Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1188980
4 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 1 DECEMBER 2019 NEWS THAT businessmen trade in political influence is something which hardly anyone doubts and perhaps is una- voidable in a small island where eve- ryone knows each other. Neither can one ignore the contribution of legiti- mate business groups to Malta's eco- nomic prosperity as an independent nation. As Malta faced the birth pangs of independence and struggled to break free of its dependence on British mili- tary spending, a crop of enterprising Maltese businessmen, hailed as cap- tains of industry, were valued for cre- ating jobs and growth, with politicians facilitating this by offering cheap land and other incentives to pro- mote tourism and industry. Even under Dom Mintoff's socialist government, busi- nessmen who contributed to 'national development' and job creation were not shunned, even if they were subjected to higher taxation and greater social obligations. Admittedly this was an integral part of our development as a nation, albeit in a landscape where politicians and businessmen either kept a degree of healthy distance from each other, or were simply less exposed to media and social media exposure. But since the 1990s, policies promot- ing job creation were extended to ones promoting rampant property specu- lation, which generate more private profit than social gains. And political parties became even more expensive machines to finance and run, becom- ing even more reliant on funding from the business class. The closer the links between them, the more difficult it be- came to disguise the familiarity – un- til the inevitable happened and some businessmen entered the corridors of power. The poachers were becoming the gamekeepers. This has been increasingly the case under different administrations. But Tonio Fenech's unfortunate trip to watch an Arsenal game with businessman Joe Gasan on a plane owned by the late Tumas magnate George Fene- ch – father of Yorgen – now pales into insignificance against more damning connections exposed in the past three years, which include politicians setting up offshore compa- nies with businessmen as their clients. Now that the system is clearly bro- ken, here are five things which need to be done. Introduce state financing and ban private donations for parties and their companies Party financing laws were re- formed upon the election of a new Labour government in 2013 after years of procrastination. Parties are now legally obliged to publish donations by any singular in- dividual or entity of over €7,000. Yet the change has been largely cosmetic as only a handful of donors have been revealed. One reason for this is that donations to companies owned by po- litical parties, including expensive to run TV stations, are not covered by legislation. There are only two ways of address- ing this: either oblige parties to de- clare any donation they receive, in- cluding to any company they own, or simply ban private donations and in- troduce a state financing mechanism through which parties are paid by the state for every vote they get in a gen- eral election. In this way political parties will no longer have to beg for money in mara- thons, which may well be charades aimed at disguising more substantial donations and back-room dealings. Parties may also be required to scale down operations to match the limited funding they get from the state. Clos- ing down partisan TV stations may well be a blessing in helping reduce partisan tension in the country. Ulti- mately we have to realise that democ- racy comes at a price and we have to start paying for it, or else obscure and sinister forces may end up paying for it instead. The question we must face is: do you prefer political parties to be financed from your taxes or by people, includ- ing shady characters, who expect a re- turn on their investments? Raise salaries if necessary, but ministers and members of their secretariats should completely sever business ties and the MPs scrutinising them should not be given government jobs The code of ethics already bans min- isters from continued involvement in business activities while serving in of- fice but it does not exclude them from receiving retainers. This is because the code of ethics states that a "minister who before his appointment was self-employed, ex- ercised a profession or was in busi- ness… is not bound to dispose of his interest or shares, but must make the necessary arrangements immediately, to ensure that he disassociates himself from the direction or management of the office, trade or business, make ar- rangements in order that he can get paid for any work previously done or the profits due to him and do not con- tinue to participate in the payments or profits due for work done after his appointment as minister, except for a fixed sum each year considered as due in return for his previous investment". Moreover, the code of ethics does not sufficiently regulate financial in- terests like investments, possibly in suspicious offshore activities like those involving former minister Kon- rad Mizzi and the PM's chief-of-staff, except for calling on them to "to avoid speculative investments about which they have or may be thought to have by virtue of their ministerial office, early or confidential information like- ly to affect the price of those invest- ments". As suggested by former Labour lead- er Alfred Sant before the 2008 elec- tion, this should change and ministers should be required to relinquish any interest in businesses and partner- ships set up before becoming public officials. To maintain a healthy separation between Cabinet and backbench- ers who should be scrutinising them, The arrest of Yorgen Fenech and the resignation of Keith Schembri have played out to an implosion in Maltese politics reminiscent of Italy's Tangentopoli scandal. What kind of firewall can protect us from the risks of collusion between big business, politics and organised crime? Needed: a big firewall between big business and politics JAMES DEBONO "The inevitable happened and some businessmen entered the corridors of power. The poachers were becoming the gamekeepers" 1 2