Last week I had occasion to attend a most interesting meeting held by the Madeira Chamber of Commerce, ACIF, at the City Hall: an event where local businessmen would have the opportunity to meet with and brief a group of EuroMPs of the Commission of Transport and Tourism, among whom were Nuno Teixeira, João Ferreira (Communist Party), Mathieu Grosch, EPP, Belgium and Zita Gourmai, Socialists, Hungary.
Towards the end of the meeting, I briefed the MEPs on the ports monopoly (in English so as not to tire the translators): that we are dependent on the ports for 80% of what we consume; that they are one of the most expensive ports in Europe, thanks to the Sousa monopoly; that the government receives not a cent from this operation and that despite Government claims to the contrary, the ports operation was a de facto monopoly.
Step forward Duarte Rodrigues, former President of the ACiF in the defense of the Sousa group, saying that there was no monopoly, that the Ports operations were open to any company that wished to license itself…
"I was the former ports director and I resigned due to the way the Port restructuring was carried out", said the next speaker, Menezes Vasconcellos. "We ended up with a single operator and the most expensive port in the country. I was so disgusted that I brought over a large firm from the mainland to compete in the Madeira ports, but after five years of trying to get a license it became obvious that it was simply not possible!"
Up spoke the President of ACIF, Cristina Pedra, to say that none of this was at all true and that the only problem was the smallness of the market which left no margin for a second operator and tended to put off any newcomers. ..
She neglected to inform those present that according to the police investigation, her family has (or had) a stake in the Ports monopoly through and Offshore company; that her father was the trade union representative and administrator at the company that supplied the labour for the Ports operation, of which the Sousas were also shareholders; that a whole series of family companies were suppliers to this same company, and so on and so forth...
quinta-feira, 3 de abril de 2014
The Ports Monopoly Discussed in Parliament
The Socialist Party proposal for getting rid of the Sousa Group ports monopoly was discussed in Parliament yesterday but its discussion was put off by Jardim's party.
According to the CDS, the Sousas have been operating on a temporary license for nineteen years. All parties were against the fact the Sousas pay the Government, and therefore the region, NOTHING in return for the use of the license to operate using the ports facilities and infra-structure. This while practicing some of the highest prices in Europe, if not in the world.
Even the PSD, in the person of Jaime Filipe Ramos, who sits two chairs away from his daddy, the party's parliamentary leader, recognized that the current arrangement must be changed and that an alternative is being drafted by the Government. By whom and for when we do not know, but it was more than obvious that this news had a nauseating effect on Miguel de Sousa, whose face dropped to the floor.
Miguel de Sousa, a PSD backbencher is cousin of the Ports Monopoly Sousas, and also Jardim's latest challenger. Sousa is a more discreet and sophisticated operator than the Ramos clan, and those connected to him have been very nicely rewarded. Apart from his cousins who secured the Ports Monopoly, Sousa was also instrumental in setting up the 30 year concession for the running of the Madeira 'offshore' which was secured by the Pestana Group (again without public tender,)…of whom he is a business partner.
Since the construction sector, which was the main dominion of the Ramos family, has dried up, they now look on the ever-flourishing Sousa family with a distinctly less benevolent eye.
According to the CDS, the Sousas have been operating on a temporary license for nineteen years. All parties were against the fact the Sousas pay the Government, and therefore the region, NOTHING in return for the use of the license to operate using the ports facilities and infra-structure. This while practicing some of the highest prices in Europe, if not in the world.
Even the PSD, in the person of Jaime Filipe Ramos, who sits two chairs away from his daddy, the party's parliamentary leader, recognized that the current arrangement must be changed and that an alternative is being drafted by the Government. By whom and for when we do not know, but it was more than obvious that this news had a nauseating effect on Miguel de Sousa, whose face dropped to the floor.
Miguel de Sousa, a PSD backbencher is cousin of the Ports Monopoly Sousas, and also Jardim's latest challenger. Sousa is a more discreet and sophisticated operator than the Ramos clan, and those connected to him have been very nicely rewarded. Apart from his cousins who secured the Ports Monopoly, Sousa was also instrumental in setting up the 30 year concession for the running of the Madeira 'offshore' which was secured by the Pestana Group (again without public tender,)…of whom he is a business partner.
Since the construction sector, which was the main dominion of the Ramos family, has dried up, they now look on the ever-flourishing Sousa family with a distinctly less benevolent eye.
The Lifting of Immunity for Members of the Government accused of crime voted for the 1st time in Madeira
The lifting of the immunity from prosecution of members of the Government was voted for the first time in the Madeiran Parliament - but with a curious twist!
Hitherto, the Chair of the Parliament merely read the correspondence among which would figure letters from members of the Government requesting the non-lifting of their immunity from prosecution, and these, it seemed, often went unnoticed among the chit-chat of the MPs.
The New Democracy Party (PND), however, has long been trying to get the Public Prosecutor's requests voted, as already happens for the MPs themselves - but only after the newspapers (Garajau among them) exposed the MPs abuse of Parliamentary Immunity.
The New Democracy MPs (I am currently replacing Helder Spinola) have been challenging the Chair's procedure every time one of these cases crops up - which is remarkably frequent.
At the end of last year, in response to Helder's challenges, the Chair called for a legal written advice from a top constitutionalist, which duly materialized but was nevermore mentioned. I requested a copy and discovered why. The advice stated unequivocally that the authorization for the lifting or not of parliamentary immunity HAD to be voted.
Yesterday, for the first time, and giving the due credit to the PND, the Chair put no less than three requests for the lifting of immunity of government to the vote. To my great surprise, the two major opposition parties, the Christian Democrats and the Socialists voted AGAINST the lifting of parliamentary immunity.
Those who so often denounce corruption and denounce the inefficiency of the justice system are PROTECTING government members whenever the justice system does act! They complain, for example, of election fraud, but they are accomplices in protecting Jardim from prosecution in two separate cases brought against him for violating the election law.
Hitherto, the Chair of the Parliament merely read the correspondence among which would figure letters from members of the Government requesting the non-lifting of their immunity from prosecution, and these, it seemed, often went unnoticed among the chit-chat of the MPs.
The New Democracy Party (PND), however, has long been trying to get the Public Prosecutor's requests voted, as already happens for the MPs themselves - but only after the newspapers (Garajau among them) exposed the MPs abuse of Parliamentary Immunity.
The New Democracy MPs (I am currently replacing Helder Spinola) have been challenging the Chair's procedure every time one of these cases crops up - which is remarkably frequent.
At the end of last year, in response to Helder's challenges, the Chair called for a legal written advice from a top constitutionalist, which duly materialized but was nevermore mentioned. I requested a copy and discovered why. The advice stated unequivocally that the authorization for the lifting or not of parliamentary immunity HAD to be voted.
Yesterday, for the first time, and giving the due credit to the PND, the Chair put no less than three requests for the lifting of immunity of government to the vote. To my great surprise, the two major opposition parties, the Christian Democrats and the Socialists voted AGAINST the lifting of parliamentary immunity.
Those who so often denounce corruption and denounce the inefficiency of the justice system are PROTECTING government members whenever the justice system does act! They complain, for example, of election fraud, but they are accomplices in protecting Jardim from prosecution in two separate cases brought against him for violating the election law.
domingo, 23 de março de 2014
Jornal publishes PSD results before they occurred!
The Jornal yesterday published the results of the PSD Regional Council meeting before they were actually voted. Albuquerque's motion to anticipate the party leadership elections was reported to have been voted down before the actual voting took place. The PSD militants greeted this act with shock and surprise, but to those in opposition it's no surprise. Jardim has always been obnoxious about flouting all rules and laws.
Even more amazing is that the Jornal refused to publish two pages of paid publicity: Jardim's latest rival, Miguel de Sousa's political program. This is a government-owned newspaper, which receives four million Euro per year to cover its losses, mismanagement and so on… and which refuses paid publicity. Let it be said that the PSD's (i.e. Jardim's) programs are always published for free in this newspaper and sometimes they run to a dozen pages spread over several issues. The opposition's programs are naturally boycotted and obviously they do not want to support the dictator paper with publicity. For the Jornal to refuse publicity from a PSD candidate really shows the depths to which the regime has sunk.
Of course, the person who is really morally responsible for this state of affairs- THE ONLY ONE - is the bishop of Funchal, D. António Carrilho, for the newspaper's editorial statutes confer him the power to designate the executive editor and to orient the paper's editorial line. The bishop both refuses to take on his duties and refuses to resign from them: He acknowledges that he gives Jardim full power to do as he pleases with the paper, but insists on remaining his alibi: that the editorial power lies not in the hand of the Government but of the CHURCH.
Madeira is a real case study into how democracy can be totally subverted.
Even more amazing is that the Jornal refused to publish two pages of paid publicity: Jardim's latest rival, Miguel de Sousa's political program. This is a government-owned newspaper, which receives four million Euro per year to cover its losses, mismanagement and so on… and which refuses paid publicity. Let it be said that the PSD's (i.e. Jardim's) programs are always published for free in this newspaper and sometimes they run to a dozen pages spread over several issues. The opposition's programs are naturally boycotted and obviously they do not want to support the dictator paper with publicity. For the Jornal to refuse publicity from a PSD candidate really shows the depths to which the regime has sunk.
Of course, the person who is really morally responsible for this state of affairs- THE ONLY ONE - is the bishop of Funchal, D. António Carrilho, for the newspaper's editorial statutes confer him the power to designate the executive editor and to orient the paper's editorial line. The bishop both refuses to take on his duties and refuses to resign from them: He acknowledges that he gives Jardim full power to do as he pleases with the paper, but insists on remaining his alibi: that the editorial power lies not in the hand of the Government but of the CHURCH.
Madeira is a real case study into how democracy can be totally subverted.
Quinta do Lorde Saga
The storm over middle eastern investors pulling out of the mega-investment, Quinta do Lorde, is abating.
The Quinta do Lorde resort is a huge resort built in a Natura 2000 nature reserve, according to legislation adopted by EU governments in 1992 to protect the most seriously threatened habitats.
The land was originally site of a house built by Lord Shrewsbury, but which he never got to inhabit. After years of disinterest, and with very limited development possibilities it was bought by Ricardo Sousa, for next to nothing. But, as usual, once it belonged to the 'right' people all restrictions melted; the sky was the limit.
However, as usual, the plans were contested by environmental NGOs and activists. In 2008, Gil Canha, (now recently elected city councilor to Funchal), presented a denunciation to the Public Prosecutor's Office. A year later, when nothing had happened he put in an injunction against the development. The judge, despite admitting there were indications of illegality, determined not to defer the injunction because of the economic consequences the promoters of the project would suffer. The main case was duly filed but only recently registered.
In the meantime, the project had run into financial difficulties and ground to a halt several times. The banks sought for new investors and eventually found a consortium of middle eastern investors who duly began to pour in much needed money. However, they were apparently never informed of the pending court case and of its consequences - in Spain the Marina Isla de Valdecañas resort, also built in a Rede Natura 2000 reserve was ordered demolished by the Supreme Court.
Contacted by the consortium, Gil Canha showed willingness to drop the case (Portuguese Justice is no match for Spanish justice and the effects of demolishing the project could not undo the damage) in return for the fulfillment of some environmental demands, such as public access tot the beachfront - but nothing doing until the Sousas stopped persecuting him and others (including myself) through court cases.
The Sousas then orchestrated several workers demonstrations in front of Funchal City Hall calling for Canha to step down for causing the loss of their jobs. Their actions failed to carry public opinion.
The Sousa Group are incidentally shareholders of the company contracted by the previous executive of Funchal City to draw up its new city plan and regulations!
The Quinta do Lorde resort is a huge resort built in a Natura 2000 nature reserve, according to legislation adopted by EU governments in 1992 to protect the most seriously threatened habitats.
The land was originally site of a house built by Lord Shrewsbury, but which he never got to inhabit. After years of disinterest, and with very limited development possibilities it was bought by Ricardo Sousa, for next to nothing. But, as usual, once it belonged to the 'right' people all restrictions melted; the sky was the limit.
However, as usual, the plans were contested by environmental NGOs and activists. In 2008, Gil Canha, (now recently elected city councilor to Funchal), presented a denunciation to the Public Prosecutor's Office. A year later, when nothing had happened he put in an injunction against the development. The judge, despite admitting there were indications of illegality, determined not to defer the injunction because of the economic consequences the promoters of the project would suffer. The main case was duly filed but only recently registered.
In the meantime, the project had run into financial difficulties and ground to a halt several times. The banks sought for new investors and eventually found a consortium of middle eastern investors who duly began to pour in much needed money. However, they were apparently never informed of the pending court case and of its consequences - in Spain the Marina Isla de Valdecañas resort, also built in a Rede Natura 2000 reserve was ordered demolished by the Supreme Court.
Contacted by the consortium, Gil Canha showed willingness to drop the case (Portuguese Justice is no match for Spanish justice and the effects of demolishing the project could not undo the damage) in return for the fulfillment of some environmental demands, such as public access tot the beachfront - but nothing doing until the Sousas stopped persecuting him and others (including myself) through court cases.
The Sousas then orchestrated several workers demonstrations in front of Funchal City Hall calling for Canha to step down for causing the loss of their jobs. Their actions failed to carry public opinion.
The Sousa Group are incidentally shareholders of the company contracted by the previous executive of Funchal City to draw up its new city plan and regulations!
'Face Oculta' corruption Trial may be subject to retrial
The defense in the Face Oculta Trial is appealing for a retrial, leading to the annulment of 180 hearings. As always in Portugal, what is at stake is never the content of the accusations but the formalities of Portuguese justice. In this case the trial may fall because the defense argued that thirty days have elapsed since the last production of evidence. In fact, in the last hearing, a series of photographs were added to the evidence, but the defense argue this is not production of evidence and therefore the whole trial should go to pot. Once again, the only thing that seems to function in Portuguese justice is the 'prazos': deadlines.
The defense will argue that the accusations be dropped due to the ex-president of the Supreme Court destroying the tapes of the phone taps made on conversations between the ex-prime minister Socrates and Armando Vara, claiming that hypothetical evidence in the tapes could absolve the accused. No little irony.
Source: Expresso
sexta-feira, 21 de março de 2014
Case against former head of Millenium Bank prescribes
The court case against Jardim Gonçalves, former head of the Millenium Bank has prescribed, amidst mutual accusations between the Bank of Portugal and the Justice system.
The Bank of Portugal blames the judge for allowing the process to prescribe. The case was subject to 35 hearings, at the end of which, after hearing the testimony of the whistleblower, the judge decided that the denunciations were nul. The Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court determined otherwise, but the delay caused, of over two and half years, led to the case prescribing.
The Superior Magistrates Council riposted that the Bank of Portugal had taken five years to formulate their accusation, a factor which contributed greatly to the crimes prescribing. Portuguese justice at its best!
Moral of the story: the only thing that works in Portuguese Justice are the famous 'prazos': time limits.
The Bank of Portugal blames the judge for allowing the process to prescribe. The case was subject to 35 hearings, at the end of which, after hearing the testimony of the whistleblower, the judge decided that the denunciations were nul. The Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court determined otherwise, but the delay caused, of over two and half years, led to the case prescribing.
The Superior Magistrates Council riposted that the Bank of Portugal had taken five years to formulate their accusation, a factor which contributed greatly to the crimes prescribing. Portuguese justice at its best!
Moral of the story: the only thing that works in Portuguese Justice are the famous 'prazos': time limits.
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)