Either a Com- mission spokesman lied to TVM in 2008… or TVM sim- ply made up the part about the Commission's 'absolution' of Malta's tuna trade. This becomes painstakingly clearer still when you consid- er how the 2010 investigation was followed up. "[A 2013] memo reveals that the Euro- pean Commission's director- general for fisheries and maritime affairs, Lowri Evans, had remarked in a meeting with Malta's permanent rep- resentative Marlene Bonnici, saying that 'compared to two years ago, the situation of the Maltese fishery is 'com- pletely transformed'' and that DG MARE was 'delighted by the progress attained by the Maltese control authorities' – Evans said that the situation two years earlier had put "the Maltese fishery… in a very bad place". As far as I can see, that's a pretty clear confirmation of irregularities dating up to 2010… after which, things improved by 2013. So how, exactly, could Malta's govern- ment-owned, State broad- caster have told us all that the Commission had come to the clean opposite conclusion in 2008? This raises some other ques- tions, which may in turn even answer the first one: i.e., why this EU-commissioned report was kept a secret for so long. Just as this contradiction is (now) visible to me, it must have been perfectly visible to the European Commis- sion at the time. Admittedly, it is a bit much to expect the Fisheries Commissioner to sit back and watch 'L-Ahbarijiet Tat-Tmienja' every day on TVM… but the Commission as a whole would (or should) have surely been concerned that extensive illegalities in Malta's tuna trade were being covered up by the Maltese authorities, right under its nose. All the more so, when you also factor in that these irregularities were threaten- ing the success of the Com- mission's own 'recovery plan' for bluefin tuna. And yet… what action did the European Commission take? (This is, after all, a text- book 'rule of law' issue here.) As I recall – and bear in mind I was being sued at the time – my press questions to the DG MARE always seemed to reach a dead end. So even back then, I wondered: what was making the European Commission so clearly reluc- tant to look too deeply into this particular issue…? I've already said this in another recent article (and probably also in a couple I wrote 12 years ago) but a tuna laundering operation on that scale – and including so many other countries apart from Malta – cannot realistically be boiled down to the corrupt practices of one, single regu- latory authority, in only one EU member state. Clearly, it takes a little more than that. Clearly, (because 'happiness is a warm pun', etc.)… it takes tuna to tango. CALL FOR TENDERS As part of the project 820451 – Prepare the Ground for Economic Independence – the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality is requesting submissions for the provision of: REFERENCE: DT-NCPE/05/2018 TENDER TITLE: Service Tender for the Provision of a Research Study and Content Development for a Training Session and Info Booklet on Equal Pay for Trade Unions Any queries should be sent through e-PPS by not later than , Thursday 7 th March, 2019 at 4.00p.m. CET specifying the publication reference and the tender title. A clarification meeting will be held on Wednesday, 27 th February, 2019 at 10.00a.m. CET at NCPE premises. Closing date for submission of tenders is Friday, 15 th March, 2019 at 1.00p.m. CET. All submissions should be carried out on the e-PPS https://www.etenders.gov.mt/epps/home.do NCPE, Gattard House, National Road, Blata l-Bajda ĦMR 9010 Tel: 2295 7850 E-mail: equality@gov.mt Web: www.equality.gov.mt Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme 2014-2020 Project part-financed by the European Union Co-financing rate: 80% EU funds; 20% National Funds There is now abundant evidence – not that there wasn't in 2008, but anyway – that a substantial quantity of bluefin tuna was illegally taken from the wild, and exported under the guise of legal, authenticated catch