The Antonio Ghio saga… and the realm of babies

Just wondering why meritocracy is bothering everyone only now.

Well, it surely bothered Mr Ghio, who was appointed chairman at the Malta Communications Authority in December 2012.

He was removed, asked to resign or tortured into leaving, and sure made a fuss about it.

Ghio must have been the only person on the globe to believe that Joseph Muscat's promise of meritocracy was more real than Lawrence Gonzi's analogous promise of a 'new way of doing politics' when he was triumphantly elected leader of the PN in 2004.

The only new thing that Gonzi introduced were his divisive policies within his own party and his decision to surround himself by first-class clowns.

Antonio Ghio is probably very qualified to do the job of chairman at MCA, but that is beside the point. The MCA does not implement its own policies, it follows a direction that doesn't grow on trees but is concocted and created at Castille.

This f***ed up country does not create posts and chairmen to improve our lot but rather to 1. quench the thirst of those individuals who seriously think that without some pocket money they will starve to death and 2. to see that the government is on track.

The ideal chairman must be someone who either understands what the government wants or is not in the habit of saying 'no' when asked to do something.

Mr Ghio was not reappointed, for a very simple reason.

He is simply not trusted by the Muscat administration.

Which is not difficult to believe.

He is seen as a good friend of one of Gonzi's sons and also related indirectly to the Gonzi family.

It is as simple as that.

And in this tribal political world we are living in, it makes one close to eligible for permanent exile.

This country has, since independence and well before that, applied a system of political patronage which has promoted political supporters to stand on boards irrespective their competence.

What has essentially happened is that half the country (or about half) has been excluded from being in the driver's seat or even pretending to be.

For 25 years the Fenech Adami administration and then the Gonzi administration did absolutely nothing to reform the institutions and ensure that appointments were not based on political lineage or allegiance.

That a government needs people who are loyal goes without saying, but loyalty is not the only requisite for being at the top of an organisation. And it is often not simple loyalty that a government demands from its chairpersons but blind loyalty and to serve as an absolute lackey for the administration of the day.

Now Antonio Ghio was of course not that kind of guy. Well, at least that is what we are led to believe, and why the hell would you want to say yes when really you wanted to say no?

Well I have a funny feeling that it had to do with the financial package.

But really and truly all the chairmen of entities, at least the vast majority, have all been yes-men. The few who have not have all ended up being either replaced or removed.

I can recall a few examples: Marlene Mizzi was the chairman of Sea Malta, and she did not quite agree with the approach of its privatisation as envisioned by Austin Gatt.

Antonio Ghio felt or has felt aggrieved. He is in my opinion a big baby. He should have realised that this country is still unwilling to accept real change, and the understanding of meritocracy - or Muscat's understanding - has everything to do with appointing all those who were previously excluded because of their political loyalties.

And yes, 25 years of political apartheid for all those who were a slight tinge of pink or red was a fact.

This is a sad country.

Dr Muscat has cited the appointment of former PN stalwarts Frank Portelli and Martin Fenech as proof of his meritocratic credentials. I would prefer not to comment on these singular appointments.

I do not blame the Prime Minister for implementing a change of the guard and appointing his own people, but likewise he should have avoided making a big deal about meritocracy and promising the world.

When Muscat wants to enact true meritocracy, he will have to think outside the box and find a way to convince his counterpart, Simon Busuttil, of a structured way to achieve it.

I do not believe that everyone should see eye to eye with government.  But if you do run a operation or a board which has to reflect government policy there is no way in hell that the person at the top can be someone with an opposing political view.

Some people say that they can be. Perhaps, but not as things stand today, in such a polarised world.

On some levels it is possible to have a mix of political opinions or political bigots side by side.

For example, meritocracy has nothing to do with preferences. For example, there is nothing wrong with having a pedantic Lou Bondi on State TV, but it is inappropriate to have only the Lou Bondi types, who see politics through their political prejudice, on State TV.

If in the past we had seen a mix of personalities and political biases on State TV, everyone would have been happy and content, even Lou Bondi, believe it or not.

So Antonio Ghio should just have done what most people did. Accept his fate and get on with life. Instead he stood around presenting himself like some kind of martyr.

I am sure that by the time the Nationalists are returned to power, meritocracy will still be an issue and Antonio Ghio will still be a potential candidate for a chairmanship.

I very much hope that by that time, I will have retired from journalism and be spending most of my time pottering in the garden and growing turnips, or sailing the seven seas.

Or, better still, reading poems by Allen Ginsberg under a pomegranate tree.