Since the 1950s, the Marxist term has been associated with Joseph Schumpeter who, in his book Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, describes innovation as that process that incessantly revolutionises the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.
This applies to all forms of life and not just the economy. It certainly applies to politics and indeed Malta right now needs a heavy dose of creative destruction.
Without going into the political history of these islands, something that has been very well documented by a number of academic researchers, I consider that one of the many problems bedevilling Malta is that, essentially, we have run out of political vision, have become barren of great causes.
This nation long battled for its independence from the British Crown, even if in the early stages of this fight, the alternative for some was the re-stitching of these islands to the Italian cultural concept which saw Malta as an extension of Italy − Malta irredenta. We strove, divided as usual, for dominion status, integration and subsequently for independence. We then embarked on the long road towards membership of the EU, still divided but at least passionately so. And surely then, in the minds of many, was the hope that membership would prevent any recurrence of a stormy period that divided families and friends, sowed a lot of hatred and finally claimed at least one victim.
The period following Independence saw Duminku Mintoff in the eye of the storm. He galvanised this nation, grabbed it by the scuff of the neck and forced it to see itself as a possible player in international politics. Unfortunately, there were serious side effects to his policies, which ultimately made large sections of the voting public take shelter under the only umbrella around – the PN. This coming together of many disparate elements gave the party something akin to today’s much-touted multicultural concept, which claims that differences can be enriching. On an island where every pretext, any paltry excuse, serves to separate and differentiate, that concept will take some time before it becomes embedded in our DNA.
The great Roman writer Seneca had two definitions for this mix. The first one stated that for Romans the boundaries of citizenship could be measured by the path of the sun. His other definition, one I suspect closer to his heart, stated that citizenship is what is assigned to us by an accident of birth.
The PN embraced both definitions and for a long time managed to balance the competing and complementary views that it came to be looked upon as a victorious political machine par excellence. But both the glory days as well as the gory days of that period are now fast becoming history. The long years in the wilderness forced the PL to change its emblem and its name and its old socialist vocabulary while the PN, once Mintoff dropped out of the equation, slowly began to run out of causes. I see this situation as being similar to the one that prevailed during the last years of the rule of the Knights of St John in Malta. With crusades becoming a thing of the past, with commercial wars substituting religious ones, and with the French Revolution bringing in new political concepts and ideas, the Order became obsolete. The main reason for its existence, that of keeping Islam at bay, had eroded and it couldn’t come up with a new one.
The last great quest of the PN was membership of the EU. That, as expected, was a mixed blessing. Malta is no longer effectively in charge of its economic policy (and the financial contagion that began with Greece is enforcing calls for greater centralisation), has only a limited foreign policy –basically restricted to the Maghreb area − and is now the equivalent (also due to its size) of a local council of the EU. My intention is not to be negative but to describe the state of play as it is. Local councils have a very narrow and limited field for innovation and Malta in the EU is likewise constrained.
In the present terrible economic firestorm that threatens to destabilise Europe, with Germany being seen as creating an economic Fourth Reich, it is no wonder that there are some who predict a violent break-up of the EU. Oh yes, we send our prime ministers and ministers to sit around the table of the great. Malta’s contribution can only be very limited indeed.
The result of all this is that we have turned in on ourselves. Even the way we are building now reflects a closed society. The great causes of the past have morphed into squabbles over divorce, gay marriage, a Church in the doldrums, a Malta-Gozo tunnel, transport and environmental problems; a mix highly enriched by a fall in living standards for the ordinary citizen, a steep rise in the cost of living that hinders competitiveness, and perceived public and private corruption with accountability still somewhere over the horizon. Lack of vision now seeks redemption in projects that many citizens see as a waste of taxpayers’ money while enriching the few. All that any political party seems able to promise is a more equitable management of the economy, an enhanced infrastructure and improved health and education services while providing value for money. This would be more than welcome, but the fact remains that future elections will be fought on increasingly narrow, parochial issues. More of the same.
This is why I had called for the downsizing of Parliament. In the prevailing situation, ministers need professional and technical services of the highest quality, people versed in how the EU works in order to be able to extract the maximum benefit we can out of it. Increases in that area may be justified. Increases in the size of Parliament and political staff in the various ministries cannot.
Malta needs administrations that will give it the best governance possible, that will work in the national interest as opposed to party or individual interest and supported by an apolitical civil service worthy of the name. We need ministers who will condemn without any reservations the declarations of Rupert and James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks. Top executives cannot be allowed to claim, “I did not know” or “No I won’t resign because the blame lies with those I trusted.”
The ongoing scandal in the UK presents an excellent example of the danger of shrugging off ministerial responsibility. Ministers need to go back to the words of Sir Thomas Dugdale, minister for agriculture in Churchill’s last government. Involved in a scandal of which he claimed he had no knowledge, he still resigned, quoting the classic example of responsibility: “I, as minister, must accept full responsibility for any mistakes and inefficiencies of officials in my department just as, when my officials bring off successes on my behalf, I take full credit for them.” Maybe that should be the Oath of Office each and every minister should take, as Malta has yet to learn and apply that lesson. We are now nearer Berlusconi than Churchill.
I believe that, in spite of the narrow operational margins allowed us by membership of the EU, these islands can still become a mini paradise if they are governed equitably, openly and with full accountability in the name of the people and for the people. This is what Malta is crying for and desperately needs. There are vast green meadows waiting to be explored if our career politicians can inject their duties with probity and a dose of old fashioned patriotism instead of the ever-present opportunism.
It is time for the citizens of this country to be taught to look on Malta as a State and not in terms of governments in office.
I wish all readers of The Malta Independent on Sunday happy holidays. I will be writing again come September.