The latest differences between the ministry responsible for transport and bus drivers seems to have been shelved, for now, but the way the two sides attacked each other in the preceding days shows that the conflict is far from being over, and that more fireworks should be expected in the weeks and months to come.
For one thing, the public at large is still unsure as to whether the bus drivers threatened to hold another strike, or whether this was just a way for the ministry to attract public support in the issue.
The Infrastructure, Transport and Communications Ministry, on the one hand, repeatedly said in statements that it regularly issued at the height of the problem that the Public Transport Association was prepared to go on strike unless its demands were met. On the other hand, the PTA said that it never intended to call a strike.
The reasons behind the dispute are still unclear too. The ministry has said that the PTA wanted to be paid the subsidies due for the days when bus drivers were on strike, an absurd request considering that, if true, the drivers wanted to be paid for days they did not operate the service (apart from the disruptions they created through their action).
Yet the PTA insisted that it had accepted that subsidies for last July’s strike cannot be paid, saying that all it wanted was that the rest of the money it was owed to be passed on to bus drivers. The PTA said that this payment was normally made in the first two weeks of January, but this never came about this year.
Whatever the reasons, and whoever is saying the truth, it is clear that we are heading towards even bigger problems when the public transport reform sees the light of day. If the two sides cannot agree on whether or not there was a threat of a strike, or if the PTA really asked for its dues for the four-day-stoppage last July or not, then one wonders what confrontation there will be when the government starts implementing its plans for a major overhaul in the public transport sector.
We already got a taste of this last summer, when all sectors of the public transport system went on strike after the government announced plans to liberalise the hearses market. The issue was resolved when an agreement was reached with hearses operators, but the wounds have remained open ever since.
When, last December, the details of the reform were made public during a conference, the bus drivers already made their intentions clear by vociferously opposing the plans that were being announced. And therefore one expects that these complaints will grow once the plans start to be put in place.
Still, the government knows that it has the full public support when it speaks about a need to reform public transport. The several attempts that were made in the past led to some cosmetic changes but the bulk of the problems remained there – sub-standard buses, inefficient services and drivers who, to say the least, should behave better with their clients than they do.
The bus drivers claim that the ticket prices are the cheapest in the whole of the European Union, but then it can also be claimed that the service they offer is (among) the poorest in the EU too.
It must be remembered that many tourists make use of public transport when they are here. Many would have travelled to other countries and can easily make comparisons. Maltese people who have been abroad know about the efficiency of the public transport services offered in most European countries too.
And this is why the reform is needed. Malta cannot boast of being a five-star destination when its public transport is far below that level.