Skip to main content

The Prime Minister who discusses direct orders


Yesterday morning gave us another one of those answering sessions in which our Prime Minister gives away his skewed way of thinking and modus operandi.

When questioned for his views on Norman Vella's arrest, he replied that he will not comment on 'personal issues'. That's right. The Prime Minister said that Norman Vella's arrest is a 'personal issue'.

And THAT is exactly the disgusting thing about it! A man was arrested for four hours, his mobile and tablet confiscated, without any proof of misdemeanor and without him having broken any law, but simply because of a 'personal' issue - which issue seems to be a personal grudge Kurt Farrugia holds for him. That's the scandalous behaviour he was asked to comment about as Prime Minister: were the Police used to payback his Communications Co-ordinator's 'personal issue'? And once again, he backed off from answering

And why did we have to learn of this Super One's contingent free-loading holiday off our taxes from a blog rather than from a government communication? Why were we then told that it was a for a training course by BBC, only to later find out that it was a course given by Public Administration International? Why are we being lied to in every answer this Prime Minister and his government give?

That's not all for a single morning. The Prime Minister was being interviewed after the inauguration of 6PM House (of course, a company which roared to success thanks to PN policies which Muscat had rabidly opposed). It happens that one of the directors of 6pm is former Nationalist Party mayor Zaren Vassallo. The Prime Minister was asked why the government had given a direct order to another company to provide it with software for Mater Dei when 6PM was providing similar software to UK hospitals, and whether Vassallo's position had any bearing on this decision.

Do you know what the Prime Minister replied?

"This is why we are here today, to discuss."

What does the Prime Minister mean by this? That he discusses with companies whether to be given direct orders or not? And what would make the government change its mind in giving the direct order? A discussion with Mr Vassallo? About what?

This admission by the Prime Minister is a serious giveaway of his modus operandi. For such a large project, he shouldn't be discussing directly with companies about being given direct orders. He should issue an open and public tender as normally happens for awarding public contracts.

But in the era where transparency, accountability and good governance have become a thing of the past, that would be too much to ask.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elezzjoni għal Viċi Kap

Nemmen li l-Partit Nazzjonalista jeħtieġ Viċi-Kap li jkompli jsaħħaħ il-proċess ta' tiġdid li għaddej minnu l-Partit stess, biex ikun jista' jkompli jwettaq il-bidliet pożittivi f'pajjiżna. Għalhekk kien ta' pjaċir għalija li nhar is-Sibt li għadda kont wieħed minn tal-ewwel li iffirmajt in-nomina ta' Dr. Simon Busuttil għal din il-kariga tant importanti. Nawguralu minn qalbi.
Post a Comment
Read more

Why I am dropping out of the Anti-ACTA protest

Like many avid internet users, I have followed with interest the debate about ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). After reading numerous articles, watched sensational videos, and discussed ad nauseam with friends, I have realized that what I have come across is a campaign hi-jacked by lies, myths and misconceptions as to rival Malta's misinformed divorce referendum campaign. I have to say that the videos on Youtube   got me worried. I quickly signed the petition, joined the Anti-ACTA groups, and prepared myself for a full-blown fight against the big-governments who want to intrude on our privacy and freedom of expression. Like our MEP Edward Scicluna invited us to do in the University debate last Wednesday, I did not try to understand the details of ACTA but rather saw who the players behind it were. But as usual, my logical instincts took over, and his call to not try to understand ACTA actually pushed me to read the text. And here's what I now know: ACTA is ...
19 comments
Read more

Who's the real monster?

I usually hate comparisons, but some very different reactions from the 'great unthinking' rabble do merit some analysis. In May this year, the notorious dog Star was found buried alive . A prima facie , this looked liked the most horrific case of animal cruelty, and is still considered so by some. The perpetrator was described by the sensitive and caring animal-lovers as a villain, a heartless monster, deserving of death, stoning, or even to be 'buried alive in the same manner'. But what did Mr. Vella actually do, according to the testimony heard in Court? Star was sick. It was shedding fur, and quite old already, and its owner did not afford the treatment. In trying to save some money from paying for the dog to be put to sleep and killed properly by vets, she gave it to Mr. Vella to have it killed himself. Nothing much to make people angry till now. Mercy-killing of very sick and suffering animals is widely done and usually a...
17 comments
Read more