Click picture to watch video - JPO on Bondi Plus

Watch this space

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando says he is still close to the Nationalist way of thinking and that he understands what Nationalists aspire to. He shares his political views on the party with SAVIOUR BALZAN

I was looking forward to the meeting. Nowadays I am usually always on time. But I knew precisely what I was going to ask the man who, in terms of media lexicology, is considered to be ‘hot’.
Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando may not be in the good books of GonziPN, the concept authored by the Nationalist Party to pit Lawrence Gonzi as their winning card in the 2008 general elections. No, Pullicino Orlando is no longer in the good books of Pietà grandees after that election. But then again, Pullicino Orlando was not made by Mistra. His past was carved by his activity with numerous civil society groups and grassroots campaigns protesting against the cement plant in Siggiewi or the dumping sites by the Mnajdra temples, and other projects captained by his government. His panache for straight talking was understandably rooted in his upbringing. He used his outspokenness, at times to highlight how backbench MPs were not being consulted by the Fenech Adami government; or to champion the environment, for which he was awarded a ‘green politician of the year’ award by Nature Trust. In politics he came to be one of Lawrence Gonzi’s rottweilers.
And then came March 2008, and everything changed. Right in the middle of the elections, Alfred Sant reveals that Jeffrey had leased out the land he owns in Mistra. Pullicino Orlando was despatched to face down Sant and confront him on the allegations. In the end, despite the allegations, the Nationalists scraped through with 1,500 votes – and Jeffrey was re-elected from two districts. It was a victory that had broken all the rules.
Pullicino Orlando, or JPO as he tends to be called in the media and political circles, arrives, smiles, asks how I am and shakes my hand. JPO has sued me for libel me over a commentary I passed on Mistra so I avoid raising the issue for the time being. We instead talk of our schooldays together – we lived next to each other for years. Like me, he points out that he wasn’t politically inclined – or a Nationalist – before the Mintoff years made him dive into politics.
Soon enough we come up to date, where the backbench MP now contemplates his political career after that crazy electoral week that went on to change his political career, perhaps forever. He looks hurt, but not like a man on the brink of resigning. In fact, JPO says he has no intention of “giving up”.
“I am here to stay, I was elected, and I will do my job in parliament to the best of my abilities,” he says. “I am a party activist first and foremost and I feel comfortable with grassroots Nationalists,” he says, when I ask him why he still feels part of the Nationalist party. After all, JPO is not exactly a darling of the party establishment.
“I feel comfortable working with those who in the last 30 years worked and suffered in and with the Nationalist party. Through thick and thin they have given me all the support I needed. We are sort of brothers in arms, if you would like to put it that way. I understand their pains and know what their aspirations are. I meet them and I know what they are feeling. That is our problem: that many seem not to know what our supporters, our soldiers, are feeling.
“But there are some people who have had it good… they should have been with us in the 1980s.”
He is of course referring to Simon Busuttil’s comments. The MEP was asked by MaltaToday last Sunday what he thought of the fact that Pullicino Orlando was throwing a party for MEP candidate Alex Perici Calascione on his Mistra land – right in the middle of the elections. Busuttil replied that he thought it was “in bad taste”. Pullicino Orlando hit back hard, saying he would not be judged by Busuttil, citing his publicly refusal of the Prime Minister’s offer to become secretary-general.
I ask him if he thinks the Nationalist Party today is close to the party members.
“In my view one of the main problems in this election is that the government is detached from the party for a number of reasons, some serious, some less serious.”
The 2004 MEP elections had delivered a blow to the Nationalists with a 39% vote share and two of the five seats in the European Parliament. Then came the mea culpas. How does this election compare with that of 2004?
“In 2004 there was a particular large segment of people who had decided to vote for Alternattiva Demokratika. I would hear this from party activists, activists who were attending parties held for Simon Busuttil and other MEP candidates. My concern is that this time round the vote for the Greens will not be as high as last time. I can feel this. In a situation where the Greens will not attain a good result and the divide between the two parties is 5%, or over that, is very worrying. This is my view.
“In other words if Labour gets an absolute majority, and AD does not replicate its 2004 result, I consider the result as very worrying.”
I put it to him that in the last European elections, the PN had asked Godfrey Grima to write up a post-mortem on the election campaign. One underlining factor mentioned in that report was the recurring comment regarding ‘arrogance ‘ in the PN’s media machine. Does Jeffrey believe this was remedied?
“The one thing, or one of the most significant steps that will have a bearing on the result is the way the Prime Minister and Austin Gatt introduced the water and electricity tariffs. They managed to bring together the constituted bodies and the unions against the government, like on no other occasion. This was unprecedented.”
While Pullicino Orlando notes how the PM and his investments minister had angered the social partners, it was he after all who was the most vocal about controversial issues such as the planned extension to the St John’s Co-Cathedral – which turned out to be one of Labour’s mid-year campaigns as soon as it realised that EU funds had been earmarked for this project. Wasn’t JPO’s vociferous stand linked to his present dejected status within the party?
“This is not the first time that I have opposed government backed projects!” Pullicino Orlando replies, referring to the respect he cultivated out of his opposition to the waste project next to the Hagar Qim and Mnajdra temples, and Charles Polidano’s planned cement factory at Siggiewi.
“On the St John’s Cathedral extension the whole issue escalated simply because of unnecessary and personal comments passed in my regard. And it started off after a rather dry parliamentary speech I had delivered in parliament and this was very much a reflection of what people were expressing.”
I put it to him that the criticism he had for St John’s was rooted in the fact that he had been left out of the loop, and that he not been consulted or better still, ostracised from any form of discussion concerning the matter.
He does not fully agree. He says he was not alone when it came to St John’s; there were other colleagues in the parliamentary group who shared his views and he reiterates that the Cathedral foundation reacted to his comments about St John’s in a roundabout way and became personal.
“I speak my mind, I always have,” Pullicino Orlando. His comments on the Cathedral has indeed become problematic for the future of the project, as a groundswell of discontent against the effects of the excavation project risked making the government more unpopular than it ever was. It was clear that Pullicino Orlando’s words had now become rather discomforting for government.
I take him back to the election of 2008. The events at Mistra led to many factors that had finally determined a victory and defeat at the polls for the Nationalists and Labour. The electoral difference between the two parties was a mere 1,600 votes and Pullicino Orlando was elected with 5,131 first count votes from two districts. He contested two districts because his original district had been dissected into three. Two ‘new’ districts. An unprecedented result for a backbencher who had been close to cost his party the election. Not even Cabinet minister Louis Galea survived the dismemberment of his districts.
“Many feel that without ‘Mistra’, and the way the party and I handled it, the PN would not have won the last election and that is a fact,” Pullicino Orlando says, referring to how he was pushed into confronting Alfred Sant at his press conferences, to chase him and coming across as having been the victim of Sant’s mudslinging.
“It is not me saying this but Joe Saliba,” he says about the former secretary-general. “He said this after my appearance on TVM to confront Alfred Sant. He said that this encounter won us the elections.”
It was in fact, the Broadcasting Authority press conference in which Pullicino Orlando was despatched with a hastily-issued press card to confront Sant. The Labour leader refused to start the press conference and eventually walked out. He recounts to me that he was asked by the party to trail Alfred Sant, and he did as he was told. “I was literally flitting from one place to another.”
Later on, the BA press conference was held without JPO’s presence but the whole episode – JPO sat besides journalists asking incessant questions to Sant, who just sat down and ignored him and then walked out – had relayed the intended message. Somehow Sant’s departure was seen as a weakness on the Labour leader’s part, a sign that he was unwilling to face JPO with his accusations, and it sent a burst of sympathy for Pullicino Orlando and the PN. Pullicino Orlando’s boldness paid dividends later when he was re-elected.
“After that episode I was inundated with phone calls, from so-called disgruntled voters who said they would now vote for the PN. One hunter from Rabat, for example, told me that he had 100 voting documents from hunters and that he would be seeing that they definitely vote in this election.”
But then, exactly two days before the election, the whole Mistra episode was dumped by the PN media machine and Pullicino Orlando was not mentioned any longer. Sant had failed to milk Mistra any further on the Thursday press conference with Gonzi – on Friday the silent day came and went, Saturday the people voted. Mistra was no longer on the agenda, it seemed.
“If I was such a problem, as some party officials chose to claim after the elections were won – for their own particular reasons – then why did the party, until the very last day before the election, the very last minutes before the election, assign me five helpers in a room with telephones to personally phone up and talk to voters who were thinking of not voting in the last election? Voters from all over the country…”
“During those last days, I acted according to the instructions I received from a person in the party,” Pullicino Orlando says.
And who gave you these instructions?
“It was Mr Richard Cachia Caruana,” he says, pointing at the Permanent Representative to the EU, who was brought in to help the ailing PN government. “He would always give the instructions. The Prime Minister told me to follow his instructions to the letter. And I did.”
But did he not think that he could have tackled the whole Mistra question in a different manner?
“On a personal level yes. It was not in my interest to inflate the issue, more so when the matter was such a trivial issue. The whole issue had been blown out of proportion. I have done nothing wrong.”
That may as well be Pullicino Orlando’s opinion – many surely don’t agree with him. But others still follow the backbench MP. So what will his next move be in the months and weeks ahead?
He grins and leaves me with some intriguing parting words: “Watch this space…”

Profile
Age: 45
Status: Separated with three kids, Jenny, Greg and Marija; in a relationship with Carmen for the past seven years
Occupation: Dentist
Previous posts: MP since 1996, head of MPs’ delegation to Council or Europe, two years president of CoE parliamentary assembly; member of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association
Favourite destination: Sicily
Last book read: ‘Union Street’ by Pat Barker
Favourite song: ‘Iris’ by Goo Goo Dolls
Idol: Sting
Likes: Long walks, reading, snorkelling

——————————————————————————–

Il-pjan għal mużew taħt l-art quddiem San Ġwann:
Proġett estravaganti f’sitwazzjoni miskina
– Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando (PN)

Id-Deputat Parlamentari Nazzjonalista Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando l-bieraħ fil-għodu fil-Parlament ikkritika b’mod qawwi l-proġett li titħaffer ħofra kbira quddiem il-Kon-Katidral ta’ San Ġwann biex jinbena mużew konness masl-istess Kon-Katidral. Il-proġett trid tagħmlu l-Fondazzjoni li tmexxi l-Kon-Katidral, proġett li diġà ntefqu fuqu eluf kbar ta’ ewro mingħajr ma għadu nbeda u ħadd ma jista’ jgħid kemm se jkun jiswa.

Għal dan il-proġett saret applikazzjoni għal 14-il miljun ewro mill-iStructural and Cohesion Funds tal-Unjoni Ewropea.

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando ngħaqad mal-Kummissjoni Patrimonju Kulturali Kattoliku u mal-Kapitlu tal-Monsinjuri tal-Kon-Katidral li oġġezzjonaw bis-sħiħ għal dan il-proġett kif inhu propost.

Sostna li hemm monumenti storiċi kbar bħalma huma l-Forti Sant’Iermu u l-Forti Sant’Anġlu li jinsabu fi stat tal-biki u bi spiża ferm u ferm inqas minn dik pjanata għall-mużew tal-Kon-Katidral jistgħu jkunu restawrati u jkun evitat l-periklu li nitilfu ġawhriet bħal dawn darba għal dejjem. Qal li l-Forti Sant’Iermu jista’ jkun salvat bi spiża ta’ 2.5 miljun ewro.

Il-Kamra tad-Deputati l-bieraħ fil-għodu bdiet tiddiskuti l-Baġit għas-sena 2009 f’livell ta’ Ministeri. Il-bieraħ fil-għodu kienu diksussi l-estimi finanzjarji għall-Ministeru għar-Riżorsi u Affarijiet Rurali.

Id-Deputat Nazzjonalista qal li l-proġett inkwistjoni se jikkawża inkonvenjent kbir tul il-medda ta’ snin li se jdum ma jitlesta. Dan mhux biss għar-residenti tal-Belt imma wkoll għan-negozju.

Huwa diffiċli ħafna biex wieħed jifhem kif dan mhux se jikkawża ħsarat fuq xogħol li għadna kif lestejna fuq it-toroq tal-Belt meta se jinġarr il-materjal kollu li se jinqala’ biex titħaffer ħofra enormi ta’ madwar erba’, ħames sulari f’nofs il-Belt.

Żied jgħid li huwa diffiċli biex wieħed jifhem kif, minkejja kwalunkwe prekawzjoni li tista’ tittieħed, mhux se ssir ħsara potenzjalment rreparabbli lil ġawhra storika li hu l-Kon-Katidral ta’ San Ġwann innifsu. Huwa diffiċli li n-nies jifhmu kif il-Fondazzjoni nkarigata mit-tmexxija tal-Kon-Katidral waqqfet lil sid ta’ ħanut fil-viċinanzi milli jħaffer għal ‘safe’ fil-ħanut tiegħu għax qalet li kien qed jikkawża ħsarat, imbagħad l-istess Fondazzjoni titfa’ applikazzjoni għal dik li essenzjalment se tkun qisha barriera eżatt biswit il-Kon-Katidral!

Id-Deputat Nazzjonalista rrimarka li l-perit inkarigat minn dan il-proġett irrifjuta li jagħti l-garanzija tiegħu li l-proġett ma kienx se jikkawża ħsarat konsiderevoli. Id-Direttorat tal-Ippjanar fil-MEPA ddikjara li “in spite of precautions and mitigation methods, the potential risk to St John’s Cathedral cannot be elimated”. Pullicino Orlando qal li kliem bħal dan għandu mhux biss iqajjem preokkupazzjonijiet serji iżda għandu jfakkarna lkoll x’responsabbiltà għandna quddiem l-Istorja u quddiem il-ġenerazzjonijiet futuri jekk inkunu aħna l-kaġun ta’ ħsara lil post bħalma hu l-Kon-Katidral.

Żied jgħid li jidher illi kontra dak li ntqal pubblikament, se jsir skavar saħansitra taħt il-Kon-Katidral innifsu biex jingħaddu passaġġi kif ukoll għal liftijiet massivi li hemm ippjanati għal dan il-proġett.

Ilmenta wkoll mill-‘generators’ massivi li hemm maħsubin għal dan il-proġett jekk jinzerta jinqata’ d-dawl. Sostna li l-vibrazzjonijiet tagħhom se jregħdu s-sisien tal-Kon-Katidral.

Id-Deputat Nazzjonalista kien kritiku wkoll għall-fatt li hemm ukoll applikazzjoni biex jissaqqaf bil-ħġieġ iċ-ċimiterju tal-Kon-Katidral. Il-bini tal-madwar jista’ jitmermer minħabba l-bdil fil-’microclimate’ tal-ġebla li se titgħatta bil-ħġieġ u se tkun esposta għal element qawwi ta’ sħana u umdità minħabba n-nifsijiet tal-viżitaturi li se jgħaddu minn din is-sezzjoni tal-proġett.

Sostna l-kritika tiegħu billi kkwota lill-Professur Taljan Sante Guido, espert ta’ fama indiskussa li kien fdat bi proġetti ta’ restawr fil-Kon-Katidral innifsu, li kiteb li “it is utter madness to further excavate the area beneath the Cathedral in order to open a museum’. Sante Guido lmenta wkoll li qatt ma kien konsultat mill-Fondazzjoni fuq dan il-proġett li tefgħu applikazzjoni għalih quddiem il-MEPA.

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando qal li ferm preokkupanti huwa l-fatt illi jidher li qatt u ħadd ma jista’ xi darba jikkwantifika eżatt kemm jista’ verament jiġi jiswa proġett bħal dan, taħt l-art. Staqsa x’jiġri jekk wara li jkun inbeda l-proġett u nsibu li biex jitkompla rridu għaxar jew għoxrin miljun ewro oħra jew aktar, kif ġieli ġara fil-każ ta’ proġetti oħrajn wisq inqas komplessi.

“X’nagħmlu? Nabbandunaw il-proġett? Ma tistax tħalli barriera f’nofs il-Belt u jkollna nitfgħu gelgul liri għal ġo din il-ħofra biex inkompluh, irridu jew ma rridux. U nispiċċaw, kif ġieli ġara, biex fondi li setgħu jintużaw b’wisq aktar għaqal għal proġetti li għandna nagħtuhom wisq aktar prijorità, inwarrbuhom għax ma jkollniex fondi biżżejjed għalihom.”

Id-Deputat Nazzjonalista qal li wieħed m’għandux jinsa l-ispejjeż biex jitmexxa proġett bħal dan anke wara li jitlesta. L-ammont ta’ dawl li jrid jintuża biex jitħaddmu sistemi ta’ arja kkundizzjonata u kontra l-umdità biex jinżamm ambjent stabbli fi proġett li fih se jkun hemm l-arazzi se jkun spiża fenomenali.

Pullicino Orlando enfasizza li l-akbar prijorità li għandu l-Kon-Katidral hija li jkun protett il-pavimentar uniku tiegħu. Staqsa kienx jagħmel aktar sens illi kieku l-Fondazzjoni ffokat fuq proġett li jaffaċċja din is-sitwazzjoni darba għal dejjem.

Id-Deputat Nazzjonalista qal li diġà ntefqu eluf ta’ ewro fuq dan il-proġett u għadu lanqas biss inbeda. “Naf li l-avviżi li ġew ippubblikati fuq il-gazzetti kif ukoll il-‘leaflets’ li kienu ntiżi li jservu bħala propaganda għal dan il-proġett ġew jiswew 14-il elf ewro. L-EIA se jiġi jiswa madwar 50 elf ewro. Mhux aħjar dawn il-flus infaqnihom fuq ir-restawr? Ċertament li mhux se jkun ir-reklamar li jiġġustifika proġett bħal dan f’għajnejn il-poplu u dan aktar u aktar fl-isfond ta’ tant monumenti storiċi oħrajn li għandhom bżonn mhux titjib jew estenzjonijiet iżda interventi urġentissimi saħansitra biex isalvaw minn rovina irreparabbli.”

Filwaqt li staqsa jkunx aktar għaqli, u orħos, li l-Fondazzjoni tixtri xi wieħed mill-palazzi li hemm għall-bejgħ fil-viċinanzi tal-Kon-Katidral u tużah għall-istess skop, id-Deputat Nazzjonalista temm l-intervent tiegħu b’appell għal prijoratizzar b’ħafna għaqal u b’ħafna ħsieb u b’hekk ikun konsolidat dak li għandna filwaqt li jitvaraw proġetti oħrajn biss fejn dan hu meħtieġ l-aktar.

——————————————————————————–

Aħbarijiet Lokali – Aħbarijiet ta’ Barra – Opinjoni – Editorjal – Features
Artikli – Ittri lill-Editur – Rati tal-Avviżi – Arkivji – Ikkuntattjana
Termini u Kundizzjonijiet (in English)

a sole ambition for the european continent

Report by Jean Claude Juncker

‘A divided europe leads to war, oppression and hardship, a united europe leads to peace and prosperity’

We must not allow democracy to dwindle into a mere empty ritual. Doing so puts it at risk. We must resist the trend towards alientation of politicians and state structures from the general public. Democracy is a living thing, it must constantly adapt itself and be nurtured to prepare it to respond to the new political demands of our fellow citizens.

Pan european cooperation is a key issue. Both the coe and the eu ,using their own instruments and pursuing their own goals, have developed distinctive cooperation models.

It is unfortunate that the two organisations remain a shaky team. They have borrowed from each other but never managed to make themselves perfectly complimentary. Hence the commissioning of this report

The shared aim of the two entities, that of having a europe without dividing lines,can be emphasised by increasing the number of joint projects. Particularly youth questions, education, culture and inter cultural dialogue. The last is becoming increasingly important in societal debate in a radically changing europe. Junker makes modest proposals in this respect but it would be wrong to ignore the snowball effects of this kind of cooperation.

The council of europe has not lost its raison d’etre, nor should it be viewed as being a mere waiting room for access to the eu. Indeed the eu builds many of its policies, especially those related to enlargement on the foundations laid by the council.

The eu should accede to the council of europe’s convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. This to ensure maximum consistency of human rights protection in europe.

The council of europe’s monitoring machinery cannot answer every question related to human rights thus this entity, together with the eu, will have to rely on the expertise of the commissioner for human rights. The commissioner’s terms of reference allow him to act more freely in specific cases than other supervisory bodies.the commissioner’s office must be given the resources to carry out the tasks assigned to him

The european commission has shown interest in the coe becoming even more active in promoting democracy. Cooperation between the two in this respect might focus on constitutional problems, citizen participation on all levels of the political process, gender equality, citizenship and identity, sustainable communities, local and regional government as a place for the exercise of democracy, participation in politics by immigrant communities and inter cultural dialogue. All of these are central to the council’s work.

Cooperation between the eu and the european commission for democracy through law (the venice commission) has a long history. The commission has played a vital part in helping the countries which opted for democracy after 1989 to adopt constitutions consistent with the standards embodied in europe’s constitutional heritage. The european commission actively participates in its sessions but cooperation should be formalised by the eu acceeding to the venice commission.

The council of europe has done an immense amount of work on fundamental rights and on legal cooperation and internal matters. On the eu side enlargement , the establishment of the schengen area and the framing of policies in the field of justice and internal affaers have led eu policy makers and legal experts to incorporate treaties ,directives and framework decisionsclauses taken from thirty of the council’s 200 conventions.

In the field of criminal law the eu regards the following council conventions as vital in the fight against organised crime: the european conventions on extradition, on suppression of terrorism, mutual assistance in criminal matters, laundering, search , seizure and confiscation of the proceeds from crime, on illiciit traffic by sea, on narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Its rules on transfer of prisoners are already applied in 70 countries. Similar action will shortly be taken on the problem of counterfeit medicines.

In other fields such as transfer of proceedings, execution of penalties, protection of victims, the fight against terrorism, trafficking in human beings, protection of the environment, and computer crime the eu and the coe have attempted to harmonise clauses in accordance with their respective fields of competence.

Family law, the fight against corruption, movement of persons, the powers of local authorities in respect of transfrontier cooperation, participation of foreigners, and also action to curb spectator violence and misbehaviour at sports events, and doping-all these would seem to be areas where coe and eu texts can ealily be aligned more closely.

Due importance must be given to the two organisations joint programmes in the coe’s areas of excellence: democratic institutions, human rights promotion and the independence of the judiciary.

In 2005 eu-council of europe joint programmes cost a total of 47 million euros.

The most significant include: modernisation of the judicial system and criminal law reform in turkey, establishment of an independent ,reliable and operational judicial system in the western balkans, and the setting up of police forces capable of combating crime in the countries of south eastern europe.

The eu’s financial contribution to these programmes exceeded 90% of total cost, evidence of the confidence the eu has in the coe’s implementing potential.

The joint programmes covered, among other things
Support for the construction of social sectors
Media law riform and action to promote a free press
Political training for leaders
Rehabilitation of the architectural and archaeological heritage of the balkans

It follows logically from the complementary relationship between the council of europe and the eu and from the increased cooperation necessary between the two bodies necessary for the democratic security of people in our continent that a further step in the relationship should be envisaged. Once the eu has acquired legal personality there should be eu membership of the council by 2010.

By then the debate on changes in the eu treaties will hopefully have moved ahead.

Its acceding will have just one purpose: to help european organisations to develop in the interest of europeans and so facilitate progress towards a europe without dividing lines in which the liberties, dignity and secutity of its citizens are fully guaranteed.

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando

I recently had the opportunity of attending an excellent seminar the highpoint of which was a speech by the eminent anthropologist Jeremy Boissevain. A charming man who was accompanied by an equally charming wife, both Melitaphiles (that’s a new word I just coined) to the core.

Dr. Boissevain spoke to us about post-war developments in Maltese society. His analysis was unique in that it was made by someone not only eminently qualified in his field but also genuinely infatuated with Malta and the Maltese. The fact that he is a foreigner gives him an element of academic detachment which is invaluable.

Many of his observations struck home. He spoke out about the need for sustainability when it comes to development, the blatant disregard shown by a percentage of the population towards the environment and, in particular, about what he regards as ‘amoral familism’.

This feature of the Maltese make-up, which involves a willingness to sacrifice the common good for the good of one’s family or acquaintances, may explain a number of negative traits of our society.

I must admit to disagreeing with him simply on one point. He asserted that the Maltese find it hard to stand up and be counted when it comes to the crunch. I beg to differ. I have been involved in politics for close to thirty years now. I started my involvement by organising student demonstrations against the educational policies of the day. I always found all the support necessary from my fellow students, notwithstanding the fact that participating in a demonstration in those days came with a better than average chance of getting a beating.

I have, more recently, been involved in campaigns aimed at stopping a golf course from being developed on arable land between Zebbug and Rabat, thwarting the development of a cement factory near Siggiewi and discouraging the implementation of plans to dispose of most of the waste produced on our islands in two disused quarries situated metres away from Mnajdra and Hagar Qim.

The campaigns would not have been successful were it not for the active support of thousands of Maltese citizens.

I recently noted with pleasure that a group of concerned citizens, led by Ms. Astrid Vella of ‘Sliema Baroque House’ fame amongst others, has set up a pro-environment lobby group called ‘Flimkien Ghal Ambjent Ahjar’. I have experienced Ms. Vella’s determination first hand and I am sure her group will continue to prove that Maltese civil society is not only alive but also ready to kick when it is necessary.

Dr. Boissevain attributed the lack of popular participation in our society to ‘a government that does not like to be questioned’. I can attest to the fact that our Prime Minister, Dr. Lawrence Gonzi, is not only receptive to the average man in the street’s concerns he actually encourages feedback from concerned citizens. Qui-Si-Sana residents will, I feel, corroborate me on this fact.

All in all, the seminar was a positive and learning experience and a credit to the organisers and, obviously, their guest of honour.

JEFFREY PULLICINO ORLANDO M.P.

There will be long-term benefits when Malta fulfils by 2020 its EU obligations whereby at least 10% of local electrical energy production would come from renewable energy sources. Reaching this target is a challenge, not an imposition or an economic hindrance. It stems from a need to secure strategic energy supplies in a time when not even our maritime boundaries and seabed resources therein are always secure. In a scenario of unpredictable world oil supply, it is essential to have part of our energy sources coming from a more secure local provenance, while reducing our carbon footprint.

Some European countries have already secured a sizeable percentage of their energy supply from renewable energy sources above the EU minimum threshold, while those that lag behind are investing vigorously in innovative energy technologies. Malta cannot be left behind in this common European energy strategy. The options for renewable energy sources available for Malta are numerous. However, local discussion (including that emanating from the opposition) has been limited to energy sources of climatic origin, which are wind farms and photovoltaic panels.

Wind farms have long been considered a viable option along the wind-swept north Atlantic European coast now affected by more frequent Atlantic storms, but less viable in the case of Malta especially during the summer months when stable air is prevalent. They farms require a large capital investment and large land footprint which would impinge on our limited territory and pristine skyline that few would want to sacrifice.

Offshore wind farms are considered to be more expensive than those onshore by a magnitude of 15 to 20. The viability of these offshore wind farms such as those proposed for Sikka l-Bajda also rests on the cost of safe seabed foundations for the wind turbine tower so that it would not succumb to strong sea currents and obviously, strong wind. This cost is controlled by the yet unknown seabed geology of this offshore bank, making it for now an unpredictable cost that remains unaccounted for in the Mott McDonald report on renewable energy in Malta.

We have to start thinking out of the box to harness our rightful share of earth energy resources sensibly. Geothermal energy is fast becoming a viable energy alternative which has been successfully harnessed by Italy since 1904 and is now utilised in 70 countries. This is a clean renewable energy source that has a small land and carbon footprint and unlike other renewable energy sources, gives a constant supply of energy. Geothermal energy relies on the heat generated under the Earth’s crust so that its potential becomes greatest where the crust is thinnest, where it may also trigger volcanic activity.

Just a few kilometres south of Dingli Cliffs, the earth’s crust thins considerably (and sea
depth increases to over a kilometre) in what is known as the Pantelleria Rift. Geothermal heat in this area needs to be investigated. If feasibility studies prove positive, geothermal energy can be harnessed by boreholes drilled down to some depths in the earth’s crust where hot rocks will heat water and transform it to steam. This steam is piped back to the surface where it powers turbines. We could replace part of the imported hydrocarbons with this infinite and free source of energy.

Success in geothermal energy and other sources of energy that can be extracted from the
Earth’s crust ultimately depends on our scientific knowledge of Malta’s onshore and offshore geology. Much of Malta’s earth energy potential remains poorly studied especially within our Exclusive Economic Zone which is more than a hundred times larger than our land territory. Despite this fact and Malta’s very limited land resources, we have surprisingly ignored our immense offshore seabed resources. Meanwhile, all neighbouring countries have invested greatly in seabed exploration and land resources.

It is now clear that our seabed has long been under the scrutiny of covetous neighbours who will exploit any opportunity to secure more seabed resources for themselves, even at our expense. This may happen because, unlike all Mediterranean countries, Malta still lacks the institutions that could investigate and advise on matters related to our land and seabed natural resources. In fact, Malta also remains the only EU country that does not have a Geological Service as the competent institution on these matters. Even small countries such as Cyprus, Lebanon, Israel and others, have long established their own Geological Service immediately following independence as part of their nation-building institutions. Geothermal energy has the potential for solving part of our energy problem if we have the right scientific institutions and sufficient institutional courage.

We only need to recall that had Malta not made the bold decision to invest in new technology called reverse osmosis some thirty years ago, we would today be rationing drinking water.

jpullicinoorlando@yahoo.com

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando M.P.

Life in these small, parched islands with scarce water resources has been a continuous struggle battled using Maltese ingenuity and the application of science to maximise on our hydrological resources. Freshwater remains one of the most strategic and vital resources for Malta, yet we still respond to our water deficit problem with solutions ranging from methods introduced at least thirty years ago to others which date back to over a century, while overlooking other possibilities.

We need to focus on these real environmental issues and not on mere distractions created by the few for political mileage. That is why I decided, in the past, to participate in the popular movement which challenged the proposal for a cement plant in a central locality in Malta and also opposed a proposed landfill which was to be incongruously located right next to Mnajdra prehistoric temples. These developments would have had long-lasting and deleterious impacts on our environment, health and heritage.

Other Mediterranean countries have shown more foresight than we have when it comes to tackling the main environmental problem that they share with us, namely, their precarious water supply. These countries sought solutions by using geological data to fully exploit their water resources.

Syria is now extracting the offshore groundwater found in its seabed in a sustainable manner before it is lost to the sea. Israel established a national water carrier to quench its Negev Desert. Libya has been exploiting ancient groundwater deep in the Sahara Desert.

Compared to others, Malta seems to have pursued mistaken environmental priorities. Statistics issued in the Malta Resources Authority Annual report of 2003 show that natural ground water that finds its way to the sea by subsurface flow or natural leakage accounts to nearly one-and-a-half times the amount of water extracted by all legal boreholes. This is a shocking statistic for a country that since the 1980s has spent so much money investing in reverse osmosis with its expensive running costs and demand for electrical energy. Much of this natural freshwater leakage is in areas where there is little water extraction, so the quality of groundwater being lost is relatively good and unpolluted. We must aim to exploit at least half of the groundwater before it leaks in massive amounts into the sea. This would amount in volume to that produced by reverse osmosis.

To address this strategic problem we must invest in our knowledge of Malta’s geological structure so that we can find those natural pathways for subsurface water flow and stem some of the natural leakage of freshwater to the sea, re-directing it to our freshwater distribution system. This would require investment in a national Geological Service which could bring other dividends which Malta cannot afford to ignore. Indeed, Malta’s future may lie in our underground and offshore resources, as our neighbouring countries, albeit larger and more endowed with natural resources, have long realised.

The unwise indifference to our water resources coincided with the increasing use of boreholes which flourished under the Labour administrations of the 1970s. Water extraction had to meet the growing demand, but the more water we pumped out of the ground, the more saline water from the surrounding sea found its way into the groundwater and our freshwater distribution system. This period of unrestrained groundwater exploitation is probably one of the greatest environmental disasters that this country had to endure. In some countries, such acts are considered as environmental crimes and those responsible, whether managers or engineers, would never be trusted as regulators of water resources.

Meanwhile, illegal water borehole extraction accounts for nearly half the amount of extracted groundwater. This water is used by private enterprise, usually for industrial and agricultural purposes. Some environmentalists have been pointing their accusing finger at these illegal boreholes, but abruptly shutting down these boreholes will have economic repercussions which we all want to avoid. Illegality cannot be condoned. However, accusations merely intended to create a scapegoat for Malta’s environmental problems while overlooking solutions to a problem that affects all those living on these islands could hardly be considered as productive.

Malta should focus on the real environmental issues and work to find solutions. Too many decades have passed without any action taken to prevent the massive natural groundwater loss to the sea, which loss is being compensated by expensive desalination for which we pay a high price in oil imports.

jpullicinoorlando@yahoo.com

JEFFREY PULLICINO ORLANDO M.P.

I have attended numerous meetings in relation to the worrying phenomenon of illegal immigration over the past months. During one particular meeting a high ranking government official postulated that the Libyan authorities might be turning a blind eye, or worse, to the organized illegal trafficking of humans from two particular ports in Libya for a very specific reason – oil.

The Medina Bank belongs to Malta (it is in what is technically referred to as our Economic Exclusive Zone-EEZ). Some may recall that the Libyan government had sent gunboats to threaten us when we had started to drill for oil there back in Mintoff’s days. Tiny Malta had no choice. We had to back off. The Libyans are claiming this area as their own even though it is north of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) maritime boundary which clearly demarcates it as being in Maltese waters. Historical and geological considerations also militate against the Libyan claims. Do the Libyans know something we don’t? They have a clear advantage over us in having excellent national geological services, something that is sadly lacking in our country making us a notable exception amongst all Mediterranean and European countries.

The fact that Malta has an immense Search and Rescue Area (SAR) means that most, if not all, illegal immigrants leaving from Libya will have to pass through Maltese waters. Many of those vessels which end up in distress fall under our responsibility. Reducing our SAR would seem to be an easy solution to our problem. However reducing our SAR would also give more muscle to the Libyans who are disputing that the Medina Bank is theirs in front of the ICJ.

Could they be using the unfortunates who are risking their lives in the organized illegal shuttle service from Libya to Europe as pawns?

This theory is not as far-fetched as it might seem. A map published in the official journal of EAGE (European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers) clearly shows that the Libyans have awarded an oil-drilling concession in the Maltese EEZ to Sirte, the state-owned drilling company. It would seem that they are impatient to start drilling for oil in our waters.

They seem to be playing the same games they played in Mintoff’s days. However tiny Malta is now not as helpless as it was back then. We are now part of the European Union. It’s about time we used our political muscle to get the Union to call on Libya to put a stop to these shenanigans.

It is apparent that the Libyans have forgotten that Malta showed herself to be a ‘friend in need’ when the international community demonized them in the not so distant past. We cannot allow ourselves to be bullied any longer. We must insist on the international community to bring pressure to bear on Libya to put a stop to the illegal trafficking of human beings which is not only resulting in unbearable pressures on our society but also, more importantly, in the regular loss of lives.

‘The sword of the law should never fall but on those whose guilt is so apparent as to be pronounced by their friends as well as their foes.’ (Thomas Jefferson)

jpullicinoorlando@yahoo.com

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando says he is still close to the Nationalist way of thinking and that he understands what Nationalists aspire to. He shares his political views on the party with SAVIOUR BALZAN

I was looking forward to the meeting. Nowadays I am usually always on time. But I knew precisely what I was going to ask the man who, in terms of media lexicology, is considered to be ‘hot’.

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando may not be in the good books of GonziPN, the concept authored by the Nationalist Party to pit Lawrence Gonzi as their winning card in the 2008 general elections. No, Pullicino Orlando is no longer in the good books of Pietà grandees after that election. But then again, Pullicino Orlando was not made by Mistra. His past was carved by his activity with numerous civil society groups and grassroots campaigns protesting against the cement plant in Siggiewi or the dumping sites by the Mnajdra temples, and other projects captained by his government. His panache for straight talking was understandably rooted in his upbringing. He used his outspokenness, at times to highlight how backbench MPs were not being consulted by the Fenech Adami government; or to champion the environment, for which he was awarded a ‘green politician of the year’ award by Nature Trust. In politics he came to be one of Lawrence Gonzi’s rottweilers.

And then came March 2008, and everything changed. Right in the middle of the elections, Alfred Sant reveals that Jeffrey had leased out the land he owns in Mistra. Pullicino Orlando was despatched to face down Sant and confront him on the allegations. In the end, despite the allegations, the Nationalists scraped through with 1,500 votes – and Jeffrey was re-elected from two districts. It was a victory that had broken all the rules.

Pullicino Orlando, or JPO as he tends to be called in the media and political circles, arrives, smiles, asks how I am and shakes my hand. JPO has sued me for libel me over a commentary I passed on Mistra so I avoid raising the issue for the time being. We instead talk of our schooldays together – we lived next to each other for years. Like me, he points out that he wasn’t politically inclined – or a Nationalist – before the Mintoff years made him dive into politics.

Soon enough we come up to date, where the backbench MP now contemplates his political career after that crazy electoral week that went on to change his political career, perhaps forever. He looks hurt, but not like a man on the brink of resigning. In fact, JPO says he has no intention of “giving up”.

“I am here to stay, I was elected, and I will do my job in parliament to the best of my abilities,” he says. “I am a party activist first and foremost and I feel comfortable with grassroots Nationalists,” he says, when I ask him why he still feels part of the Nationalist party. After all, JPO is not exactly a darling of the party establishment.

“I feel comfortable working with those who in the last 30 years worked and suffered in and with the Nationalist party. Through thick and thin they have given me all the support I needed. We are sort of brothers in arms, if you would like to put it that way. I understand their pains and know what their aspirations are. I meet them and I know what they are feeling. That is our problem: that many seem not to know what our supporters, our soldiers, are feeling.

“But there are some people who have had it good… they should have been with us in the 1980s.”

He is of course referring to Simon Busuttil’s comments. The MEP was asked by MaltaToday last Sunday what he thought of the fact that Pullicino Orlando was throwing a party for MEP candidate Alex Perici Calascione on his Mistra land – right in the middle of the elections. Busuttil replied that he thought it was “in bad taste”. Pullicino Orlando hit back hard, saying he would not be judged by Busuttil, citing his publicly refusal of the Prime Minister’s offer to become secretary-general.

I ask him if he thinks the Nationalist Party today is close to the party members.

“In my view one of the main problems in this election is that the government is detached from the party for a number of reasons, some serious, some less serious.”

The 2004 MEP elections had delivered a blow to the Nationalists with a 39% vote share and two of the five seats in the European Parliament. Then came the mea culpas. How does this election compare with that of 2004?

“In 2004 there was a particular large segment of people who had decided to vote for Alternattiva Demokratika. I would hear this from party activists, activists who were attending parties held for Simon Busuttil and other MEP candidates. My concern is that this time round the vote for the Greens will not be as high as last time. I can feel this. In a situation where the Greens will not attain a good result and the divide between the two parties is 5%, or over that, is very worrying. This is my view.

“In other words if Labour gets an absolute majority, and AD does not replicate its 2004 result, I consider the result as very worrying.”

I put it to him that in the last European elections, the PN had asked Godfrey Grima to write up a post-mortem on the election campaign. One underlining factor mentioned in that report was the recurring comment regarding ‘arrogance ‘ in the PN’s media machine. Does Jeffrey believe this was remedied?

“The one thing, or one of the most significant steps that will have a bearing on the result is the way the Prime Minister and Austin Gatt introduced the water and electricity tariffs. They managed to bring together the constituted bodies and the unions against the government, like on no other occasion. This was unprecedented.”

While Pullicino Orlando notes how the PM and his investments minister had angered the social partners, it was he after all who was the most vocal about controversial issues such as the planned extension to the St John’s Co-Cathedral – which turned out to be one of Labour’s mid-year campaigns as soon as it realised that EU funds had been earmarked for this project. Wasn’t JPO’s vociferous stand linked to his present dejected status within the party?

“This is not the first time that I have opposed government backed projects!” Pullicino Orlando replies, referring to the respect he cultivated out of his opposition to the waste project next to the Hagar Qim and Mnajdra temples, and Charles Polidano’s planned cement factory at Siggiewi.

“On the St John’s Cathedral extension the whole issue escalated simply because of unnecessary and personal comments passed in my regard. And it started off after a rather dry parliamentary speech I had delivered in parliament and this was very much a reflection of what people were expressing.”

I put it to him that the criticism he had for St John’s was rooted in the fact that he had been left out of the loop, and that he not been consulted or better still, ostracised from any form of discussion concerning the matter.

He does not fully agree. He says he was not alone when it came to St John’s; there were other colleagues in the parliamentary group who shared his views and he reiterates that the Cathedral foundation reacted to his comments about St John’s in a roundabout way and became personal.

“I speak my mind, I always have,” Pullicino Orlando. His comments on the Cathedral has indeed become problematic for the future of the project, as a groundswell of discontent against the effects of the excavation project risked making the government more unpopular than it ever was. It was clear that Pullicino Orlando’s words had now become rather discomforting for government.

I take him back to the election of 2008. The events at Mistra led to many factors that had finally determined a victory and defeat at the polls for the Nationalists and Labour. The electoral difference between the two parties was a mere 1,600 votes and Pullicino Orlando was elected with 5,131 first count votes from two districts. He contested two districts because his original district had been dissected into three. Two ‘new’ districts. An unprecedented result for a backbencher who had been close to cost his party the election. Not even Cabinet minister Louis Galea survived the dismemberment of his districts.

“Many feel that without ‘Mistra’, and the way the party and I handled it, the PN would not have won the last election and that is a fact,” Pullicino Orlando says, referring to how he was pushed into confronting Alfred Sant at his press conferences, to chase him and coming across as having been the victim of Sant’s mudslinging.

“It is not me saying this but Joe Saliba,” he says about the former secretary-general. “He said this after my appearance on TVM to confront Alfred Sant. He said that this encounter won us the elections.”

It was in fact, the Broadcasting Authority press conference in which Pullicino Orlando was despatched with a hastily-issued press card to confront Sant. The Labour leader refused to start the press conference and eventually walked out. He recounts to me that he was asked by the party to trail Alfred Sant, and he did as he was told. “I was literally flitting from one place to another.”

Later on, the BA press conference was held without JPO’s presence but the whole episode – JPO sat besides journalists asking incessant questions to Sant, who just sat down and ignored him and then walked out – had relayed the intended message. Somehow Sant’s departure was seen as a weakness on the Labour leader’s part, a sign that he was unwilling to face JPO with his accusations, and it sent a burst of sympathy for Pullicino Orlando and the PN. Pullicino Orlando’s boldness paid dividends later when he was re-elected.

“After that episode I was inundated with phone calls, from so-called disgruntled voters who said they would now vote for the PN. One hunter from Rabat, for example, told me that he had 100 voting documents from hunters and that he would be seeing that they definitely vote in this election.”

But then, exactly two days before the election, the whole Mistra episode was dumped by the PN media machine and Pullicino Orlando was not mentioned any longer. Sant had failed to milk Mistra any further on the Thursday press conference with Gonzi – on Friday the silent day came and went, Saturday the people voted. Mistra was no longer on the agenda, it seemed.

“If I was such a problem, as some party officials chose to claim after the elections were won – for their own particular reasons – then why did the party, until the very last day before the election, the very last minutes before the election, assign me five helpers in a room with telephones to personally phone up and talk to voters who were thinking of not voting in the last election? Voters from all over the country…”

“During those last days, I acted according to the instructions I received from a person in the party,” Pullicino Orlando says.

And who gave you these instructions?

“It was Mr Richard Cachia Caruana,” he says, pointing at the Permanent Representative to the EU, who was brought in to help the ailing PN government. “He would always give the instructions. The Prime Minister told me to follow his instructions to the letter. And I did.”

But did he not think that he could have tackled the whole Mistra question in a different manner?

“On a personal level yes. It was not in my interest to inflate the issue, more so when the matter was such a trivial issue. The whole issue had been blown out of proportion. I have done nothing wrong.”

That may as well be Pullicino Orlando’s opinion – many surely don’t agree with him. But others still follow the backbench MP. So what will his next move be in the months and weeks ahead?

He grins and leaves me with some intriguing parting words: “Watch this space…”