John G. Borg Bartolo’s article PBS: The unending symphony has inspired what will be my last, halting and baffled attempt to write about Public Broadcasting in Malta.

A quarter of a century ago I began a doomed love affair with Xandir Malta (and then PBS) in the role of advisor, television consultant to several chief executives and, later, contributor and – often, off the record – respondent to requests for assistance. Except on one occasion, all my advice and costs were given free – by the BBC.

Reports were written, analyses completed, long (unminuted) conversations ensued. Government ministers were lobbied (some responded well, others patronisingly). The reasons for this regular activity had nothing to do with a prolonged ego trip (why bother with television in Malta when you were employed by the biggest broadcasting organisation of all and dealing on a daily basis with international stations?) but, simply, because contacts with Malta (and a house in Gozo) and love for the Maltese had been there for many years. So, one persisted.

But J.G. Borg Bartolo relates, most coherently, the story of some of the bureaucracy that has been the death knell of PBS (and, I suspect other elements of the Maltese state) over the last years ...

‘Reports’ – when in doubt, in my experience, call for a report – that buys you time. ‘Task Forces’ – that does the same – and ensures a multiplicity of reports and even more time. (Very good for the egos of the members of the task force, too.)

‘Studies’ – the same as above. They cost money. ‘Business experts’ (excellent at bean counting and always with one eye on the Finance Ministry) able to produce putative figures based on concepts of supply and demand and an assessment of the licence fee and other revenues … And so on. (PBS is not alone in this. A few years ago a BBC director general went into similar mode. The corporation shuddered – and is still recovering. The former director general is now a senior government advisor …)

In all this, programmes and who they are for and those who try and make their living by making them, are forgotten. The authorities (in Malta’s case the government of the day) kick up a terrible, holier-than-thou stink, if the programmes do not fit their agenda. The opposition, predictably, brays.

Objective programme making? Forget it, unless you have been able to develop a broadcasting system that is free of interference but which adheres to principles of freedom of speech and political balance accepted by all. There are laws of libel, after all – although, dare I say it? The Maltese people (politicians particularly) are not very robust when it comes to being criticised.

But, I wander. The problems at PBS over the last many years have been, frankly, caused by the well-accepted Maltese capacity for shooting itself in the foot.

When I first visited Xandir I was surprised at being introduced to a religious gentleman in a well-worn habit who told me that he was the ‘censor’ who had to look at ‘naughty programmes’. He chuckled at some he told me that he had ‘cut’. Good … but … An engaging man, but could he really assess the wishes of a nation?

There followed, over the next few years, so many indications of what was going wrong.

Governmental interference – both tacit and implicit. Union intransigence – even worse.

Equipment not properly used, safety regulations (generally one of the great props of the union argument) blatantly ignored. Union refusal to work out of hours. (I remember viewing an imaginative attempt at a locally-made television drama which involved a night-scene. No night work by the union-controlled staff. So the programme makers lit the scene with cars’ headlamps …)

But, here is the crunch. In my opinion, and I do not speak Maltese, one cannot assess the real content (save technically) of Maltese programmes. The truth is that so many staff have been/were appointed to their jobs when they were not properly qualified. That shines (or glooms) through in so many programmes. Political/union interference again, I suspect. Freelance programme makers are very competent and particularly loyal but have in some cases not been paid for six months. Why?

In a country so self-sayingly sophisticated (and now part of the EU) as Malta? And so it goes on. The shambles that have been allowed to develop in PBS are, without doubt, a major, political failing.

A quite absurd dereliction of political duty, disguised as the failures of others. You need/accept a Public Broadcasting Service because it is right for a democratised country.

It is then the government’s responsibility to ensure that it works and that the right people of talent and quality are appointed. No good blaming the middle-people, the executives appointed to try and walk the tightrope of governmental and union whims, disguised as public service.

In this respect, the Maltese people are also to blame, because their voices have rarely been heard, so deafened have they been by the raucous noise of the two party system.

John Borg Bartolo quotes Michael Grade, the BBC chairman ... “to be credible in building public values, they have to keep broadcasting honest, they have to be honest with themselves and about themselves” ... How right!

Gordon Croton was a radio and television producer with the BBC. He became the Head of BBC Television Training and International Consultant on Programming.