Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/252940
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 2 FEBRUARY 2014 Opinion 24 L ast week another section of the media published the results of the rankings of the MEPs in terms of their 'activities' – the higher the ranking, the better an MEP one is supposed to be. Contrary to popular belief, the site w w w. mepranking.eu is not an official site of the European Parliament. And the 'prank ' in the address is so interesting. I was f labbergasted to learn that according to their ranking criteria, I am the worst Maltese MEP because I ranked the ' least active' of all the Maltese. Hand on heart and without a sliver of modest y, I say that I have taken my role as an MEP most seriously – as I have taken all my public roles – regularly attending sessions, participating in debates and negotiations in important committees, and participating in my main committee (Economic and Monetary Affairs) as its vice- president. I also belong to extra- parliamentary intergroups on animal welfare and job creation, and I am a full member of the EU-ACP delegation. To find myself trailing all my Maltese colleagues in 'activities', when I know that this is not ref lecting the truth, was most disconcerting, to say the least. I therefore wanted to get to the bottom of this and check out the integrit y of these conclusions – not just for my sake, but with respect to the citizens to whom I feel accountable. This quantitative exercise is based on the length of the entire legislature – that is, a comparison of the activities of MEPs during the whole term they served – ranking the MEPs who have been serving for a number of years, against those who served for a few months. This is enough to shoot down the credibilit y of this exercise. Secondly, the so-called 'activities' on which this ranking is based, consist only of: the quantit y of one-minute speeches, explanation of votes, parliamentary questions and reports as recorded in the EP website. The information by numbers might be correct; it is the interpretation and conclusions which are fallacious and misleading. The methodology of these agencies consists of counting everybody's 'activities', sort them by numbers in descending orders and voilà, the good and the bad MEPs are revealed. What is wrong with that? A lot! The role, work and worth of an MEP has been reduced to a production unit – not very different from that of a factory! According to these agencies, the more PQs, explanation of votes (how one voted in plenary) and one-minute speeches filed, the more 'active' the MEP is shown to be. In the majorit y of cases, these 'activities' are prepared and filed by the parliamentary assistant or staff member of the MEP. I know for a fact that there are MEPs who employ trainees purposely to compose and file these so- called 'activities' on behalf of the MEP! There is evidence of MEPs to have done more than 11 'activities' in one day, when the real involvement of the MEP is to sign the template for filing. I would like to invite any MEP to negate that this is what in fact happens. So according to the conclusions of these independent ranking agencies, the MEP can technically go fishing, shopping or go home to the babies, and still be ranked as being very 'active'. I find fooling citizens in this way appalling. Then I checked the qualit y of content and relevance of PQs, explanation of votes and speeches which were being filed by the highest-ranked MEPs of the Maltese delegation, which no doubt instigated the publication of this ranking data as a feather in their caps. These are two examples of the written 'activities' which contributed to the high ranking of our most active MEPs: "It is crucial that Europe's space industry remains competitive on a global level, and therefore I have supported this report." That's an 'activit y'! "I share the objectives of the report which calls for the strengthening of capacit y for civil participation at Union level." Duh… but it's an 'activit y'! This is the calibre of material on which the MEPs are being ranked by these agencies. This is what the electorate is being fed! Then there are the Reports and Opinions – the most important tasks entrusted to an MEP. While my group, S&D, has appointed me as their main speaker for four reports since May 2014, only one other MEP has been entrusted with one report for the same period. Reports are only listed once they are presented in the plenary. Even then, the ranking agencies do not give weighting to reports, so, a silly PQ is rated the same as an important legislative report. In this regard, only David Casa has more reports than myself – all through his term in office from 2009. Therefore, the criteria on which MEPs are ranked, by these non- official agencies, are fallacious. It is quantit y above qualit y. They undermine the work, worth and role of an MEP as well as damage the image of the EU. This is what fuels further euroscepticism. The importance of attending meetings, negotiating and debating, ensuring that no rules or legislation affect one's country or citizens negatively, of course, are not factored into the ranking criteria. Neither is the active participation in other groups known to be of interest to one's country and constituents – job creation, animal welfare, and environment. In other words, the real work expected from the MEP is not recognised – because it is qualitative, not quantitive! With the benefit of hindsight, I am pleased that someone instigated the publishing of these rankings – no doubt intended to boost their own image, and to shed a negative light on others. If not, I would have never discovered the fallacy of these rankings, the pettiness of criteria and the paucit y of content. But then I am not quite used to the games certain politicians play to boost their ego and importance. Fooling the voter will never be my game. Those who so rejoiced at my low ranking were doing so at the expense of their own gullibilit y – so sorry to burst their bubble. MEPs should not be judged by the criteria of the number of the 'activities' as defined, especially when one knows that these activities could be the product of their office staff. MEPs should be judged by their diligent attendance, overall performance, delivery and relevance of their contributions in the interest of their country and the citizen. The value of an MEP is his/ her capabilit y to stand up to be counted, to be sensitive to the issues important to the people and to one's country, on how to turn challenges into opportunities and on the capabilit y to be the voice of the people in Brussels, and the ear of the people in Malta. MEPs should be judged on their sense of accountabilit y to the citizens, and the respect they have for their intelligence. So, in view of my findings about the ridiculous and fallacious ranking criteria, certainly instigated and published to damage my image, being ranked the MEP with the ' least activities' is really not bad at all. It shows that I am the MEP who produced the least bull… Marlene Mizzi is a Labour MEP YOUR FIRST CLICK OF THE DAY www.maltatoday.com.mt Marlene Mizzi What happens in Brussels, should not stay in Brussels Contrived rankings that do not reflect the reality of how MEPs work in Brussels, should not be used for political gain Download the MaltaToday App now