The sins of the son

It is often said that children should not pay for the sins of their father - however the corollary has not made it into the popular lexicon. So should a father be held responsible for the sins of his son?

That is the first thing that came to mind when I read about the Birkirkara Local Council saga this week. Apparently a number of councillors have come under fire in an audit report issued by Grant Thornton for not paying the correct amount of tax and also for receiving payments in excess of the ceiling defined by law.

The report highlights the fact that the Mayor, Michael Fenech Adami, was paid an honorarium of €22,620 instead of the €17,500 he was in fact entitled to by law - in essence an overpayment of €5,120. Generally speaking, this is not a major issue. I do not imagine that it is the mayor who issues the pay cheques, so he cannot be held responsible for the error. All that is needed for this matter to be resolved is that Mr Fenech Adami returns the money.

However, he refuses to do so.

"I was asked to repay it to set an example, but there's no obligation to do so. And when I read that Franco Debono is still getting paid to be a parliamentary assistant, I don't see why I should pay it back." (Quote taken from The Times).

What on earth is the man going on about? First of all I do not understand what he means when he says that he is under no obligation to return the money - if the €5,120 was given to him in error, then he is obviously obliged to give it back. The Birkirkara Local Council surpassed its expenditure budget by €1,280,000 in 2011 (yes, you read that right - one million, two hundred and eighty thousand euros), so it clearly cannot afford to be giving out €5,120 bonuses to anyone, no matter what how hallowed their surname may be. There is absolutely no doubt that Fenech Adami is morally obliged to return that money because it does not belong to him, it belongs to Maltese taxpayers.

His second comment, where he implies that it is OK to take money one is not entitled to because Franco Debono is still receiving his salary, is such a non-sequitur that it would be a waste of precious column inches to point out how absurd an argument it is.

To add insult to injury, it also appears that the Birkirkara Local Council did not deduct the correct amount of tax from a number of councillors' pay cheques. Councillors should pay a flat rate of 20% on their honorarium, but somehow a few Birkirkara councillors - Michael Fenech Adami included - have opted not to do so. According to my trusty calculator, this means that Mr Fenech Adami has bilked the tax payer of €1,131 (5% of the €22,620 he was paid).

"I paid 15% on mine, and that's much more than enough," he was quoted as saying by The Times.

Since when do we get to define what tax rate is more than enough? The tax rate is set by law and common mortals have no choice other than to comply. I am sorely tempted to send in my next tax return with a polite note to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue, quoting Mr Fenech Adami and calculating my tax payments at 15%, but I very much doubt that I would get away with it, seeing as I hail from the rather mundane Cassar clan.

Unfortunately, the picture that is emerging is that of a son who is taking his father's legacy lightly. Eddie Fenech Adami is renowned for his integrity and honesty and he deserves better than this. Surely Michael Fenech Adami values his father's name at more than €5,212? Is he truly willing to muddy the Fenech Adami name for such a paltry sum?

Life must be pretty sweet when you have a surname like Fenech Adami. I bet that people vote for you even if they have never seen your face and have no idea what you stand for. I expect that crowds flock to shake your hand during the village festa and people rush to buy you drinks.

It must be easy to forget that this respect is not a privilege but a responsibility.

Michael Fenech Adami would do well to remember that.