It is disturbing to note how the discussion about governance in Malta has come to be dominated by outside interventions made by people with opaque and suspicious agendas.

For there has been and there remains a need for a national discussion regarding how we should improve the practice of public administration. One could perhaps say that this issue should be tackled during the upcoming consultations being organised about changes to the constitution. That might be the case, even if I am one of those who are not convinced that the constitution requires any radical restructuring. What we really should do is change the methods by which we apply it.

Beyond this though, governance in the practical sense of the word needs a separate dscussion. Up to which point should transparency be taken and how should it be made to work? Ditto for accountability, as well as administrative and political responsibility... And all this without undermining efficiency or paralysing the public administration...

How should conflicts of interest be assessed – in the framework of a very small societysuch as ours? What tools exist that can truly combat corruption?

In any such discussion, one has to be extremely wary of bad faith and a fear of the new.

***

At Aachen

The treaty that France and Germany signed recently to reinforce friendship and cooperation between them has few new and concrete measures, even if it has been said that it will give a greater impetus to the joint military programmes which the two sides would like to carry out. The treaty carries over from the first one that they had signed in the 1960s.

However with the signing of the treaty, there has been a consequence that I guess was not foreseen. A substantial number of European citizens did not at all like the idea of the EU’s two largest states coming to an agreement by way of a treaty. They apparently find such an arrangement unfamiliar, one that should not have been attempted.

The treaty has been seen as intended to first establish the agreement of both sides on how to regulate EU affairs, so that then the remaining members will just have to follow in their footsteps.

***

OECD

As of now, I still do not understand the reason why Malta has not yet become a member of the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, set up long years ago to carry out what its title indicates. It started as an institution mainly for European states with market economies; today it is considered as a global player.

If my memory serves me right, soon after Independence the Borg Olivier administration applied to join the OECD. But either the initiative was aborted or it got permanently shelved. Succeeding administrations showed no interest in OECD membership. In 1997, I tried to open a windw and even visited the Organization’s headquarters to establish contact. In the years that followed, there was again no progress.

I think that’s a pity. Almost all members of the EU consider it useful to participate in OECD activities. What can the reasons be that make a similar conclusion inapplicable to Malta?