In his review of Malta in 2017, Godfrey Baldacchino referred to Lino Briguglio’s concept of ‘The Singapore Effect’.

A quick Google Scholar search brings up several references to Briguglio’s concept of ‘The Singapore Paradox,’ which he defines as “the possibility that a very vulnerable small country could actually be very successful economically”. I think Baldacchino must have been referring to this when he described Malta’s “labour importing economy and powerful government”. On the other hand, he might have been referring to the Telegraph’s definition of the “The Singapore Effect”, which is the emergence of a spectacularly powerful government, once that government had realised that no one was going to do it any favours.

A small mistake to make, and an academic one, as it were, hardly worth an opinion piece, perhaps.

Baldacchino and his possible error are not my target today; instead, my topic is words, and how they slip in to our discourse, making us believe things that are not true.

When Briguglio speaks of the ‘Singapore Paradox’ he is referring to a phenomenon which seems impossible, or at least, very unlikely, and yet occurs. A paradox is something which cannot be explained, or else is yet to be explained. Malta’s economic success is only a paradox to the extent that we don’t understand it.

Calling something an ‘effect’, on the other hand, suggests that we are out of the realm of mystery and into that of science. An effect must have a cause, and therefore we can, in theory, explain it scientifically or at least, perhaps, in economic and sociological terms.

There is a wealth of difference between calling something a paradox, and calling it an effect. But what does it all have to do with Malta and with Singapore? First or all, have you heard that Malta is like Singapore in some ways? It is a paradox, as Briguglio points out, that Malta does so well economically, when it is so small, and vulnerable to external shocks.

I think Baldacchino might have caught on to another way in which Malta is like Singapore. We have a strong government that seems to think it owes nothing to its international partners. That might have been true in the case of Singapore; I don’t think the Maltese government has such a right to ‘go it alone’, disrespecting international conventions and expectations – not if we want to stay in the EU, anyway. In fact, in Britain, the term ‘Singapore Effect’ is used mostly in relation to Brexit.

Briguglio is an economist, Baldacchino is a sociologist, whereas I like to think of myself as a philosopher. One thing that philosophers are supposed to be able to do is find the right words to describe things, so let me have a go.

What we have in Malta is not a paradox, or an effect, but a fully-formed intention to make Malta more like Singapore. Joseph Muscat has said so since 2014, and neither Simon Busuttil nor Adrian Delia has challenged him explicitly about it, as far as I am aware. Karol Aquilina has told me, however, that the PN is against this idea. Only our Environment Minister, Jose Herrera, has publically spoken out against this (and he’s been to Singapore).

Let me spell that out again. Our PM has declared his intention to make Malta like Singapore.

What does that mean though? We were not told much at the time, except that Malta must become a ‘hub’ of everything. Education was the example chosen then; now we know that it involves much more. We must become a hub for everything – from AUM-style education, to Vitals-style healthcare, a gaming and finance quasi-tax-haven, a hub of construction, certainly, and who knows what else?

Last year we were told a little bit more about what it will involve. Our population must increase dramatically and that will mean more buildings, especially high-rise.

We were told that the population must increase, but we were not told by how much. Instead, our PM chose to focus on our xenophobia, asking us to get over it and accept that we need migrant workers. I am all for bringing in as many migrants as Malta can take, especially if they can have a significantly improved life, escaping poverty or persecution. I’d like to point out, however, that I don’t need anyone to work for me, not yet anyway; perhaps later on I’ll need a nurse or carer.

In any case, how many people are we going to invite here? I think we have a right to know exactly how they intend to transform this country.

I dread to think what we will do about traffic. Incidentally, in Singapore last year it cost up to €30,000 to bid for a Certificate of Entitlement, which will then allow you to take lessons and apply for a driver’s licence, valid for 10 years. After that, you’d have to scrap your car or buy another certificate. All cars have 41 per cent importation tax on them, and you have to pay to use many roads.

I think we have a right to know exactly what Joseph Muscat has in mind when he talks about making Malta like Singapore. By how much will the population increase? What will we do about traffic?

What, exactly, is this Singapore Intention?

In any case, whether Malta turns into Singapore is not a paradox. It is not an effect either – yet. Up to now it is still only an intention, mostly in Joseph Muscat’s mind.