Some time ago in one of my articles, I picked upon some of the characteristics that the new Consumer Agency should have. One characteristic that is necessary is independence especially from the government of the day. Even though at first glance this seems a very plausible proposition, it is still as elusive as ever.
It is a very plausible proposition as the amount of services still provided by the government is still large though it has greatly dwindled. When most services used to be provided by government, it was understandable that such institutions would be controlled if they were to take their task too seriously, as they should have had, they surely would have rocked the boat both for the organisation providing the service and the government of the day.
Three strategies were used. Two of these were used to maintain structural control of the institution which was supposed to ensure a fair deal for consumers. The intention was to ensure that no turbulence is created as a result. The first strategy was to maintain direct Ministerial control through the structure of a department. Mind you, this had some benefits, especially when the politician concerned was interested in the area as it provided the stimulus for the Department to bring about radical changes. However, this direct control ensured that even such radical changes would be implemented in such a way as to ensure that the services provided by government were protected from the pressure they might have had to endure especially where standards were concerned. The same applied to products and services provided by the private sector. I find it hard to remember a public warning issued by the Consumer and Competition Division even though the present legislation permits such action.
The second strategy emanates from such a structure. The departmental structure ensured that the personnel within the structure will tow the line of the government as their career prospects depended on the whims of the political masters. This ensured that the personnel looked up to try to decipher these whims. In the process they lose any motivation and independence they might have had.
The third line to secure the government’s peace of mind were the borders they set for themselves. Public services were defined out of bounds for the simple reason that the consumer does not pay directly for them. Consequently, the services offered by the largest two departments (nowadays called Divisions), those of Health and Education, were excluded. This is in spite of the fact that most of the taxation consumers are paying is being devoted to these entities.
Clearly it is important that the new Consumer Agency will address these three deficiencies as these will shackle the new structure and condemn it to the same status as the old one. The only difference would be a new name. Thus it is worthwhile to discuss how this can be done.
Let’s take a look at the structure itself. This structure should not be answerable to a Minister but to the whole Parliament. This does not mean that such a structure simply should take the form of an authority. The reason is that if we do, there is a high risk that we would end up having another sterile authority. As I have argued in other articles, an important factor is the selection of the Chairman. However, I still believe that we need to take a more structured approach.
As I said above, I believe that such an authority should be answerable to the whole Parliament. Mind you, I do not believe that the usual procedure should be used. The fact that an authority lays its report on the Table of the House and a discussion may ensue is not enough to maintain accountability. I personally believe that if we really believe that Consumer Affairs should be given their true importance and in the process ensure that such an Agency is proactive we need to appoint a standing House Committee to take care of Consumer Affairs in general and this Agency in particular. This Committee should not only review the yearly report but should also discuss the work-plan for the forthcoming year. This work-plan should be amended, if need be, and once finalised should serve as a benchmark against which the following report should be compared with.
Supervision should form only a part of the interaction that should be nourished between this Committee and this Agency. If the Agency is proactive it should provide this Committee with discussion papers of the issues being faced by consumers. This Committee through public interaction should also note the challenges being faced and together with the Agency and the NGOs develop strategies to meet these challenges both on the local front and on the international arena especially at the EU level.
The present Consumer Affairs Act already gives an indication of the importance of market surveillance and this Parliamentary Committee would be the forum where studies undertaken by the new Consumer Agency on certain issues, e.g. how particular markets are operating, would be discussed. In this way problems are dealt with publicly. This will not only destroy the perception that those in power are only interested in the consumer on the eve of an election but will also raise consumer awareness to important issues.
The dependence of the staff on the political class is not restricted to this area. This malady affects all the civil service. Unless and until the civil service is held accountable for its actions, non-actions and ministerial cover-ups it will be difficult to make them committed to the departmental aims and objectives rather than to the Minister. Having such an Agency controlled by a Parliamentary Committee will go a long way to solve this problem as the civil service will have to answer personally and publicly.
The third problem listed above can be solved by simply extending the remit of the Agency to cover services provided by government. Mind you, in today’s world where these services are also being provided by the private sector, it does not make sense to have the private sector part accountable while the chunk provided by the public sector is not. Moreover, the fallacy that the services being provided by the public sector are free does not take much to counter. Consumers know they are paying through their taxes.
There is one final point I wish to make. Why is it taking so long for Government to set up this Agency? My gut feeling is that there is more to it than it appears. I was surprised that when celebrating this year’s Consumer Rights Day nothing was mentioned about it. What was stranger was that days before this Day, the GRTU launched an attack on this Agency questioning ‘the need for such an agency when consumers were already being abusive’. The GRTU said that we are being faced by a ‘”new class of consumer” who is abusive, arrogant and at times violent.’
The Ghaqda tal-Konsumaturi was surprised as our view is that when compared with other EU consumers, ours were definitely not assertive let alone violent. We wrote to the Commissioner of Police to see if this were true. The answer we got was that the Police do not keep such statistics. But we are sure that if it were true that there was any upsurge by consumers, others amongst them the Police would have noticed since being violent is a criminal act and we’re sure that these would have been reported at least in the press. Whatever the case, was it a coincidence that after this attack by the GRTU, nothing was heard again of the Consumer Agency?!
This article was published on Maltastar.com of the 27thJune 2010
Note: Since the time this article was written, we heard that the new Consumer Agency is in the Government's pipeline.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment