Halfway through the Presidency

We are now near the halfway mark of the Maltese Presidency of the EU Council, the first time ever that Malta held this post. So far, it would seem that Malta has done well. There have not been, to our knowledge, any claims of mishandling of our responsibilities. On the contrary, there have been instances of praise heaped on Malta, most notably by Jean-Claude Juncker in Malta. This does not mean that the Maltese Presidency has been spectacular so far. The presidency, we now understand, moves with the speed of the countless meetings held and the insistence on unanimity slows down the procedure. It has come as a surprise to learn, and that not from any government press release, that Malta has just signed off the first legislative amendment of its presidency through Ian Borg and EP President Tajani. The work of the presidency is mostly that of a mediator, rather than that of a proponent of legislation or initiator of legislative documents. There is an opportunity for a country holding the presidency to come up with ideas and initiatives, these are mostly sidelined while the member states get on with their own agenda. So any ambition of a dramatic surge of legislation and initiatives quickly gets sucked in the complex negotiations between Parliament and Commission. Malta must prepare for the end of the Presidency and see what it will be remembered for. (Not that we remember any previous presidency, for that matter). The main danger, as we see it, is that come June not one Maltese will be found to describe in two words what Malta’s successes were during the presidency. For those who have been active in EU institutions and the Maltese Presidency offices during the six months, this will no doubt have been a very useful time in which they got to know at close quarters how the EU functions. Since we are living in quite dramatic and historic times, this is an opportunity to see how the EU is responding to the manifold crises it now has on its plate – the enduring economic crisis, President Trump and his protectionism, and Brexit.

In conclusion, it is sad to note that while Malta was doing its best during the presidency, the actions of key members of the government, most notably Minister Konrad Mizzi and his Panama account, and many other cases of sleaze, have been bringing Malta’s name down. The more Malta’s name shone, the more the damage by these members of government has blackened Malta’s name.