|
The appointment of John Camilleri as the chairman of the editorial board of the Public Broadcasting Services is miguided. It flies in the face of all the things that have been preached since dark days of Xandir Malta. The decision is regrettable for a number of reasons.
Firstly since John Camilleri is an appointed member on the PBS board it diminishes the salutary independence of the editorial board from the board of directors of PBS. It is crucial that the editorial board operates in full autonomy from the board of directors.
Such separation should ensure that attention is given to the public service ethos of the national broadcaster rather than focusing on narrower bottom line interests.
Much as commercial imperatives are also crucial to the financial survival of the company.
This appointment risks compromising the autonomy even further. The appointment also raises eyebrows since the newly appointed chairman, a highly competent and hard working person, carries political baggage as a result of his years of public service as the secretary to the former prime minister Eddie Fenech Adami and years of being a party functionary.
This should not automatically disqualify him from the job but it certainly should have raised the political antenna of the minister and his closest advisors. They should have realised that the appointment would raise a political controversy.
The minister justifies the appointment by equating it to the appointment of Dominic Fenech, a former Labour Party secretary general, also a member of the editorial board. But then it must be said that Mr Fenech has for a rather long time been rather distanced from the Labour Party.
This political balancing act is a farce and nonsense, and certainly not evidence of a new way of doing politics. The decision should be revisited.
A dispassionate analysis of local appointments reveals just how regrettably far our country is travelling up this dangerous road. The dominance of the parties is all pervading. The composition of the Broadcasting Authority is party-driven. Party appointees are expected to serve as watchdogs over, amongst other media, the party-operated media. This has potential conflict of interest implications.
There is further evidence to pinpoint the realm of the political parties; they are also exempted from the provisions of the Data Protection Act. This grants all parties privileged rights to processing the personal data they have collected throughout the years.
Worse still, all parties are entitled to full information on which citizens exercise their right not to vote. This smacks of a big brother looking over our shoulders. It is unacceptable.
It repeats itself with both parties sitting on the MEPA board casting their vote in favour or against all major projects submitted for approval. It inevitably leads to a potentially cosy relationship between politicians and developers and contractors. This presence on the board is all the more absurd in the absence of a seat being given to non-governmental organisations and civil society.
The dominance of the parties limits our democracy in what should be a system of government for the people and by the people. In reality all too often our democracy, similar to that in Italy, has developed into a system of government by the parties and for the parties. This is weakening the system and further disengaging citizens from the system. The way forward is more direct participation by the people and not less. This manifests itself by increasing the role of civil society, that manifestation of collective involvement by ordinary people who feel that together they can evolve and change society. The quintessence of this people spirit manifested itself on the eve of the European referendum when no fewer than 34 organisations collectively manifested a common spirit and drive in favour of Europe.
That spirit needs to repeat itself and the political class should endeavour to take a backburner role in pushing themselves and their peers in the sensitive posts in the institutions and agencies.
|
