In the world of business, the confidentiality clause attached to negotiations, contracts and other dealings is one of the most sacrosanct. But, conversely, transparency and openness is, or at least should be, the name of the game in the public sector.
Those two worlds are now at loggerheads at Air Malta within the context of participation in the steering committee tasked with drafting a restructuring plan to keep the beleaguered airline in the air.
On the one hand, we have a government-owned corporation, one that employs a great number of people and which is an important national asset the country cannot afford, on so many levels, to lose.
On the other hand, we have a company that needs to drastically reinvent itself in order to cope with scores of questionable past decisions, and increasingly cut-throat competition in a continually more competitive sector that has been hard hit by the recent recession and persistently high fuel prices.
There are numerous reasons for a confidentiality clause with respect to the Air Malta discussions: their sheer sensitivity, the commercial interests involved, the prospective entry of a third party and the airline’s suppliers, who can easily develop cases of itchy feet should certain details of what is being discussed emerge.
We, however, have an Opposition that wants more information on the process, and although it has pledged to not reveal commercially-sensitive information, it does not want to be bound by a confidentiality agreement.
The restructuring plan itself will have to be approved by the European Commission by 15 May, and such approval is required, as the €52 million emergency loan facility temporarily approved by the Commission is conditional on the plan’s viability.
The Commission will not be factoring in past mistakes in the airline’s running, nor will the social implications resulting from the plan’s implementation be paramount. Instead, the Commission will undertake a cold, hard assessment of whether a sensible private enterprise would make such an investment, or, in this case, a loan to the struggling company.
Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat yesterday made some very valid observations on shortcomings in the restructuring plan and such ideas, we are certain, are welcome.
But, if the Opposition wants to be brought fully on board, it must do more than merely vouch that it will respect the confidentiality of commercially sensitive information. It must give the best assurance that it can give: it should sign on the dotted line.
There is a lot at stake here, and if the Opposition wants to give its utmost to the process, it should act in the best possible national interest by working hand in hand with the government toward that end, instead of voicing its discontent from the sidelines.