Controversy erupted because (if I understood correctly) as part of the financial cuts that the government will be making in its expenditures, the grant to the University shall be reduced by a little over a million euros, close to 1.1 per cent of what the government had initially planned to spend. It is always tough when funding for education has to be pruned. I still however could not follow why so much horror was expressed.

If the same percentage of draw down on expenditures is being extended right across all the cost centres of the government system, then it will be too little given current cirmcumstances, with inflation still raging and international energy prices firmly rising. I cannot see how such a cut can provide the government with enough fiscal space to maintain its commitment to buffer price rises over the longer term.

For there is an imperative that has to be taken into account. As of now, the debate about the wage adjustments under the COLA mechanism for next year have circled around the private sector and how it will be seeing its operational costs spiralling.

Very little has been said about how the government’s own expenditures will be hit much more significantly.

***

EUROPEAN ACTION PROGRAMME

The pandemic created unexpected complications which helped to make matters more difficult. From the very beginning, the five-year action programme launched in 2019 by the European Commission and the European Parliament appeared to be very ambitious. In the fields of Green Deal policies meant to reverse environmental  degradation, of digital reforms, and of defence and security, the project was to affect a deep transformation through reforms that indeed, were not easy to introduce without causing trouble. It was natural that some delay started to register in the production and development of proposals in line with the established datelines.

Putin’s war continued to multiply problems with the need to meanwhile resolve dilemmas about war and peace that it provoked.

In Brussels, it is being said that the aims set for the five years to 2024 should still be met. May this be true. I hope though that it will not be achieved to the detriment of the interests and needs of the smaller member states.

***

EUROPEAN ELECTION LAW

It is interesting to read governments’ reactions to the proposals regarding a new electoral law to regulate the election of MEPs to the next European Parliament. A clear current of dissatisfaction has emerged vis à vis the proposal to create “mixed” constituencies, made up of parts of different countries. Some (and I agree with them) cannot comprehend how the idea can serve to ignite an interest in the elections among European voters. Yet for others, that this will happen has become dogma.

Then there is the issue about “European” parties that will nominate their spitzenkandidat. The “leader”-candidate of the party which secures most votes in the election would become President of the European Commission. Huge doubts prevail about the merits of this procedure. Personally I find it half baked.

Similarly, the idea that elections should be held on the same day across Europe has drawn criticism. It clashes with the constant long-held practice of certain countries when organizing elections.

By the 12 of August some twelve governments had submitted their reactions  The Malta government was not among them.