Corruption in politics has existed since time immemorial. It will never absolutely go away. We have a challenge to keep it as low as possible and fight what is being inflicted on Malta, a level of corruption that is threatening the island’s ability to function as a viable EU state.
Not all politicians, businessmen and developers should be considered corrupt but, currently, too many of them seem to be, in particular prominent big ones, old and new money.
It is the general opinion that corruption takes off with that fatal mutual attraction that prevails between unscrupulous politicians and shady businessmen/developers. As they go in search of funds for their party, and for themselves, unprincipled politicians engage with shark businessmen/developers.
Shrewd businessmen/developers love this party and personal financing dialogue and very gladly communicate their willingness to contribute what seem to be huge sums of money. The catch lies in what these businessmen/developers negotiate in return for their “generous” contributions.
It appears that, for these so-called entrepreneurs, there is no investment as profitable as this dishonest financing of parties and politics. It is reputed that the return on such investment is astronomical. This seems to be quite credible once one estimates the magical additional value to a four-storey zone building permit that transforms into one for a 30-storey high-rise.
Try to estimate the value of an illicit sanctioning of five, 10 or 20 illegally built apartments and penthouses. Try to estimate the value of a preferential torrent of direct orders for often unnecessary services or supplies delivered at inflated prices. Consider undue unamended 60-year extensions of the government expired leases or the selling off of public assets at prices disloyally negotiated to favour private interests.
What can be done to reduce the harm of this unholy alliance between negative political elements and shady donors?- Arthur Muscat
If this is actually happening, who knows what such fraudulent interactions between big time donors and political parties might be costing us taxpayers? Forfeited government revenue from underselling must run into millions. There is also environment damage to consider, caused by an unending issue of building permits.
In the end, it is not rotten businessmen and developers that are bearing the cost of financing political parties, it is us taxpayers. Businessmen and developers just reap the profits and inflict corruption with all its negative effects.
Now what can be done to reduce the harm of this unholy alliance between negative political elements and shady donors? How can we break this vicious relationship?
An effective intervention could be the introduction of strict rules of state financing of political parties. This should reduce the current significant dependency of politics on fraudulent, big-time donors. Such an intervention will bring a hefty reduction in the real, hidden financial cost that taxpayers are currently bearing in favour of corrupt donors. Harmful and fraudulent policies will diminish as our political masters will not have to pay back corruptors with favours.
In simple terms, would it not be better and cheaper to state finance political parties and politicians rather than have them accept donations from corrupt operators, in the process fleecing us citizens? Such financing will also give a due democratic chance to small parties to make it to parliament, thus breaking the two-party monopoly.
Two queries here arise. How realistic is the hope that one of the two dominant parties will favour this option and elaborate and propose relevant adequate legislation? Should we citizens remain passive and, stupid us, accept to keep on paying millions to corruptors?
Arthur Muscat is a human resources and industrial relations specialist.