On each of the three occasions at which I had occasion to visit Toms Bar in Floriana, (a well-known, well run gay bar) a place at which most of the clientele, as in most bars in Malta during the summer months congregates outside to have a quiet drink and a chat with friends, we have been seriously assaulted with stones both large and small, large pieces of wood have been thrown, as well as plastic chairs, heavy cardboard, straw, eggs and peaches of all things. These came from the direction of the public garden which lies immediately overhead all accompanied by verbal abuse.
It is a miracle that no one has yet been seriously hurt ,which is not the same that one can say for the cars parked opposite most of which where hit causing extensive damage to body and paintwork. Each and every time the police have been called and each time they have failed to turn up. This despite the fact that Police headquarters are a matter of a few hundred metres away as is Valletta Police Station. Are they waiting for a serious accident to happen or is the life of a gay guy not worth bothering about? Sad that in Malta in the 21st century this sort of attitude towards minorities is still prevalent among the public at large and equally sad that the Police seem to take such a laissez-faire attitude.
David Newson
United Kingdom
The National TV and radio station seems to be determined to stay in the limelight, at least, where mismanagement and controversy are concerned.
Through the media, we are now informed that the TV winter schedule of programmes is about to be finalized. In fact, we are told that the board of directors had concluded its deliberations on most of the programmes selected, and the respective production houses are said to have been informed of their success.
It must have been months since the Editorial Board made its recommendations to the Board of Directors vis-à-vis its conclusions on the October TV Programme Schedule. As everybody is well aware the Editorial Board’s recommendations had been rejected by the main board at Television House, and thrown out of the window. The PBS Ltd Board of Directors, rather than ask the Editorial Board to reconsider its recommendations, ventured to undertake the exercise itself. Why, then, do we have an Editorial Board, simply to squander public funds?
The conflict that ensued, between the chairmen of the two boards within the confines of PBS, following this clash, is still fresh in the minds of those who follow the media. Disgustingly enough, the two chairmen hit at each other, publicly and repeatedly, on the issue. Yet government, or better still, the ministers responsible for public broadcasting never lifted a finger in an endeavour to calm down the anger that divided the two factions at our national station to the limit. On the contrary, the little they said on the matter seemed to be an excellent exercise of a balancing act in an attempt to keep the two chairmen hitting at each other, like school boys.
Now, the PBS chairman, Mr Joe Fenech Conti, found it most appropriate to let the cat out of the bag and pronounce himself on the revised schedule without first informing the Editorial Board chairman, Mr John Camlleri, of his board’s conclusions. I find Mr Fenech Conti’s attitude in ignoring his counterpart Mr Camilleri, on the matter, most disturbing, and above all unethical. No doubt this arrogant approach on the part of Mr Fenech Conti could only have frustrated further, Mr Camilleri and his board members.
If I had to be in Mr Camilleri’s shoes, I would definitely have called it a day, and tendered my resignation from the chairmanship immediately as I learnt of Mr Fenech Conti’s pronouncement of the October TV Programme schedule. Mr Fenech Conti’s action seemed to have one purpose behind it. That to show one and all, who is boss at PBS. To be more precise, I would have probably vacated the post earlier, for the writing has long been on the wall. But, at the end of the day, people’s dignities vary as day varies from night.
The above incident is only one of a long string of conflicts occurring continually over the live span of public broadcasting. To be fair, government on its part gave little heed, if at all, to the many conflicts that took place at the national station throughout its relatively short history, other than change chairpersons as if they were socks. It gave no consideration whatsoever to maturity and experience/skills in both management and finance, when considering individuals for appointment. The only consideration that seemed to be in the minds of those responsible did not go beyond who the individual was and his /her association with the people that matter, or with the party.
Reorganizations, restructuring, and/or so called reforms have been the order of the day for years on end, with thousands of public funds finding their way down the drain or into the pockets of the so called media gurus who were specifically hired to give local broadcasting a new face.
I seriously wonder whether these media experts whose input in public broadcasting produced nothing but failures, do feel the responsibility for failing the people on so many occasions. Nor do they seem to be conscious that they did not deliver value in exchange for the remuneration they received.
I hope that by now government has realized the grave mistake it did when it decided to share the responsibility of the national station between two ministries. Equally short of vision, was the idea of having two boards within Public Broadcasting Service Ltd.
John G. Borg-Bartolo
Attard
I hate bangs, as I am sure most of the Maltese people do. I fully agree with your opinion that fireworks laws have to be strictly enforced, and where the nonsensical big bangs come in, especially at night, these laws have to be revisited and made more humane.
Some low-noise, colourful fireworks are of course welcome and a beauty to behold, but the big bang petards are nothing but a nuisance to everybody and money down the drain, which could be better utilised elsewhere.
I suggest an honourable mention to the first parish priest to ban them from his village festa, if it is within his control.
George Gauci,
Victoria
Congratulations on your excellent editorial of the 5th August.
sadly, the politicians of Western countries are puppets.
Their policies are determined by the corporate interests of multinationals.
The French are particularly notorious for their callous and amoral foreign policy. Consider the bombing of the ship of Greenpeace, Rainbow Warrior who were protesting against atomic tests in the Pacific. The French are experts at polluting other people's neighbourhoods.
They even shipped plutonium to Japan. God only knows what else happens under the guise of high security.
The French are unfortunately not the exception.
Dictators in Third World countries are fertile ground for their machinations.
Not so long ago, the USA sold Marcos of the Philippines a nuclear reactor in an earthquake prone area near a volcano.
Thankfully the nuclear reactor never was commissioned.
This is documented in Susan George's masterly book 'A Fate worse than Debt' which exposes the sacrilegious manner in which money was lent to Third World countries.
The impoverished populations are still paying back the interest of these loans that were worse than worthless. Unless we promote ethics in the economic sphere, we are all doomed.
The supine response of our major political parties as regards Libya acquiring a nuclear reactor is not surprising but still disgraceful.
Nuclear technology gives us short-term gains with high risks and long term high level contamination. World opinion should strive for nuclear disarmament and nuclear reactor decommissioning, especially in the overpopulated and vulnerable Mediterranean.
We need total information on the handling of nuclear waste and the clear information of the dangers to health and safety.
No wonder cancer rates are soaring.
At least, with a vigorous and courageous press we know why we are going to the dogs.
Klaus Vella Bardon
Balzan
Our Prime Minister (Dr Gonzi) recently landed at Perth Airport, Western Australia. Upon passing through the security channels he then had to endure the ignominy of being frisked by airport security – this despite his exalted rank and the purported diplomatic immunity afforded against such procedures (exemption?) to heads of state and leaders, especially pertinent to a fellow Commonwealth member.
Perhaps your good office may be at liberty to disclose why this unwarranted and unacceptable treatment of the Maltese Prime Minister was allowed to be perpetrated, bearing in mind that this was the second such occasion that a Maltese Prime Minister has been subjected to such discriminatory treatment which highlights Australia’s apparent disregard as to Malta’s significance on the world stage.
Would the leaders of the UK or USA be subjected to being frisked by airport security? Would the Australian Prime Minister be frisked at MIA security? Or would all these significant statesman be afforded the dignity and courtesy in permitting them to bypass these measures – even in these troubled times? It is my perception of matters that such privileges are normally granted to such VIP’s (or in the case of Dr Gonzi perhaps that I in VIP stands for insignificant!). Yet Australia has once again amply demonstrated her regard for the leader of the Maltese people by forcing him to undergo a body search (as happened to Dr Eddie Fenech Adami on a previous occasion) – which, although admitting security measures assume paramount importance, is surely totally out with the bounds of probity?
It is my submission that Australia submit an unconditional apology to the people of Malta for this grossly unilateral act, and to offer assurances that no repeat of such disrespect will be forthcoming as future dates in time. For who could rule this out, given Australia’s past record in this regard?
Peter Murray
Mosta
I was appalled to read that the development of Ta' Cenc has once again raised its ugly head. Very well timed for the summer break (when nobody is home and nothing gets done, except condoning dodgy permits and licences) and the forthcoming elections when there are more important things to discuss (and favours to be distributed).
I understand that the number of villas/bungalows requested has been reduced. However, even one more villa in that area is one too many and another hotel is laughable. The Ta' Cenc hotel is beautiful and extremely tastefully designed and decorated. However, it is rarely, if ever, filled to capacity and extensions and additions will not help attract more tourists. The competition from other parts of the world is simply too great. The only hope to attract more tourists to Gozo is to stop the building mania and concentrate on enhancing what is already available and to emphasise the many natural features which are so unique to the island, but that is another topic.
The cluster of existing villas overlooking Mgarr Xi-Xini always seem to be unoccupied and many show signs of neglect. Does the island need another 38 villas with pools there? I am sure we would all love to have a beautiful villa in an ODZ overlooking a relatively undisturbed bay, but when the new villas are built it will no longer be undisturbed – the peace and quiet will be destroyed, and the bay will be full of sewage (a good excuse for building private pools). It appears that no real thought has been given to the environmental impact of such a development – where will all the sewerage be diverted to? Where will all the fresh water for the swimming pools come from? What sort of damage will all the building equipment and endless convoy of heavy trucks do to the flora and fauna, not to mention the residents of Sannat?
What I find so terribly sad is that a Gozitan could want to deface his birthplace in such a way. The developer was quoted by one of the local newspapers as saying, among other things, "I made my money in Gozo". That is wonderful, but does it give him the right to milk the island some more? Isn’t it time that perhaps he gives something back to the island? One comes into this world naked and leaves the same way.
The time has come now for MEPA, the political parties, NGO's and owners of other sensitive properties (e.g. Ramla and Hondoq) to work together for the good of Gozo and not themselves. If the owners are not prepared to negotiate the return of the properties to the Government, the Government should expropriate such properties and turn them into nature reserves to ensure that their uniqueness as well as the wealth of flora and fauna are preserved for future generations of Maltese and Gozitans.
Lesley G. Kreupl,
Gharb
The ongoing campaign against the rape of Ramla l-Hamra, kickstarted by Din l-Art Helwa, has now reached proportions of a loud national battlecry. It has provoked a huge awareness even amongst the usually environment complacent.
Considering a result of such massive negative impact, even a dilettante campaigner will surmise that a level-headed political party which aspires to regain power will take a diligent approach to address the matter effectively.
But will government move an inch to save the day? No, because it have became too arrogant to listen when the people are talking. We witnessed similar protests before and the result was always the same. Government acted as if it had a dictatorial mandate for five years.
Irrespective of government’s despotism, people will still demonstrate their disagreement and expect that in a democracy like ours they must not be left to fend for themselves. The people expect protection from the political party in opposition and when that is not forthcoming, because some stones are left unturned to pressure government to revert an unpopular decision, that party becomes an accessory to the wrongdoing of the government.
This may sound a radical sweeping statement. But can anybody really contest its veracity?
The Labour Party, NGOs and the majority of people from all walks of life have exhausted their valid arguments. All to no avail as the government, fronted by Mepa, remained adamant.
The opposition is now the only remaining body with clout that can be turned into ammunition to stop the development, which after all is only beneficial to the few stake holders and detrimental to the rest of us.
The time has come for Labour to make an unequivocal declaration that when they return to power they will requisition the developed site, demolish the building and revert the area to its former glory.
Only this positive and democratic action will deter the speculators from ignoring the will of the people and think twice about their investment.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Mellieha
While the idea of “extended youth” may sound appealing, in Europe it often refers to a generation of 20-somethings still living with their parents, postponing their entrance into the adult world of labour and trailing far behind in responsibility and independence. This generation depends on the parents’ financial assistance and works only occasionally. Malta is no exception.
Young people in Malta are materialistic, short-term oriented, and rather uninterested in politics, even though we cannot generalise. Maltese youth, like the German “sceptical generation” of the 1950’s, is apparently apolitical and focused on leisure time, private space, and individual professional progress. Sceptical about its own future, it concentrates primarily on earning a living. The fact that youths are living for a prolonged period with their parents, depending on their parents’ financial and other support, is holding them back. Even though some good initiatives were taken throughout this legislation, amongst them the setting up of MCAST and the permission for students to work as much as they want, according to Vlasta Ilsin from Zagreb’s Institute for Social Research, “extended youth” is merely the logical consequence of a situation in which the labour market is incapable of absorbing new workers.
Young Maltese often find politics to be outside of their interests. Some also agree that many Maltese youth do not feel welcome to take part in decision making that directly affects their future. Youths do not see anyone who would represent their interests. They consider politicians insufficiently active in introducing actions and incentives that could open space for youth participation. Young people have remained on the fringes.
Such escapism becomes more understandable against the backdrop chronic youth unemployment. A considerable percentage of the unemployed registered at the National Employment Agency (ETC) are aged between 18 and 25 with no experience.
Another drawback for Maltese youths comes up when a couple plans to buy their first home. In these last 10 years property costs have become sky-high, prices for which you spend your whole life paying loans. On the other hand, high bank interest rates are another big obstacle since youths end up paying much more in interest than the actual property price. Apart from that, there is the job security issue. Throughout these last five years, the sight of employees losing their jobs has become a common thing on the news, the most recent being the VF company. This had made it much more difficult for those already having loans and for those planning to get one.
Another concern regarding property is when it comes for those trying to open up their own self-employed business. Apart from the imposed surcharge which is destroying a lot of these self-employed businesses, there is the property cost sky-high plus the VAT to pay. All in all, it’s a discouraging situation for those in business and for those who try to enter into the business world.
On the other side of the coin there is Labour, for 20 years on the Opposition benches, which designed some sort of a vision statement for this sector among others. I must say that the document presented include real and factual ideas. One of the most interesting pledges concern small businesses where Labour is promising that for the first two years, the owner will be exempt from paying the national contributory tax so that the business can stand on its feet and clients could be found. Apart from that, a new Labour government is promising that the electricity surcharge will be reduced by half.
As regards property, one of Labour’s important pledges for the next upcoming election is that once in government, the taxation system for those buying their first residence will be revised. In addition, Labour is pledging that a million pounds fund will be allocated for those who wish to go to study abroad.
To recompense this deficit in national income, Alfred Sant’s new Labour government is pledging to be more accurate, responsible and accountable for the government’s expenditure. Similar situations as happened in the expenditure of the Mater Dei hospital, the Burmarrad bypass, the Mtarfa bypass and the Hal Far bypass among other projects, which at first are estimated at a much lower price than its final amount, are to be avoided.
Labour seems to be the party with the greatest number of new young faces candidates. This can serve as a better attraction for youths. New, fresh and trendy ideas are needed and to be sincere I can’t imagine new, fresh and trendy ideas coming from people who have been in power for nearly two decades. Some sort of change is needed in the PN’s clan or else I predict a red victory in the next general election.
Bjorn Azzopardi
Qormi
Reference is made to the advert which appeared on page 4 of Malta Today of 12t August 2007 titled Broadcasting Authority Survey – April-June 2007. This advert was not issued by the Broadcasting Authority even if one might get the impression that such was the case when reading this advert. In fact, this is a very misleading advert as it distorts the Broadcasting Authority’s audience survey results for the months April to June 2007. This advert seems to indicate that it was either compiled by the Broadcasting Authority or prepared by someone on the basis of information supplied by the Broadcasting Authority. Furthermore, there are several inaccuracies in this advert.
The Broadcasting Authority’s Audience Assessment does not measure programme audience shares but broadcasting stations’ viewing averaged over a period of three months. The Audience Assessment does nowhere mention any programme by name – instead it refers to half-hourly slots by station for all the week-days under review. The half-hourly slots are not intended to gauge programme audiences but broadcasting station viewing by consumers. The questions put to respondents refer to broadcasting station following by consumers and not programme consumption. Indeed, as can be seen from Table 1 and Figure 1 below, the Broadcasting Authority audience survey measures ‘TV Weekday Peak Audiences’ whilst Table 2 and Figure 2 provide data for total daily average audience for television stations.
The programme percentages listed in the advert are not correct because most of the programmes advertised have more than one half-hour slot, while the advertiser chose to discriminate amongst programmes. In some cases the percentage published in the advert is that of the first half-hour slot of the programme; in other cases the highest half-hour slot for the whole programme is published; while in another case the mid-point audience slot was published. In his exercise, the advertiser did not follow uniform and constant parameters.
The programmes listed in this advert do not fall under the same programme genre and as such, it is very misleading to compare programmes without also considering the targeted audience for each programme which may range from 12 year-olds to over 90 year-olds. Let alone such other factors as broadcast-time, week-day and gender – all factors considered in the Audience Assessment done by the Broadcasting Authority.
The list of programmes given in the advert is also misleading. Between the period April to June 2007, Arani Issa was last on air on 9 April 2007, L-Ispjun was last on air on 16 May 2007, Gizelle was last on air on 22 May 2007, while Dejjem Tieg_ek Becky was last on air on 17 June 2007. Besides, while the percentages given in the advert for these programmes are taken from the averages of particular weekdays, the percentages taken for TVM News and One News are taken from the averages of the whole period April to June 2007. On the other hand, the last programme to be aired from those mentioned in the list of programmes in the advert was Tista’ Tkun Int.
In addition, the bar-chart at the lower part of this advert has not been compiled, nor does it figure anywhere, in the Audience Assessment April-June 2007 published by the Broadcasting Authority. The Audience Assessment did not and was never intended to make available any data on programme audience share.
The Authority does not accept responsibility for the data and chart provided in this advert and totally disassociates itself from the contents of this advert which it considers to be untruthful, incorrect and entirely misleading. The Authority also considers the advert to be deceitful as it gives the impression that this advert was placed by the Broadcasting Authority and not by an anonymous person or entity. The Authority’s name and reputation were abused for unethical commercial interests.
For the above reasons, it is therefore appropriate that your readers are informed of the incorrect data that has been published in last week’s edition of MaltaToday. The correct data and audience assessment report are available free of charge for viewing and downloading from the Broadcasting Authority’s website at “www.ba-malta.org”.
Kevin Aquilina
BA Chief executive
Editorial note: At no point does the BA undertake to point a finger at the originators of this advert. The advert was paid for by Tista Tkun Int. MaltaToday added a short note unlike other publishers under the advert that the advert was a paid advert.
Having served my apprenticeship in the late 1970s in what was left of the British Shipbuilding era, I can commend Ms Mallia on most of her comments. However, there are a few things that I wish to comment upon.
The Malta Shipyards, as you say, must be honest with its workers – transparency is another name for honesty, and it is only by being honest to the workforce that you can get them to pull together in the direction that a company must go in order to achieve both financial and long term job security.
Ageing management practices must be culled. The era of the “fat cat” at the top blaming the under-achievement of the workforce, is a dinosaur attitude that has seen many businesses in Western Europe die.
It is only by getting everyone within the company to pull together as a team that results – both financial and towards job security can be achieved. If everyone in the “whole” company has the same attitude to pull together for the good of each other, if everyone is informed and more importantly aware, of his or her position within the company, and also that they are an important, valued and important asset to the company, can you ever expect to get the workforce pulling together in one direction – that direction being the stability and long term prosperity of both the company and it’s workforce.
If everyone has the same transparent goals – everyone understands which direction they need to move in – everyone at every level within the company are seen to be sharing the pain of re-shaping the company, then you will get a committed and dedicated workforce.
Us and them will never work. Divide and conquer (or the old management against the workforce) attitude will never work.
Malta is a relatively new country within the EU neighbourhood and she should be very aware of the fickle nature of Brussels. Get the management right, get the workforce aligned to the correct business practices, but most of all be prepared as company to stand by yourself.
It is only by not being scared to change and also to accept change as an opportunity, rather than something to be frightened of, that a company can adapt, grow and move forward.
Times change, I just hope that both the management and the union within the Malta Shipyards can accept this, otherwise the alternative is stagnation and ultimately decline.
Having viewed the facilities within Grand Harbour myself, anyone would be jealous of such a geographical strongpoint for what should be a thriving shipbuilding, ship repair and ship engineering function.
Let the Maltese Government take note – do not have a short minded view on this subject. You sit within the crossroads of the Mediterranean. More and more goods are being shipped from the low cost countries such as India and China to Western Europe. These goods will not come around the Cape of Good Hope, but through the crossroads of the Med. Most Western European automobile manufacturer’s – Nissan, Toyota, Ford, Renault, VW, Fiat etc, are all using these countries for sourcing the parts that they build into there products. The short-cut through Suez is geographically on your doorstep.
Malta should grasp the opportunity with both hands to ensure that it is the first port of call to try and attract business that is not traditional to it, but which would make it the envy of Europe.
Who but yourselves have the opportunity to act as a repair and chandling depot in what has always been a busy section of the maritime trade routes, but which can easily be seen as growing – if the correct infrastructure was there to accommodate it.
Never be afraid to accept change. It is only by changing and evolving that a company can grow – both for the prosperity of its workforce short term, but also to ensure the growth and overall standarding globally of its people.
David Nixon
United Kingdom
Mr Manuel Micallef’s credibility is definitely known to all especially to GWU delegates and more so to former PBS newsroom employees. Perhaps Mr Micallef would care to divulge the terms and conditions of his employment so as to permit your readers to judge for themselves which of our jobs is the most cushy.
What’s more I congratulate Mr Micallef for his endeavours in trying to move towards Labour. May be this is yet another sign of the times that the political winds are changing.
Lastly may I thank Mr Micallef for the interesting information brought up in his letter of MaltaToday, 12 August; albeit coming from him, it will have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Manwel Cuschieri
St Julian’s
