"Come into my parlour," said the spider...

Is anyone, like me, finding the current gaming rage very unclear as to its social repercussions? What is clear, however, is that our politicians are well sold on the burgeoning gaming industry. 

I was surprised that on a recent visit to Betfair, – an online sports betting company that offers “best odds on Sports, Football and Horse Racing” and “safe and secure betting on Casino, Games and Poker” – Opposition leader Joseph Muscat was quoted as saying, “the gaming industry was a sector without political controversies”.

That was quite a telling statement. Because, although the two main political parties are in agreement that the gaming industry should flourish, the subject is proving contentious among the general public. So one can hardly say the sector is without political controversy.

The latest was over an application to open a gaming parlour in Senglea. Mepa turned it down on the grounds that it constituted “bad neighbourhood development”. However, the same owner had a similar application for another gaming parlour in neighbouring Cospicua accepted by Mepa a little earlier.

So my question to Mepa is this: Why is it seen as a “bad neighbourhood development” in one of the Three Cities, but not in the other? Furthermore, like the present government, “bad neighbourhood development” does not seem to bother the Opposition either, “a Labour government would continue working to attract new gaming investors and to sustain the industry”, ensured Mr Muscat.

Now, one has to make the distinction between online gaming and parlours and the online games that do not involve betting or gambling and those that do. But are the politicians taking note of that difference? The company that Mr Muscat visited definitely falls within the gambling category. However, like other gaming companies Betfair is now branching out into social gaming.

Add the word “social” and it all becomes perfectly acceptable! And to make it even more OK, a digital games company are developing a family oriented digital game aimed at children, no less. To be launched in the US, the makers, TRC Family Entertainment Ltd, hope the game will unite children and families worldwide since it will be a massively multiplayer online game, which can be accessed by thousands of users.

I read that the company is investing $6 million here and relocating its intellectual property to Malta, adding a further $18 million. Now, no one can quibble about a digital game aimed at children and families, which will bring in cash to our economy. But, is this opening the right window of opportunity for other digital games, which are not  non-detrimental?

Should Finance Minister Tonio Fenech have been more cautious about seeing this investment as a signal to the global digital games industry that Malta is a good location for the development of digital games.

Let us have a look at social digital gaming? Anyone on Facebook would have seen friends hooked on all kinds of harmless games. The point of them is that you do not play a solitary game but interaction is key. It is also an extension to games families played together like Monopoly or Scrabble. “Social games must be multiplayer and are based on social platforms for providing users with an identity and are casual”, is one description I found while googling.

“Turn-based” was another term I found. That means a strategy game, usually some type of war game. Those are among the much more sophisticated games, which have replaced the old arcade games. There is no doubt that those are unleashing creative talent, are very marketable and that politicians are hoping will create lots of jobs. Whether those war games are containing innate violence harmlessly, or dangerously unleashing it, is debatable. But like the "bad neighbourhood" syndrome, that is obviously not troubling our politicians.

“Government is committed to continue providing the necessary support and assistance that is required for firms (digital gaming sector) to establish themselves in Malta and contribute in our collective effort to generate wealth and create employment. Building on existing capabilities and unleashing our innovative capacity, Malta can become a regional centre for digital gaming... We can make it happen and transform this digital gaming strategy into a vibrant economic sector in the years to come,” said Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi in his keynote speech at the Digital Games Forum on Friday.

Now, some online commentators seem to believe that digital gaming is different to gambling. But is it? It is true that some online games do not involve gambling, yet, what about online poker, Casino games and more?

“It has nothing to do with gambling being a moral issue. Families break up even if there is no gambling, and gamblers will risk bets even if Malta does not service this activity... Moralists would be better advised to support gamblers anonymous if they want to soothe their conscience,” said an online commentator.

Of course he was right that gamblers could place their bets online even if the company is not based here. He was also right that marriages break up for all sorts of reasons, but it must be noted that serious debts and bankruptcy brought about by gambling also takes its toll. As to his last comment on morality, people who are objecting are not doing it to soothe their conscience but they are doing it out of social responsibility. Besides, the fact that we need a Gamblers Anonymous demonstrates we have a problem.

Now what is the difference between gaming parlours, which are sprouting as rapidly as tal pastizzi, and on line gaming? (I love the ‘parlours’ title. “Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly” is so apt). On line gaming is wider ranging and more diverse, since it also includes family and harmless games, as well as gambling games like card games, roulette and ‘violent’ games. Besides, one can access it in the comfort of one’s home, or at an Internet café. So the web is literally spreading.

We can be in no doubt that these firms are raking it in, whether our economy will get a sizable spin off and that at the cost of some social damage remains to be seen.

Article published in the Malta Independent on Sunday on 29 April 2012

Read More

Dom’s daughter, fuel and public protests

 

I have yet to see the much-debated Dear Dom documentary, but it has certainly given his daughter Yana a convenient platform from which to push for a seat in the next parliament.

It is great to see a strong woman putting herself forward on the Malta political scene, but I do have reservations. Basically, it is because of her previous lack of involvement in Maltese politics, even in its wider sense, and the niggling feeling that her participation now is due to the strong possibility of Labour winning the next election.

It must be somewhat galling for the Labour women, who have been struggling through thick and thin, to see someone suddenly pop up stealing the limelight thanks to her dad.

The female stalwarts in the LP have long been pushing that the working class and pensioners be properly looked after. Marie Louise Coleiro Preca has had more than a little to say on social services; Helena Dalli has tackled women’s rights, and Renee Laviera has battled on the domestic violence front.

As much as it is welcomed that the PL now has another female fighter, Yana is not presenting any progressive ideas. Besides, she was not properly prepared for the Sunday Times interview with Christian Peregin either.

Her response – to what I thought was the best question, namely that she had not reacted when human rights were being breached here in Malta by her father’s government, while professing her stand on human rights abroad in the eighties – “I would need more facts on that,” was dismal.

How can she put herself forward for election and be so ill informed on the island’s political history.

Fuel debate

Are the constant increases in fuel prices really beyond the country’s control? Or are they down to government, parastatal and private enterprises inefficiencies? I pondered while preparing for a fuel debate on Thursday evening on RTK.

The regular discussion programme, hosted by Tonio Portughese, presented a wide analysis on the subject, since fellow panellists included management and finance consultant Stephen Muscat, UHM’s Jesmond Bonello and Manuel Micallef, former deputy general secretary of the GWU and another media commentator.

Looking for answers to my questions, I perused last October’s Moody’s report when Malta was downgraded from A1 to A2.

“The country fares badly also in transparency of government policymaking (56); “favouritism in decisions of government officials” (56) and lacks a culture of customer orientation (69).”

All three points are relevant to the fuel debate. Maybe lack of transparency is part of the problem on why consumers are so incensed by the constant price rises. Favouritism, when it comes to appointing administrators and regulators, also has a bearing on efficiency. Maybe, the best people for the job are not being appointed.

The Consumer Association took Malta Resources Authority to task, earlier in the week, for setting maximum prices based on the full cost recovery, burdening customers with the costs of industry inefficiencies.

“Malta’s performance starts getting really disappointing when it comes to business sophistication (42) and innovation (51). The efficacy of corporate boards (74) leaves much to be desired,” according to Moody’s. Besides, the quality of (our) electricity supply (90) was also criticised.

But how are the latest fuel rises affecting an already financially constrained public? Basically, it undermines its purchasing power and downgrades its standard of living. Customer protection is sadly lacking, and as to competitive prices on fuel, they are non-existent. One pays the same price for one’s fuel wherever it is purchased.

With regard to unions and employers, it is a no win situation, because both employees and their bosses are feeling the pinch. Industrial competitiveness is affected and any rises in wages would just be passed on to the already burdened consumer, which of course includes the employees.

Enough is enough

The people of St Julian’s have had enough and have taken to the streets and are also showing their disapproval by hanging banners from their balconies. They are objecting to the downgrading of their quality of life through air and noise pollution, traffic congestion, parking problems and the destruction of urban conservation areas.

As voiced by many online, it is not just St Julian’s that is being swamped by cranes, lorries and the resulting high-rise developments. Although I do not live in St Julian’s, I have been following and supporting the Save St Julian’s page on Facebook, because I think that this kind of protest can act as a catalyst and set an example to all other towns and villages that are being overrun by over-development.

In my own backyard, or I should say front yard, the view of the entrance to Marsamxetto harbour and Sliema Creek gets smaller day by day and I live in dread of the day the view of my beloved Valletta is also obliterated. I live in Sliema’s highest point and can see that planners in the past ensured that the highest buildings were at the back.

Now the terracing is reversed, which is not only visually non-aesthetic but stops air flow from the sea reaching Sliema’s back streets.

Mepa, and more importantly the government and the Opposition, both preparing for the next election, should be taking serious note of the public disgruntlement on the lack of proper town planning, disregard for our precious green areas and inadequate impact assessments.

Article published in  the Malta Independent on Sunday on 15 April 2012

Read More

European Capital of Culture 2018?

Culture is far reaching and includes shared beliefs and practices that identify a particular place Frankly, as much as I would like us to achieve that aim, not only because I was born and bred in the city, I don’t hold much hope that we shall, unless we take serious stock of changes that need to be made. Yes, much is being done in Valletta, but the trouble is that it is a piecemeal job and the major project at City Gate, to include a new parliament building, has certainly not been generally welcomed. Since culture is far reaching and includes shared beliefs and practices that identify a particular place, we still have a way to go. My curiosity in the project was revived by an invitation to an exhibition at the Lily Agius Gallery and an accompanying Facebook page “Valletta Art Museum”, which generated much debate. Architect Chris Briffa is proposing to transform the sad, depressing food market in Merchant’s Street into an art museum. The idea is that it would improve the chances of Valletta becoming the European Capital of Culture in 2018. That the market has been sorely neglected and in need of a facelift for decades is indisputable. But, as much of an art lover as I am, I would rather see the market restored to a thriving food market. Besides, the proposal interferes with the architecture, which I found out of synch in the intended top floor. My reasoning is that there are other suitable venues in Valletta for another art museum, but not for another food market. Other European cities have managed to maintain these wonderful venues, as demonstrated by many beautiful photos sent in to the FB page so why can’t we? I agree that we need to exhibit important art collections. How about the Evans Building, or something incorporated in the St Elmo’s restoration project, I suggested on the page. I then discovered, going back to articles I had missed, that last September saw the launch of a study commissioned by the Valletta local council and financed, to the tune of over €19,000, by Parliamentary Secretary Chris Said, which suggested, “the St Elmo area be transformed into an arts and science centre and the Evans Building area be converted into a centre of art, with a National Art School”. I found no reference to the food market in the news story. The study took almost three years to conclude that, guess what? Valletta needed “rejuvenation and refurbishment”. Now why do I find those words disturbing? How does one rejuvenate a city famous for its baroque architecture? But more on that study later. In July 2008, Miriam Galea interviewed (then) Valletta mayor Paul Borg Olivier for ME magazine. This is what he had to say, “The market is the Lands Department’s responsibility, not the Valletta council’s. I know of no proposal by the government to attempt the market’s renovation and believe that the problem lies with its ownership. “It’s as though the place has no owner. The council doesn’t own it. The shop owners try to own it, but they have no title over it, nor the funds to do so. They pay rent to the Lands Department, but the Lands, in turn, doesn’t assume its ownership. The market is like a ship, abandoned by its captain. “The council has been trying to push for a serious rehabilitation project, but it’s been a struggle even to convince the authorities to change the rusting gutter that goes all round the building. We’ve had serious problems even to get its basic maintenance seen to. "We’ve left such an important site to deteriorate. The council has been offered to take the market under its wing, however this requires a minimum of Lm100,000 (more than double that in €) to go towards its maintenance and rehabilitation. Basically, the government has to make the financial commitment,” Borg Olivier had said. So there you have it, the government did not make the commitment, but the much-maligned Borg Olivier had the right idea. “The space can generate economic activity. It is the gauge of a social hub, part and parcel of Valletta’s social life. “The social spirit of the market could be revived, retaining its original function while introducing new, attractive elements. Why not introduce a florist, a newsagent, restaurants… Turn the open, central space into an atrium, where street performers and a band could play? The space can be animated, ” he had told ME. So what is happening now? I received a pamphlet entitled V.18 with pretty pictures and pretty words that told me little, so I surfed along to the www.valletta2018.org I was invited to visit. This is what I found, that has relevance to what I am writing about, under the “My Valletta” and “Living” headings: “It’s about supporting your local butcher or vegetable stall holder at the undercover market in Merchant Street and helping to keep their businesses alive,” a resident was quoted. OK, enough about the market. Of course there are positive projects being carried out in Valletta. The imposing, magnificent bastions are being given a long overdue cleanup. But again piecemeal, two huts near the House of Four Winds are still used to house pigeons, which give a more than shabby look to what should be one of Valletta’s prime sites. Besides, although that stupendous view across Marsamxetto has been enhanced by the restoration of the Manoel Island Fort the entrance to the harbour has been marred by the Tigné Point development, a fact even Albert Mizzi, responsible for both projects has admitted to in his interview with the Malta Sunday Times. And what about the proposed escalator in one of the plans for Valletta? Will it be accorded the same maintenance as the one at the Valletta market? God help us. Yes, we are seeing our baroque heritage, the auberges and churches being renovated, but again unless the pigeon problem is solved in Valletta, it is money down the drain. And please, for Heaven’s sake, we should not take the study’s (mentioned earlier) suggestion that “Palazzo Ferreria in Republic Street, which houses the Social Policy Ministry, be transformed into a casino”. Why gambling generally is encouraged at anytime, let alone during a financial near meltdown, is beyond me.   The new traffic arrangements have not helped either because they have increased air and noise pollution in the streets the cars have been pushed to use. It is good that we now have pedestrianised streets, but taking away a vital access point from Castille towards Hastings Gardens, which was on the Valletta fringe, was unnecessary. Furthermore, the entry to that area through Marsamxetto is sometimes closed, which might help with pollution along the streets leading up to Hastings, but what about the residents in that area, who need to have access? It is no wonder that I found a quote I related to so well on the V18 website “Many associate a trip to the city as a chaotic and often stressful journey.” It is always, not often, stressful for those of us who have elderly relatives living there. Then of course we have had the increasing removal of mature trees all over the city, which were not only beautiful, but also provided shade and oxygen. Hastings Gardens is more concrete footpaths than anything else since the ‘embellishment’. The study also recommended “little green areas around the city”. Did we really need a study to tell us that urban areas need greenery, especially in the hot summer months? This brings me to Objective 8 of the V18 project, “Nurturing a Sustainable Relationship to Our Environment”.  “Throughout its programme, V.18 intends to celebrate and accentuate Malta’s marine and maritime characteristics by developing a respectful and healthy symbiosis between human and natural activity.” Who writes this bumph? Symbiosis is a close association of animals or plants of different species that is often, but not always, of mutual benefit. It goes on: “By using Valletta’s infrastructural and technological means to develop an interface whereby Valletta stands to gain both physically and emotionally, we aim to discover and explore new ways of interaction between the city’s various structural components: the citizens, the architecture, and the coastal landscape of its peninsula setting. The development of a climate of well-being will interact with the dimension of our Mediterranean Sea.” Hmm, well I hope you make sense of that because I can’t. Article published in The Malta Independent on Sunday on 01 April 2012

Read More

Two own goals

The two main political parties in Malta seem intent on shooting themselves in the foot. The governing party (Nationalist) has, on Monday, denied putting any pressure on the Sliema councillor who stood down after admitting he had made comments about paying Labour party people within his employ less than Nationalists.

Meanwhile the Party in Opposition, (Labour), which is aiming at winning the next election, announced that it defended a councillor who successfully contested last week’s local elections. It said that it had no problem with him contesting on its behalf, since he had shouldered responsibility for his actions.

He was re-elected with 420 first count votes, the highest number won by candidates on his party’s ticket.

The councillor had been given a suspended sentence in September 2010 after pleading guilty to vandalising balustrades at the Attard parish church the previous summer. The court was told that he had acted in a fit of rage after promising constituents he would remove them.

Following his conviction he had resigned from the LP and stayed on as an independent councillor, but later rejoined the party.

Considering the uphill struggle the LP has been grappling with to make people forget about violence connected with its party in the past, I would have thought they would have given this issue more serious attention.

I was also as baffled by the Attard people who voted in a councillor who acted violently as with the Sliema voters who voted in a bigoted one. Was it, yet again, because the right-minded did not bother to vote?  Do the Attard people really want  someone who loses his rag if he does not get his way to represent them?

Read More

Let’s rid ourselves of bigotry

Forget about murders and other dramatic happenings. The most talked about subject in Malta right now is Julian Galea’s bowing out of the Sliema local council. I am not someone who enjoys rubbing it in, but reading some of the reactions to the news that Mr Galea has stood down has pushed me to it.

First of all, I was shocked that despite the allegations, of overt discrimination on the grounds of political partisanship, Sliema people voted Mr Galea back in. What does that tell me? Either that the right-minded did not bother to vote; that those who did were unaware of the implications, or are as bigoted as Mr Galea.

I was also surprised that despite the precarious position of the PN (Nationalist party), it allowed him to stand under its banner to begin with. Then again, maybe it was precisely because of its wobbly situation and it was a desperate attempt to avoid the LP (Labour Party) gaining another seat. Or, perhaps, the people the PN grandees are listening to are the bigoted ones.

From what I have seen of Simon Busuttil (who has been called in for the PN rescue operation) in action at the European Parliament and from private conversations, he is certainly not prejudiced or intolerant. I believe it was down to him that the PN belatedly realised the damage done and got Mr Galea to rethink and give up his seat.

Now I am not naive and I know what goes on in all political caucuses. However, some of us were deeply disturbed by the “business as usual” ethos when discrimination was overtly displayed. It is a trait in politics everywhere that supporters are rewarded when it comes to filling jobs, especially sensitive ones and also lucrative ones.

But when it comes to excluding people and paying people less for the same work on the grounds of political affiliation, democracies have created watchdogs like Equal Opportunity Commissions to guard against such injustice.

We cannot have someone in public office that publicly declares s/he applies discriminatory practices. The LP’s Jason Micallef had come unstuck five years ago with his,  “I tell you we will also be a government for Labourites and we will carry out justice with Labourites in the first few months".

He also had to step down from his General Secretary post later. His statement, “We will be a government for all Maltese and Gozitans, but here we are Labourites among Labourites qeghdin bejnietna,” had not done the LP any favours with regard to floaters.

Undecided voters, whose numbers are increasing daily, do not like to be left out and both parties have to consider that.

As I wrote in my Sunday Times column “Bejnietna Jason,

you screwed up”, in August 2007, “It is not that it is wrong that injustices should be addressed and rectified. What is wrong is that it is not just Labourites that have suffered injustices and would like to see them rectified.

“Besides, people who are neither Nationalist nor Labour do exist and vote. The problem with this country is that neither of the two major political parties seems to recognise this... “Austin Gatt has proclaimed the same philosophy the PN is so outraged about. Even worse, he wanted the partisanship extended to the civil service. So what is the PN bleating about?”

Five years later Julian Galea has screwed up more blatantly than Jason by admitting he pays his employees affiliated with the Labour Party less. Galea’s was not a statement saying it will redress injustice, it was perpetuating injustice.

The Employment and Industrial Relations director is investigating his comments that he paid Nationalist employees more than their Labourite colleagues. In his apology the day after his comments, which included that if a girl had to tell him she was a Labourite, he would discard her, were made public, Mr Galea said his remarks were wrong and did not reflect his or his party's beliefs.

Apologising does not erase intent. If his words did not reflect his beliefs why say them? A particular nonsensical comment on the Timesonline started off,  “Nobody is arguing what Mr Galea said was right.”

Then went on, “But surely we can all admit many of us have said similar things in a jocular manner at some point in our lives - which if taken out of context would sound equally bad... a conversation which he himself (Galea) acknowledges was inappropriate - albeit not to be taken literally by any reasonable person.”

I responded to that comment yesterday, by saying, No, many of us have not made similar comments as those made by Mr Galea and prejudice is no joking matter. The comment was obviously not taken out of context because Mr Galea admitted to his remarks and the commentator himself said it was "a conversation which he himself (Galea) acknowledges was inappropriate".

I asked this particular commentator to explain why such bigoted remarks should not be taken literally? And how one should gauge a reasonable person? 

Article published in the Malta Independent on Sunday on 18 March 2012  

Read More

AMAZON WATCH » Stop the Belo Monte Monster Dam!

AMAZON WATCH » Stop the Belo Monte Monster Dam!

Read More

Where is the buck going exactly?

 

Thanks to a maverick member of parliament who upset the apple cart (and is ever not so humble about it) we are seeing so much activity. If only Franco Debono could stop behaving like a smug, puffed up peacock and stopped telling us how good he is, he would gain more kudos.

I wonder if he breeds those birds and is copying their posing. Yes, he has instigated much needed reforms and yes, he is right that we should not tolerate oligarchies and that is why many people have supported him. "The declarations made (by the PM last Sunday) would be meaningless if the issues of political responsibility, the oligarchy and constitutional reforms dealing with the distribution of power among institutions are not urgently tackled," he told timesofmalta.com

He is right and I like the way that, similar to a terrier, he will not let go until his goal is reached. I admire the way he has stood up to be counted, unlike many of his colleagues, and for that he deserves praise. But, he does not need to keep congratulating himself and behave like a child that is not getting the attention he deserves.

Besides, he should stay focused on the serious reforms and not get into his personal hobby and be seeking the derogation on finch trapping based on bird ringing and a capture breeding programme in conjunction with FKNK (Hunters & Trappers Association).

He did not need to shout it from the treetops that “it was thanks to me that the government and the PN had been brought to their senses”. He is then upset that he has enemies within his Party. His efforts have been widely publicised and recognised, his rubbing it in is not needed and does him no favours.

He must accept that he will have enemies, especially if he intends to keep playing the political game. If he keeps on and on with ‘Look, I am such a hero. Why isn’t everybody falling at my feet in admiration’ (my quote) he will continue to attract even more flak.

I have one question for Franco Debono where does he stand on his declaration that he “was prepared to work with anyone but Dr Gonzi”?

Despite two recent meetings with the PM, neither are giving anything away. It is acknowledged that credit is due to him that Government is suddenly listening to some of the decades old complaints. And the Prime Minister has belatedly realised that listening to the people was a good idea.

He is not the only one rowing hard to gain some ground.

Several ministers are burning the midnight oil. We are seeing reform proposals all over the place and finally we are told that something is to be done about the environment and neighbourhood noise.

But hold your horses, the new Minister, Mario de Marco launching the White Paper on Noise said it should “spark a debate” about the way forward on this important issue. The public is being invited to contribute to a two-month consultation process.

So we are talking about further debate not action. For Heavens sake, it had “dominated the feedback received during the National Environment Policy process,” he told us.  So why do we need more debate?

OK, so it’s a White Paper, which means it has got to get through parliament, after the two-month public consultation, which brings us to May.

Since the worst noise polluter in the summer months – the festa petards  “should be a separate discussion” because “although (they) could be a nuisance, they were part of a cultural tradition,” it means yet another summer of disturbed sleep and rude awakenings.

Now granted that fireworks are traditional and they are very pretty, most people, would want them to stay. But the enthusiasts must be told that the blitzkrieg, aka the petard bombardments have to stop.

They are barbaric rather than cultural. My point is that “cultural” denotes sophistication and one cannot uphold a primitive tradition at the cost of uncivilised behaviour.

Dr de Marco pointed out that the Paper made mention of fireworks regulations and “if people notice a breach of these regulations they would eventually be able to call the hotline.“

“Eventually”! Ah, the proposed 24/7 hotline, which, we are told, will receive and redirect complaints with the help of a tracking system, which will ensure accountability and enable callers to follow up their complaints. Sounds really good.

But who will the complaints be redirected to? The minister is proposing an end to the pass the buck syndrome. He said that neighbourhood noise legislation was fragmented, with various institutions responsible for different aspects, forcing individuals to go from one department to the other and resulting in a “lack of ownership” from the authorities responsible.

So a Noise Control Board is to be set up. The Boards function will be to streamline and update existing guidelines and regulations according to latest developments. Fine, yet another Board. But who will be employed to take the necessary action. Where is the buck going exactly?

What we need are a group of trained inspectors linked to the 24/7 hotline who will be able to take action on the spot.

A Board cannot stop an all night party in a residential neighbourhood, nor barking dogs in the middle of the night. It needs to have an effective enforcement arm.

Read More