Resignations are not a common occurrence in Malta and when someone does, it always creates controversy.

Very often, people who resign from important posts do not give the real reasons they are doing so to the media. Official statements informing the public of their resignation state personal reasons, and little, if anything, reaches the public. Of course, some resignations really take place because of personal issues, but others do go beyond that.

So, when last Monday, Sea Malta chairman Marlene Mizzi chose to give the press a copy of the letter she sent to Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi in which she tendered her resignation, the public came to know the full details which led her to take such a decision. In turn, the public was also informed what the Prime Minister told her in his reply.

Both can be described as hard-hitting letters. Among other things, Mrs Mizzi accused the government of neglecting the company to pave the way for the privatisation process, saying it was evident that the government’s intentions were to dismantle an entity that was of strategic importance to the country.

Dr Gonzi acknowledged the company’s importance, but he did not share the view that the maritime links could only be assured through “a loss-making Sea Malta”. The government had not abandoned Sea Malta, he added, but would not take the easy way out by continuing to subsidise the company through public funds. The best way, in this case, was to privatise the company, he reiterated.

One question that arises from all this is why Mrs Mizzi chose to resign at this point in time, right in the middle of negotiations the government is holding with an Italian shipping line for the sale of its shares. The direction the government is taking with regard to Sea Malta has been known for quite some time and, if Mrs Mizzi was against such a move – an opinion she is entitled to – one believes that she should have taken the decision to resign a long time ago.

She justifies this by saying she had often thought about resigning but held to her post due to the respect she has for the company’s employees. We are in no doubt that this is true but, again, why choose to resign now, less than a week after a memorandum of understanding was signed with Atlantica Spa di Navigazione?

In last Friday’s editorial, The Malta Independent explained why, given the present circumstances, the best option the government has is to privatise Sea Malta. For one thing, the sale of Sea Malta would allow the buyer to invest to improve the services offered and the company’s efficiency.

Tuesday’s announcement that Lm17 million will be invested in Malta Freeport within one year of the concession given by the government to CMA-CGM is a clear example of what private investors can do. One would hope that the same thing will happen at Sea Malta once the transaction is concluded.

There are other bones of contention on the Sea Malta issue. Opposition leader Alfred Sant has criticised the proceedings right from the start, insisting that Sea Malta should not be privatised. He has now called for an independent inquiry, saying that at this stage it is better to have this rather than take the matter before the Public Accounts Committee. The issue can be brought before the PAC once this inquiry is concluded, he said.

The government’s reply was to call on Dr Sant to say all he knows, and questioned Dr Sant’s idea of an independent inquiry rather than a direct approach to the PAC.

It is clear that the Sea Malta saga will not finish here.

One thing is sure however. The arguments in favour of Sea Malta’s privatisation are much stronger than the arguments put forward to keep the status quo.