Top comment of the night

Published: May 14, 2014 at 12:34am

Sent in by ‘Ex Secretariat’ on the subject of the spate of consultancy appointments by cabinet ministers to their secretariats:

I really have to comment here because I am so tired of hearing the inevitable rejoinder that ‘the other lot were just as bad’. When it comes to engagement in private secretariats, a process I was closely involved in from the start in 1998, there was a centrally monitored system for ensuring that these engagements were appropriate.

1. In 1998 the Cabinet approved a STANDARD organisation structure for each and every secretariat with fixed positions. Posts could not be created on a whim. These positions were pegged to the appropriate Public Service salary scales and the total package for each one, including any allowances, were also standard.

2. This organisation structure was geared to ensure that the overall majority of secretariat employees were public officers (which also meant that the impact on the salary bill was controlled); only three posts, in addition to the driver posts, could be filled from outside the government.

3. All persons proposed had to be submitted for the approval of the Prime Minister. This was only done after a full security check was carried out. The person’s skills and qualifications also had to be suitable. For example, regulations required that if a public officer was proposed, his or her substantive salary scale had to be of a similar level to the salary scale of the secretariat post in question. You could never have a situation therefore where a clerk (substantive scale 16) was suddenly trumped up to a post linked anywhere above scale 10.

4. All engagements were regulated by a standard contract with a clear position description. Inter alia, this clearly specified that the officer could not engage in other work/employment outside the secretariat against remuneration. It further specified that the officer could not sit on government boards against remuneration. The intention here was to eliminate ‘double benefits’ at all times. On this basis, it would have been impossible to have a situation where a full-time secretariat employee on contract to have a separate and concurrent contract with another ministry or indeed any other area of the government. On the other hand this seems to be a common practice under the new administration.

5. Yes, of course consultants were engaged at ministry level – however nowhere near the scale and number we are seeing now, where I suspect a ‘Consultant on Silly Walks’ is at this very moment waiting in the wings at a ministry near you.

6. The system was not perfect and mistakes were made along the way. In the main, however, it was rigorous and it was there, unlike the undignified free for all we are currently witnessing.




12 Comments Comment

  1. manhattan says:

    A minor correction – only two posts (in addition to the driver posts) could be filled from outside the public sector.

  2. perpless says:

    Hawn tohrog id-differenza bejn gvern serju taht Lawrence Gonzi u gvern moralment korrott imexxi minn Joseph Muscat.

  3. Jozef says:

    Make that gratuitous contradiction.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdoGVgj1MtY

  4. Nik says:

    Hear, hear. I can confirm. Moreover there were a number of cases where persons with very close connections to ministers, but who were not up to scratch (including because of a criminal record), were rejected. This was not popular and PN paid the price.

  5. observer says:

    I, too, know. I was there in the thick of it at the time.

    There were surely some who did not live up to the level expected of them in their assignment – these, however, were few and far between. The others were a school of dedicated and conscientious people who gave due attention to their responsibilities.

  6. Civil Servant says:

    Having worked closely with secretariats for several years, I can confirm the process as described above. A great deal of screening took place sometimes to the ministers’ frustration, may I add.

  7. concerned says:

    Posts such as this one by Ex-Secretariat are very welcome. We need to be knowledgeable of such correct practices to be able to make informed judgements.

  8. J. Agius says:

    I too can confirm that most of the staff in secretariats were on secondment from other government entities.

    For example, upon a reshuffle, such staff members returned to their previous public service position if their minister or parliamentary secretary was not given a portfolio following the reshuffle. I confirm also that there was rigorous screening.

  9. White coat says:

    Ex-Secretariat is completely correct. I was a professional in a unit that carried out valuable and important projects without any political hindrance, interference or arm-twisting.

    Now the situation is very different with tenders being awarded to firms or individuals whose offers do not even conform to the most important specifications. If the Auditor General were to investigate, really investigate, heads would roll.

  10. Rumplestiltskin says:

    This is the difference between PN professionalism and PL ‘Taghna Llkoll’ crass amateurism.

  11. Last Post says:

    Zmien ilu kont Laburist ghax kont nara, nisma’ u naqra’ dwar nepotizmu, korruzzjoni u tghawwig tal-proceduri min-naha ta’ amministrazzjoni nazzjonalista.

    Wara li esperjenzajt il-Lejber fil-gvern, in-nepotizmu, korruzzjoni, inkompetenza, hamallagni anke fl’affarijiet iz-zghar ta’ tmexxija, mhux talli m’ghebux anzi zdiedu u bl-iktar mod sfaccat u arroganti.

    Tghallimt li f’did-dinja m’hawn xejn perfett u kollox relattiv. Ikkonkludejt li bejn iz-zewg partiti l-kbar bil-qabda nippreferi gvern immexxi mill-PN. Il-Lejber tajjeb biss ghas-slogans, weghdi sterjotipati ta’ demokrazija, tollorenza, inkluzjoni, serjeta’, ecc. Meta gejna ghas-si u n-no, gvernijiet laburisti gabu fuq Malta iktar hsara milli gid.

    Dan qed nistqarru biex naghmel kuragg lill-laburisti genwini (mhux dawk li ghandhom (jew jahsbu li ghandhom) xi ziemel jew qaddis jaqbez ghalihom quddiem l-allat tal-poter) u lis-switchers li qed jistaqsu lilhom infushom ghamlux ghazla tajba meta qalbu l-fiducja taghhom favur il-Lejber.

    Il-hnizrijiet, il-pastazati u l-arroganza sfaccati li rajna fl-ghoti tal-impjiegi kien jigri biss bhalhom fi zmien il-gvern tal-marmalja mintoffjana.

    Illum kburi li ma blajtx il-lixka tal-arlogg tal-lira. Ghallinqas dawk kellhom daqxejn dekor u zejt f’wicchom. Dawn l-anqas biss jafu jisthu — anzi jisfidawk billi jergghu jaghmlu aghar.

  12. Gee Dee says:

    Compared to this sorry lot, the PN were amateurs where corruption and favouritism is concerned. Yes the PL won by 36,000 votes but can it satisfy the whims of 18.000 foolish switchers.

Leave a Comment