Comments on: ‘The national interest’ raises its ugly head again

By: Gahan Malti

Gahan Malti — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 20:09:27 +0000

Afraid as usual.

By: Gahan

Gahan — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 18:35:30 +0000

In reply to Il-hsieb tar-Ronnie. Qabel jew wara, mhux xorta?

By: Doris Debono

Doris Debono — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 15:52:14 +0000

Issa kollox f’isem l-interess nazzjonali…imma bħar-revoluzzjoni Franċiża, f’isem il-libertà kemm tħanxru rjus.

By: Last Post

Last Post — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 15:34:21 +0000

‘It’s going to be a long, long five years.’

At least we’ll have you around here to keep us amused and informed.

By: Il-hsieb tar-Ronnie

Il-hsieb tar-Ronnie — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 14:56:32 +0000

Maybe somebody can help on the following. Hopefully this somebody would be a Government official or a journalist asking some informed question to a Government official who in turn may give us some more informed answers than what we have been getting so far on various issues.

There are 2 ways how to adjudicate offers: either through the MEAT (Most Economically Advantageous Tender) or Cheapest Offer (subject to the offers satisfying the selection criteria).

An offer can be a tender (over 47,000 euros) or a quotation (up to 6,000 euros). There are also other names for offers such as expression of interest, request for proposals, direct orders (which have to be justified). However, in all cases, the tenderers have to know, IN ADVANCE, what method is to be used, that is either MEAT or cheapest offer. Changing rules AFTER the offer is submitted raises more than one eyebrow.

The Prime Minister’s apologetic stance that ministers are still learning is extremely weak since the civil service is the entity that should guide the minister in procedural issues (assuming that the Minister wishes to be guided). If the top heads of the civil service themselves are still learning then it is the prime minister’s doing since he decided to remove almost all heads of the civil service making it vulnerable to mistakes that should never take place. It was the Prime Minister who had stated that in removing permanent secretaries he was following the Constitution. This is totally untrue. The Constitution is clear on the matter. So if the Prime Minister does not know how (or does not want) to read the highest law of the land, that is the Constitution, then I am not surprised that his ministers cannot read other lesser laws.

By: ciccio

ciccio — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 14:45:16 +0000

What national interest? They mean national socialism.

By: Jozef

Jozef — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 14:41:35 +0000

In reply to Claude Sciberras.

Basically every tenderer can sue the minister.

I would.

When he stated he personally intervened during the closing stages of the selection process, changing the criteria of adjudication, who wouldn’t?

By: Mr Meritocracy

Mr Meritocracy — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:54:44 +0000

This would have been a resignation matter under any Nationalist government – hell, it should be one under any government whatsoever, full stop.

Labour would have rightly made a whole fuss about this if they were in Opposition.

But the Nationalist Party now remains silent on this matter, and Labour get away with murder scot free instead. Incredible.

By: caflisa

caflisa — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:36:05 +0000

I almost didn’t recognise Chris Cardona’s rotund face.

By: observer

observer — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:26:37 +0000

A man who is very used to observing and scrutinizing the intimacies of pole-dancing positions is eminently suitable to scrutinize the finesse of legal assistance, isn’t he now.