Country before Party: a Matter of Urgency

I think by now it’s beyond dispute that Joseph Muscat’s roadmap was to pander to a particular radical-liberal lobby to secure a robust majority behind which he and his minions could hide to carry out their business deals

Rosianne Cutajar – entrusted with the legalisation of prostitution – indulged in private business with Yorgen Fenech. Johann Buttigieg – entrusted with the laissez-faire attitude in the real estate sector – “did not do any business” with Mr Fenech but was probably willing to. Keith Schembri – catalyst extraordinaire – was discussing different types of business with Mr Fenech. Joseph Muscat himself – who even wanted to campaign for the introduction of abortion – invited Mr Fenech to his birthday party at a delicate moment in Mr Fenech’s life (to put it mildly) because “ten people run the [Maltese] economy” (among whom Mr Fenech).

It’s clear how the triangulation was conceived and executed: the radical-liberals would hand over power to Muscat in exchange for the implementation of their radical agenda (legalisation of prostitution and cannabis-consumption, the introduction of euthanasia and abortion, and who knows what else). At the same time, Muscat and his “people of trust” would make as much hay as the shining sun would allow.

It’s also clear that the radical-liberals have been taken for the ride of the century. I’m sure they must be feeling used and abused. If not, they need to look at the mirror and examine their conscience. Did they really need the diabolical pact with Muscat just to achieve their morally questionable goals? Are sex, drugs, and the killing of the terminally ill and the unwanted unborn such lofty ideals that they justify the utter destruction of Malta’s international reputation? When Malta’s a tiny country that lacks natural resources and depends on ingenuity and an impeccable reputation for its survival…

As this foolish plan unfolded, Robert Abela served as legal advisor to Prime Minister Muscat. Dr Abela has refused to divulge which matters he advised Muscat on even though his role as advisor was a public one. This has raised and keeps raising questions that desperately need an answer: we need to know how much the current Prime Minister knew of the rot that festered under his predecessor’s rule, and how much he advised his predecessor on matters relating to that rot. The nature and extent of this ambiguous relationship might explain why Dr Abela is perceived as the puppet and Muscat as the puppetmaster.

Dr Abela’s weakness of character is now publicly acknowledged. I wonder how members of his Cabinet of Ministers feel about it. Already during the leadership race they had supported his rival, Chris Fearne. Now, they’re probably confirming how spot-on their intuition had been back then: Dr Fearne would have made a better Prime Minister. Party delegates should have listened to Ministers and MPs and backed the Health Minister. Instead, the delegates listened to Muscat and followed his “advice”, unable to work out that Muscat was (quite evidently) tending to his own and his allies’ narrow, personal interests. This wasn’t even a case of putting party before country. Sadly, the delegates put demi-god Muscat before country.

But this is the legacy of Mintoffianism. Dom Mintoff – who led the Labour Party for 35 years from 1949 till 1984 – had a clear vision for the country (keeping Malta non-aligned in return for development aid and investment) and had zero confidence in his supporters’ discernment.

Mr Mintoff himself said it quite openly in the conclusion to his speech in Parliament in 1995 when reacting to a motion tabled to mark his fiftieth year in that august institution. Writing in February 2014, a few months after Mr Mintoff had passed away, Lino Spiteri summed up his attitude: “He was the undisputed leader of the Labour Party, not known for giving space to mere mortals to make him change his mind, let alone on matters of principle.”

Mr Mintoff’s authoritarian paternalism became the “corporate” culture of the Labour Party and Muscat exploited it to the full, remorselessly and with unbridled cynicism.

I can only imagine the frustration the members of the Cabinet are going through right now. Not only are they seeing the government crumbling before their eyes because of all the sordid details emerging from the court hearings in the Daphne Caruana Galizia murder case. They’re also seeing the government crumbling because of Dr Abela’s weakness of character, and the very obvious difficulties that Chris Fearne’s facing in trying to tackle the pandemic crisis mostly due to Dr Abela’s political topsy-turvy.

On top of that, the Cabinet members are seeing Opposition Leader Bernard Grech growing in stature as Dr Grech’s suggestions on how to deal with the pandemic are wiser and more strategically valid and valuable than Dr Abela’s.

My only conclusion’s that a sense of disillusionment and disheartenment must be pervading the Cabinet of Ministers. This can be gleaned from the savage attack on Repubblika, that veritable thorn in the government’s side. The psychological dynamic behind the baseless attack on the NGO is transparent: attacking Repubblika makes up for the loss of self-confidence permeating the Cabinet on account of Dr Abela’s weaknesses.

Disillusionment and disheartenment can also be gleaned from how the talons of confusion have closed on the country’s administration in a vice-like grip. Whereas the financial services sector’s being paralysed and stymied by an overreaction to the mess Muscat threw the country in (an overreaction meant to impress international observers but which might actually backfire), the real estate sector’s running amok, with a senseless scramble to build build build and glut the market. The overdevelopment will soon kill the golden-eggs goose – tourism – as the country’s charm gets eroded when the waves of the foolish quest to replace quaint buildings with soulless blocks of ugly apartments crash against it.

For fairness’ sake, it’s not that all that Robert Abela’s done is wrong. For instance, he was absolutely right to assign to that useless and utterly incompetent Owen Bonnici a dead-end ministry comprised of departments that should form part of a larger ministry. But one insightful decision does not a good Prime Minister make. The one-off decision to put Dr Bonnici where he truly belongs doesn’t mean that Robert Abela knows what he’s doing overall.

The government is sailing in rough seas and facing rogue waves, and its helmsman’s feeling dizzy. This is felt not only by the Cabinet of Ministers and observers like yours truly but also by somebody like Desmond Zammit Marmarà.

I like Mr Zammit Marmarà. He gives me the impression he’s the honest type of chap, one who calls a spade a spade and who, unlike others in the Labour Party, puts country before party.

Writing elsewhere, Mr Zammit Marmarà opined (my translation):

“Today many Labourites of principle, who worked hard and made sacrifices for the Labour Party […], are furious when they read in the newspapers that people occupying positions of power had close and secret links with businessmen and even did their best to line their pockets.

“There’s also the environment issue. […] Many Maltese, including many Labourites, are fed up hearing of controversial permits being issued by the Planning Authority even, at times, when residents and Local Councils oppose them. Many Labourites cannot understand how a supposedly left-wing party like Labour can end up becoming one with businessmen. This is a government which prioritises certain powerful lobbies at the expense of the rest of the population. Just consider the Malta Developers Association as an example!

“Then there’s the pandemic problem. Many feel the Prime Minister is putting the economy before the people’s health. He’s hurting people when he’s boastful as people consider such tone out of place given how many have died and got infected.

“The Prime Minister needs to convince the people that he’ll cut the Labour Party loose from businessmen. He needs to stop defending people in power who are caught entertaining unethical links with businessmen. He needs seriously to protect the environment: no more saying one thing and then doing the opposite. And with regard to the pandemic, yes he needs to take decisions that safeguard jobs and Malta’s economy but he also needs to take tough and unpopular decisions if public health so dictates.”

Well, Mr Zammit Marmarà, that’s a tall order, and, objectively speaking, veteran journalist Renu Bugeja was probably right when, during the leadership race, he rhetorically asked Dr Abela if he wasn’t too young for the job.

Mr Zammit Marmarà: country before party! It’s crystal clear from what you’re saying that the country needs a change of administration. Do the patriotic thing: do your part to bring about that change!

In the meantime, the current situation no longer necessitates resignations, but arrests. The rot is far too deep. We’re risking losing everything. Malta has become the reputational soft underbelly of Europe. Again: country before party!

Police Commissioner Michael Cassar resigned when his office received an FIAU report on Keith Schembri. He should have arrested the man, not resign. Now we need strong personalities to arrest office-holders (present or past) who are utterly destroying our country’s reputation.

This is fast becoming a matter of life and death for the country.

Tourism planning in Malta and Gozo has always been a “topdown” process; in 1925 when the Malta Tourism Committee was first set up in April by the official decree of the Senate, this was a decision taken by politicians and a few well-chosen businessmen (yes, the gender specification was rampant at this age). After the Second World War, the Tourism Bureau took over the management of tourism as an economic industry and this was again controlled by the colonial government. In 1958, it was another colonial government (civil government was suspended following the protests and turmoil following the integration question when the Malta Labour Party took the streets with antiBritish skirmishes) that set up the Malta Government Tourism Board (MGTB). This was the start of the new tourism industry focusing on the summer holiday rather than the winter break of the pre war era.

The MGTB together with the new civil government of 1963, led by the Nationalist Party commissioned the Italconsult report through the United Nations. This could be said to be the first 10year plan based on sustainability (some 30 years before the Bruntland Commission) and planning. The Italconsult report helped develop the new Malta in terms of better accommodation, new investments such as Hilton and Sheraton; the aids to the Industry scheme and the new infrastructure including the “regional road” network and the “building boom”.

Tourism was growing between 1967 and 1977 but the growth was not proportionate to the resources available nor was it in line with the carrying capacity. A Labour government in 1971 proposed and implemented the

“mass markets” based on tour operators and back-to-back bookings. The island was heading for disaster − Bugibba and Qawra had become tourist ghettoes or enclaves filled with substandard accommodation and tacky restaurants and bars; tourists came here because of two factors, price and availability, and irrespective of Malta’s cultural and historical attractiveness.

After 1987 the tourism bubble burst and we suffered from serious issues of waste management, energy distribution, water shortages and a wrecked infrastructure. The new government in 1987 led by the Nationalist Party embarked on a strategy of investment in waste management processes, energy power stations, water reverse osmosis plants and infrastructural planning. Once again we started to experience development plans and the first National Tourism Plan of 2007 (a five-year plan based on sustainable growth and development); this was followed by another plan in 2012 (although the 2007 plan lacked a complete implementation plan since there was no clear communication of the plan with internal and external stakeholders). The new government led by the Labour Party in 2013 decided on a new plan for tourism (although the 2012 plan was still in session) and this highlighted the problem with planning – a shortterm action led by politicians and businesspersons who were only interested in satisfying their own ego.

At last we may have the beginning of a medium- to long-term strategy but it seems the document must still be orchestrated by the politician and the businessperson. Somehow we must persuade these people that the integrated approach involving all key stakeholders including the local community can work better.

Next time I will continue my analysis by taking a look at the follow-up to the last strategy of 2015 and the present situation with Covid. I will ask the obvious question. When will it be safe and responsible to reopen tourism and how? I invite all readers to download this strategy and follow the analysis with me, comment and let us work together on achieving a real integrated tourism policy – after all we all deserve a sustainable, responsible and better quality of tourism for these islands and we are one of the key stakeholders in this activity.

Dr Julian Zarb is a researcher, local tourism planning consultant and a visiting senior lecturer at the University of Malta. He has also been appointed as an expert for the High Streets Task Force in the UK. His main area of research is community-based tourism and local tourism planning using the integrated approach.