PBS ordered to publish details of extravagant Eurovision costs

The Shift wins challenge against state broadcaster

 

The state broadcaster (PBS) has been ordered to publish details of how it spent some €1.6 million earlier this year to refurbish a TV studio used for the Malta European Song Contest.

The decision was taken by the Information and Data Protection Commissioner (IDPC) following a challenge by The Shift, which requested transparency and accountability on how PBS used public funds.

Led by the now-sacked CEO Mark Sammut and backed by Minister Owen Bonnici, PBS decided to abandon the decades-old popular song contest format and instead hold it in one of its unused TV studios without any audience participation.

Since the studio chosen to hold the contest had been abandoned by PBS for years, Sammut decided to spend some €1.6 million to refurbish it through public funds and equip it with the latest technology.

PBS refused to provide details when asked by The Shift in a Freedom of Information request for a list of contracts issued, their value and how the beneficiaries were selected.

Minister Owen Bonnici did the same when PN MP Claudette Buttigieg questioned the event in Parliament. He said the information was “commercial sensitive”.

The Shift asked the IDPC to investigate PBS over a breach of the Freedom of Information Act.

Upholding The Shift’s request, the Commissioner said that PBS was obliged, as a public entity, to publish the information.

He ordered the state broadcaster to supply the information requested.

The Commissioner stressed that this wasn’t the first time PBS has tried to argue that it was not obliged to furnish the information as it was a commercial entity.

He quoted two other instances in which the Court rubbished PBS’ arguments and declared that, like any other government entity, the state broadcaster was duty-bound to be accountable and transparent.

Despite the expenditure, PBS was harshly criticised for its “poor and amateurish show production”.

Following last June’s MEP elections, Sammut was shown the door by Prime Minister Robert Abela, even though he was responsible for his appointment.

Sign up to our newsletter

Stay in the know

Get special updates directly in your inbox
Don't worry we do not spam
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
S. Camilleri
S. Camilleri
1 month ago

Why do these public entities find it so hard to be publicly accountable? All the time they have to be dragged by their hair screaming and pounding before they are obliged to do the right thing. They must have plenty of skeletons in their closets.

Paul Pullicino
Paul Pullicino
1 month ago
Reply to  S. Camilleri

I don’t get it. If someone entrusts me with their money and I refuse to account for it, then I am obviously creaming some of it off.

Related Stories

Opinion: ‘We can do business’
Do you get the impression that Labour’s behaving like
Asset declarations: Robert Abela ignores transparency rules followed for 30 years
Prime Minister Robert Abela has further compromised his government’s

Our Awards and Media Partners

Award logo Award logo Award logo