Aktar ma jinqalgħu kontroversji dwar għażliet Ewropej, aktar joħroġ ċar li t-triq biex l-Unjoni Ewropea ssir aktar effettiva u magħquda hu billi jiġi rikonoxxut li hi għaqda bejn nazzjonijiet, li hi Ewropa tan-nazzjonaijiet.
Fil-Parlament Ewropew ta’ bħalissa, dil-fehma hi mitqiesa bħala ereżija minn maġġoranza sostanzjali ta’ deputati, mhux l-anqas fost is-soċjalisti u d-demokratiċi. Il-pożizzjoni tagħhom u ta’ min jaħsibha bħalhom, kellha bħala riżultat li tiftaħ spazju politiku enormi għall-partiti “estremisti” speċjalment fuq il-lemin.
Il-loġika għall-għaqda Ewropea trid tkun waħda konfederali.
Trid tiżgura li tassew se jkun hemm konverġenza bejn in-nazzjonijiet differenti fl-oqsma ekonomiċi u soċjali. Jekk dan mhux se jsir – u mhuwiex qed isir – kull meta tinqala’ riċessjoni ekonomika jew kriżi politika, ikollhom jinstabu kompromessi nejja biex l-affarijiet ma jmilux lejn l-għarqa. Hu meta l-ekonomija dinjija (u Ewropea) tkun qed tavvanza, li l-kuntradizzjonijiet jistgħu jitgħattew.
Forsi jaqbel li l-ġenerazzjonijiet preżenti fit-tmexxija Ewropea (tip ta’ Juncker) jinbidlu malajr kemm jista’ jkun ħalli l-ideat li wirtu u ħaddmu, jiġġeddu b’mod radikali.
IL-MIDJA TRASPARENTI?
Fid-diskors li jsir dwar il-ħelsien u s-sigurtà li jridu jingħataw lill-ġurnalisti biex ikunu jistgħu jagħmlu xogħolhom – għan li naqbel miegħu mija fil-mija – tkiddni ħaġa waħda: dik li ftit li xejn jissemmew l-istituzzjonijiet li fihom jissawwar il-ġurnaliżmu. Donnu li l-ġurnalisti jgħixu f’bozza għalihom fejn jagħmlu xogħol bla ma ħadd jindaħlilhom “minn ġewwa” fl-organizzazzjonijiet li jħallsuhom ta’ xogħolhom.
Imma dawn huma strutturi bl-għanijiet u l-interessi tagħhom. Jekk jippretendu li għandhom jingħataw għarfien li qed jagħmlu xogħol ta’ fejda nazzjonali/publika, huma wkoll għandhom ikunu soġġetti għal kriterji ta’ trasparenza mhux jinħbew wara skużi ta’ kunfidenzjalità kummerċjali.
It-Times ta’ Malta hi ħatja bil-kbir ta’ din l-ipokreżija. Waqt li l-ħin kollu tipproklama l-importanza tat-trasparenza fil-governanza tajba, baqgħet tirrifjuta li tixħet xi dawl fuq il-każ tad-direttur eżekuttiv tagħha Hillman.
SKEMA TAL-MALTACOM
Ċerti affarijiet li jiġru Malta bilkemm jitwemmnu.
Xi għoxrin sena ilu, meta t-Telemalta ta’ dak iż-żmien ġiet ipprivatizzata in parti biex saret il-Maltacom (illum il-Go), ħloqna fond fejn tpoġġa numru sabiħ ta’ azzjonijiet tal-kumpanijia l-ġdida – fond li kellu jinżamm f’isem il-ħaddiema tal-kumpanija u jitmexxa għall-benefiċċju tagħhom.
X’ġara minn dak il-fond? Min hu responsabbli għalih?
Misterju enormi mid-dehra. Tisma’ li għal raġuni jew oħra dal-fond qala’ daqqiet kbar u li forsi jirkupra… Imma kif ġrat dil-ħaġa? U għaliex?
Risposta ċara mid-dehra ma hemmx.
Jiġu jistaqsuni dwaru u jkolli nammetti li ma nafx. Hi risposta xejn komda; wara kollox dawn huma/kienu fondi publiċi.
English Version – European contradictions
As more controversies arise over European options, the clearer it becomes that the way forward by which the European Union can become more effective and united is through a recognition that it is a union of nations – indeed a Europe of nations.
In the present European Parliament, this view is considered heretical by a substantial majority of its members, not least among the socialists and democrats. As a result of the position that they and like minded people have adopted, an enormous political territory has been opened up for “extremist” parties, especially on the right.
The logic for European union must be confederal.
It has to ensure that in economic and social terms, there is truly a convergence between the different nations. If this is not going to happen – and it is not happening – whenever an economic recession or a political crisis emerge, half-baked compromises must be established in order to guard against a collapse. It is when the world (or the European) economy is on a roll, that the contradictions can be fluffed over.
Perhaps it would make sense were the present generations who are active in Europe’s management (of the Juncker type) to be replaced as soon as possible so that the ideas they have inherited and pushed forward, can be renewed in a radical fashion.
***
Transparent media?
In statements that are made about the freedom and security which journalists should benefit from when carrying out their profession – an aim with which I totally agree – one issue continues to bother me: the institutions in which journalists work rarely get a mention. It’s as if journalists operate in a bubble of their own where nobody interferes from the “inside” of the organizations which employ them.
But these structures have their own objectives and interests. If they want their operations to be recognised as having a national and/or public significance, they too should be subject to criteria of transparency which would not allow them to hide behind excuses by way of commercial confidentiality.
The Malta Times is a big player in this hypocritical game. It consistently proclaims the importance of transparency in good governance, but then refuses to shed any light on the case of its former executive director Hillman.
***
Maltacom scheme
Some things that happen in Malta are hardly believable.
About twenty years ago, when the Telemalta of those days was being partly privatised to become Maltacom (today Go), we created a fund endowed with a good number of shares of the new company – a fund that was held in the name of its employees and should have been run for their benefit.
What has happened since then to that fund? Who was/is responsible for it?
The answer seems to be a profound mystery. You somehow get to know that for one reason or another, the fund got badly hit but that it might still recover… Yes, but how did this happen? And for what reason?
It seems like there is no straight reply.
People come and ask me about the matter and I have to admit I do not know. That is anything but a reassuring reply. After all, the funds in question were/still are public funds.
Post a comment