Lobbying laws: Transparency for all ministries, not just one

In a move that builds on the commitment made by Environment Minister Aaron Farrugia to publish a Transparency Register, the Commissioner for Standards has proposed the setting-up of a law that would see all Ministries follow suit and be more transparent about their contacts with lobbyists.

The proposals, published on Friday, also seek to establish a Register of Lobbyists and a Code of Conduct for Lobbyists.

The suggestions, by Standards Commissioner George Hyzler, are in line with the thoughts expressed by this newspaper in an editorial a few weeks back – that all Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries should follow Aaron Farrugia’s example and be fully transparent about their meetings with lobbyists in their respective portfolios.

The need for transparency has never been so vital. The Muscat administration climbed to power on the promise of meritocracy and transparency and a Malta for all, but delivered nepotism, favouritism and secret, shady deals.

For example, this newsroom has reported how former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat has recently lobbied in favour of Steward Health Care – the company privately running three stateowned hospitals – getting more taxpayer money.

The law being proposed by Hyzler, in fact, would bar Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and some other designated public officials from acting as lobbyists for a specified period after they cease to hold office.

“This would prevent private individuals from gaining privileged access to government decisionmaking through senior officials who have recently left office,” said Hyzler’s office.

The Standards Commissioner argued that there is a danger – in certain circumstances – of lobbying coming uncomfortably close to trading in influence, which is a crime in many countries, including Malta.

A well-kept Transparency Register that details the times, places and subjects of meetings between government members and lobbyists, and which would be easily accessible to the public and – more importantly – to journalists, would lessen the danger of secret and corrupt practices.

So would the requirement for certain lobbyists to be listed in a register, and a Code of Conduct that would be properly enforced and promised sanctions against those who would try to gain favour through undue influence or the use of gifts.

Hyzler noted that several EU and Western World countries have adopted similar measures – some have had laws to regulate lobbying for years – and we believe that Malta should not be an exception.

Undoubtedly, such a law would not go down well with certain individuals, groups or companies who would rather meet politicians without having their meetings published in a Transparency Register, but this is the only way in which our system can be cleaned of shady dealings.

If they have nothing to hide, they should not find a problem in having their meetings logged. If they do, then they should not be having these meetings in the first place.

The same goes for politicians: nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

While Hyzler’s proposals are to be welcomed, we have to point out that it had to be the Standards Commissioner to come up with such a proposal. We feel that it should have been the government, indeed the Office of the Prime Minister, to have done so.

One out of 26 Cabinet members pledged to act in a more transparent way – why should the other 25 not do the same?

Another point that should be raised is the need to extend these transparency measures to political parties as well. Everyone knows about the infamous Labour Party HQ fourth-floor meetings before the 2013 election. God only knows what was promised during those meetings, how much money was pledged in ‘donations’ and how many contracts were awarded in return.

While the Party Financing Law was a step in the right direction, making it obligatory for political parties to declare donations in excess of €5,000, it should only be natural that parties also tell us with whom they are having meetings and what the meetings are about.

It is a known fact that both main political Parties have meetings with all sorts of groups and business-people, and it would serve democracy well to publish a list of all such meetings held and the subjects discussed.

While this may seem to some to be a step too far, a measure too revolutionary, we would not be inventing the wheel by introducing such a system. Others have done it, and so can we.

Nay, so should we.