|
Karl Schembri’s article on the announcement of government’s new broadcasting policy makes interesting reading, however, had there been no other person on the face of this earth to seek an opinion from, re government’s restructuring of national broadcasting, I would still not have not sought Fr Joe Borg’s comments. The reason is obvious. Having been involved up to his neck in the restructuring of the national station, it was most unlikely for him to find the minutest of fault in the envisaged new set-up.
Unfortunately, other journals did exactly the same and got what I would describe as stereotyped bombastic comments typical of the media guru.
Has one forgotten that this same reverend gentleman promised us much of the same things years ago in that (in) famous Task Force Report, of which he was the pivot, and which never came to fruition, despite the lapse of some five years? Has one forgotten that this report recommended the appointment of an expert to see to the implementation of the restructuring? Who, in fact, got the appointment, and at what cost to the taxpayer? The task force report was shelved to gather dust, yet the expert stuck to his appointment. His job description seems to have changed to include quite a number of roles from advisor to the board of directors, to the drawing up programs’ schedules, from the training of personnel, to the chairing of the editorial board.
Amongst other things Fr Joe was quoted to have said that he was staking his reputation on the envisaged reforms. What is so unusual with people of his like? Hasn’t he risked his reputation a hundred and one times? Take for example the task force report mentioned earlier. What about the current editorial board? Had it not failed its purpose surely complaints of bias and unfair reporting would have been eliminated, wouldn’t they?
I can go on and on with instances were he risks his reputation, but I know that space is restricted. In another section of the media he was quoted as saying that public funds financed bad work practices and inefficiency. After having been committed, body and soul, for all these years advising government, the direction of PBS, and the station’s senior staff, doesn’t he feel that he was, at least, partially responsible for the bad work practices and inefficiency to which he refers?
To rationalise and synergise its presence in the broadcasting sector, government needs to do much more than what Joe Borg seemed to have recommended. Unfortunately, for some reason or another, government persisted in seeking people with conflicts of interests for advice.
It takes a new breed of experts to say that the new published policy is bold and innovative. What is innovative, the editorial board perhaps? Doesn’t PBS already have an editorial board, which as mentioned earlier was not worthy of its salt? Where is the boldness? The discharging of personnel perhaps; otherwise it seems nothing more than a restructuring exercise that is tailor-made to fit the whims of specific buddies as in the earlier cases.
Take the appointment of the expert to see to the implementation of the envisaged restructuring as recommended by the then task force. The appointment was imminent while the restructuring was never implemented. That was about five years ago. If this isn’t waste of public funds, what is?
The new policy should have centred on the concepts of efficient and effective good management and true transparency. Instead, the onus seems to concentrate on who will be reaping most out of the new set-up. Hidden agendas seem to abound as well.
I can anticipate who is most likely to be considered the most eligible, unassuming, impartial, exemplary and befitting guru to chair the monstrous electoral board.
I can bet my bottom dollar on a few other guesses too, but I prefer to let time tell more.
Finally, I recommend to your reporter never to say never, for though there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel, I do not rule out that the reformed national station will not make it to the end of the tunnel.
John G. Borg-Bartolo FCIB.
Attard
Editor’s note: This letter was written prior to the appointment of the new PBS editorial Board, wherein Fr Joe Borg was appointed chairman. He was asked for his comments precisely because of his involvement in the
restructuring.
|
