editorial

The dishonest property negotiator
This week’s front-page story treats a very thorny subject, which will upset a few people. Many are those who have witnessed their property purchased by their negotiator and then resold at an upped price.
We have little sympathy for this type of greed that has left us with inflated prices, leaving the pockets of every Tom, Dick and Harry a rather pitiful sight.
Let us declare from the onset that we have nothing against making a decent profit but what is happening here, is outrageous and a disgrace.
Property negotiators are getting involved in contracts with property owners and reselling the property at higher prices.
They are intentionally driving the prices up, in an effort to have more of a commission.
In countries where this has happened, property negotiation is strictly governed by tough rules and notaries are also bound to respect them.
Here in Malta notaries are somewhat vulpine in character, abetting negotiators in their profit margins.
Unlike other countries, where the commission decreases when prices get higher, here in Malta the commission remains a staggering five per cent. Negotiators (not all) are tricking their clients and then reselling their property. There are a lot of vested interests here.
This should stop … it has gone on for far too long and it is unacceptable. Something must be done now.

Two weights and two measures
Jeffrey Archer, the flamboyant conservative peer is in prison for perjury.
He lied in a libel case, he himself instituted against a newspaper over an article which reported his relationship with a prostitute.
The British court system, however flawed, did not look the other way when Jeffrey Archer appeared before them. They did not say, well this Jeffrey Archer is a conservative peer and a millionaire.
In Malta, in the last thirty years, the judicial system has never moved against a politician or rarely against high profile individuals. When they see a successful person or a person in power they act as though they are untouchable.
There have been cases where the media has launched crusades against personalities, only to be halted by a number of libel cases and hefty fines.

Irreverent media
There is this irreverence in the press from those award-winning newspapers that display their journalist of the year trophies with much pomp.
The other day, one editor expressed his desire to rush to a vomit bag when reading some comments in this newspaper about what are our views on this issue.
What should we do when we read a front-page story described as an exclusive but that appeared in our newspaper, a week or a month ago?
And what do we say to the attitude taken by PBS and other TV stations that choose to ignore earth-shattering stories in the press; because it is their policy not to report what appears elsewhere? If it does not suit them, that is.
It should be a golden rule that if something is carried in one section of the press we all acknowledge it as such. If something is newsworthy we should look at it.
Unfortunately a concoction of pride and tribalism bars us from acting in a logical and rational manner.