The blame game being played by political parties, unions and the public at large over the dire state of affairs at the national airline needs to be put on the backburner, at least for the time being.
We do not mean to imply there should not be a full investigation into how what was a source of national pride when it first took to the skies is quickly degenerating into another Drydocks debacle. That is a step that most definitely needs to be taken.
But, first and foremost, all stakeholders need to stop the pointing of fingers, there will be plenty of time for that in the future, and get down to the brass tacks of determining the way forward for Air Malta. The blame game simply obfuscates and complicates the exercise at hand, and in the process risks derailing the vital discussions under way.
No, the employees are certainly not to blame, but their sheer numbers are undoubtedly accountable for the sorry financial state of the airline. Any future investigation into the rot will need to ascertain how exactly the staff levels have been unnecessarily bloated to the extent that they have been over the years.
Other issues, such as the colossal failure that was Azzura Air, and of course the dubious RJs contract, will also need to be exhumed and a proper post mortem carried out on both counts. Accountability for such decisions will also need to be taken. And while these decisions undoubtedly contributed handsomely to the airline’s rot, they are not the sole culprits.
Those advocating against any job shedding at the airline would do well to reconsider their stance, stop pulling the wool over the public eye and concede that at least some jobs will need to be cut. Only then can real discussions on the airline’s future begin.
Perhaps more importantly than trimming the employment numbers at the airline, there also has to be a realignment of the way the airline operates. Air Malta desperately needs to be run along commercial lines and it can no longer be used more as a tool for the tourism trade than being run along the lines of a commercially viable operation.
The exercise will also require a good, long and hard look at the possibility of bringing in an outside party to participate in the airline, either directly or indirectly.
Against this backdrop, the government is walking a very fine political tightrope. The issue is so heavily politicised that the government will be damned if it restructures – since that would undoubtedly require the taking of some very controversial decisions – and damned if it doesn’t – since a failure to act, and act quickly, could very well mean the downfall of the airline, and the possibility of the loss of far more jobs than could be contemplated through even the most painful of restructuring exercises.
As Noel Grima aptly noted in Ghasafar tac-Comb (Lead Birds) in last week’s issue, the Drydocks could have been kept in state hands with the workforce that Palumbo employs now. That, however, was a political impossibility, just as it appears to be with Air Malta, given the current tone being adopted by some stakeholders.
He likened the situation to a seriously ill patient who is told by a doctor that major surgery is required, but the patient leaves the office and tries to console himself with palliatives. He later finds himself becoming progressively more ill until he finally relents and agrees to surgery, but by then it is too late.
The analogy is spot on and there is no doubt that some very painful decisions are in the pipeline – painful for the employees and painful too on a political level.
Former Air Malta chairman and current European parliamentarian Louis Grech has written to the European Commission’s Vice-President, imploring him to reconsider the Commission’s thumbs down to Malta’s request for a straight-out cash injection. He also quite rightly raises the national importance of the airline to Malta.
But instead of direct state aid, the Commission would prefer an aid and restructuring package. In making such assessments, the Commission needs to look at the company under consideration in terms of a private enterprise. The question it asks is whether a private investor would seriously consider the cash injection being requested, in this case €100 million. The answer in the case of Air Malta was a definite ‘no’.
But with the airline being the national asset that it is, as the government keeps saying, it needs to remain a national asset and to operate in the national interest and in the national interest alone. But what that national good is is another matter altogether. And it is certainly not in the national interest to continue subsidising an airline with millions of euros to simply keep it aloft.
More, much more than that very clearly needs to be done.