A probe into opposition MPs’ attendance for their public sector jobs found ethical breaches. Ivan Martin takes a deeper look.

It was February when Times of Malta reported how MPs on the state payroll had been ordered to clock in at their respective workplaces or be kicked out after months of allegedly poor attendance.

Nearly eight months later, the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, George Hyzler, found that the work set-up offered to opposition MPs by public sector employers was leading to abuse.

The report looked into nine MPs who are employed in the public sector – David Agius, Kristy Debono, Ivan Bartolo, Robert Cutajar, Clyde Puli, Hermann Schiavone, Ryan Callus, Toni Bezzina and Mario Galea. 

It noted findings concerning three of them, saying that the employers of the other six MPs "have not reported any problems with their attendance, with due allowance for their parliamentary duties."

While the commissioner provided details related to three MPs, he also noted that the practice of having MPs employed within the public sector was a long-standing one and that it would therefore be "improper" to frame his findings as one of misconduct by the MPs in question.

He also said there was no evidence that any of the MPs had pressured their employers to be granted special arrangements. Nor had the employers in question raised any objections to the MPs' claims, he added.

David Agius

David Agius. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier

The commissioner’s report says the Malta Freeport Corporation had handed over an email it sent to David Agius back in June 2014.

In the email, Agius was told that, while he had started using the palm reader to record his attendance in April 2014, he had stopped palming out after a few days and reporting late had also “unfortunately become the order of the day” on his part.

Agius was directed to palm in and out regularly and to follow normal working hours in the absence of events relating to his parliamentary duties.

He was also asked to explain a number of instances in which he had not shown up for work.

The corporation also stated that its board of directors resolved not to award a performance bonus to Agius on account of his regular absences.

Agius verbally informed the commissioner that the Freeport’s directions to him had been overruled. He also claimed that he had renounced the possibility of a performance bonus on his own initiative but he had communicated this decision to the Freeport verbally and not in writing.

Ivan Bartolo

Ivan Bartolo. Photo: Facebook

Jobsplus informed the commissioner that Ivan Bartolo rarely reported for duty.

His performance appraisal for 2019 was marked “not applicable” due to his absences.

“I always attended for work regularly as permitted by my obligations as an MP,” Bartolo told the commissioner.

However, attendance data for 2019 and 2020 that was supplied by Jobsplus corroborates its statement concerning absenteeism on his part.

I always attended for work regularly as permitted by my obligations as an MP

Bartolo informed the commissioner verbally that he had notified Jobsplus when he went abroad on parliamentary duties but such visits were still recorded as absences in the attendance data.

“Basically, whenever Bartolo did not attend for work, he was listed as being on parliamentary duties,” the commissioner said.

Kristy Debono

Kristy Debono. Photo: Matthew Mirabelli

The Malta Gaming Authority did not report any problems with the attendance at work or the performance of duties by Kristy Debono.

However, the authority did say that, in January 2020, it had sent her a “clarification email”, following which the “matter was resolved”.

On her part, Debono said the directions from the MGA since 2013 were that she should be able to “perform her parliamentary duties as freely as possible and without restrictions”.

In January 2020, however, a “change in political direction” was communicated to her by the MGA.

The MGA made no reference to the Times of Malta report but Debono did refer to it, claiming that the report was incorrect in parts and it quoted her out of context at another point.

Debono verbally informed the commissioner that her desk was in a corridor and she was being given clerical work although she held a managerial rank.

She then went on to inform the commissioner that she had been given an office and a laptop and she was attending regularly until 1pm daily, following which she worked from home for the remainder of the day.

In September 2020, Debono did not indicate to the commissioner that the current arrangements were in any way impeding her from attending parliamentary sittings.

However, in a previous letter of March 2020, she contrasts these arrangements with those existing up to January 2020 and suggests that the latter were considerably more liberal.

“This can only mean that, up to January 2020, her attendance was not at the level one would have expected even taking her parliamentary duties into account,” the commissioner concluded.