|
If jourmalist Julian Manduca had read the minutes of a Broadcasting Authority Board meeting held on the 11 February 1994, he would have realised immediately what a contradiction Dr Dominic Fenech was making when in his interview with him, Dr Fenech said: “I am convinced Malta should have a national broadcaster of quality and it would be a tragedy if it were removed, as it has been suggested from some quarters from time to time. The TV stations run by the political parties do not do us proud. Rather than balancing out different views, the political party stations serve to generate more division and polarisation.” (my bold).
Dr Dominic Fenech is in no position to project himself as a broadcasting expert on the local scene and he has nobody but himself and the Broadcasting Authority Board of which he was an active member for several years, to blame for the sorry state that the Maltese airwaves are in today.
It was the stations of the two big political parties that Dr Dominic Fenech placed his faith in in 1994. I believe that together with the rest of the members of the BA Board and the Chairman, Prof Joe Pirotta, Dr Fenech was instrumental in aiding the two major parties to create what he now calls the division and polarisation which permeates this tiny island, and which Dr Fenech now laments. Was it not the BA that chose to allocate television broadcasting licenses to the two political parties, and in 1994 preferred the MLP over independent private applicants?
Dr Dominic Fenech, an ex- MLP General Secretary and the BA Board member hand picked by Alfred Sant, was then also convinced that the MLP should be given the only available license, and he justified his views as follows: I quote from the minutes of a BA meeting held on the 11 February 1994 which are exhibited in the records of a constitutional case alleging discrimination in the allocation of the only available TV license to Rainbow Productions Ltd and Super 1 TV in 1994.
Minute 1.11states: “Dr Fenech rrefera ghal dak li qal ic-Chairman fir rigward ta’ dak li sar fi Frar 1993 meta l-Awtorita giet assenjata zewg kanali mill Prim Ministru specificament biex tikkonsidera t-talba tal-MLP. Huwa qal li dan jiggustifika dak li ghamlet l-Awtorita meta ddecidiet li tohrog licenzja lil Rainbow Productions. Dr Fenech qal li l-aspett finanzjarju ta’partit politiku jimmerita trattament differenti minn dak ta’ kumpanija kummercjali, ghax f’kaz ta’ diffikultajiet, partit politiku jista jdur fuq il-membri tieghu, u anke jiflah izomm stazzjon b’telf.” (my emphasis ).
Translated: “Dr Fenech referred to what the chairman had said with regards to what happened in 1993 when the Broadcasting Authority was assigned two frequencies by the Prime Minister specifically to consider the request of the MLP. He said that this justified what the Authority had decided when it had decided to grant an authority to Rainbow Productions. Dr Fenech said that the financial situation of a political party merited different treatment to that of a commercial company, because should a political party find itself in difficulty it could always ask its members to keep the station afloat.”
This opinion was expressed in total disregard for the newly enacted Broadcasting Act (1991) which made it clear that the financial aspect of a station, although relevant, is not the most important factor which should motive the BA’s decision in distributing licenses.
I, for one, believe that Dr Fenech’s failure to foresee and to anticipate the division and polarisation which the granting of TV licenses to political parties would bring about precludes him from participating in broadcasting issues from positions of authority. Instead, he has just been appointed to serve as a member on the sensitive Editorial Board of PBS. And what, may I ask, does Dr Fenech know about television programmes? Perhaps his track record as “a longstanding member” of the Broadcasting Authority Board which preferred the political parties over the independent applicants makes him an “expert” in this field now too?
Only in Malta, do we get a government sanctioning the blunders and gross lack of judgement of political appointees by unwisely re-appointing them or offering them other prestigious public offices instead of holding them accountable for their decisions. No wonder they then proceed to imagine and to portray themselves as “experts” in areas where they have shown such gross errors of judgement, in this case, with disastrous results!
May I suggest that it would be wiser if Dr Fenech were to keep to himself this urge to show us how knowledgeable he is about broadcasting and, now that he has been also promoted to Dean, perhaps confine himself to the precincts of his true realm of expertise, the Faculty of Arts at the University of Malta which, according to Dr Fenech “had the foresight to launch the first course for translators and interpreters.” It is obvious that his foresight is strictly limited to academia.
Lynn Zahra LL.D.
Sliema
|
