We hear a lot about the aim of attracting quality tourism to the island. However it is not at all clear what is being meant. On various occasions, the ways by which it is described give rise to different interpretations.

What actually defines the quality tourist? An easy reply would be: one who during the time he/she is visiting Malta spends a lot of money. But on what and how much? If he/she is one of the attendees at the big concerts which are regularly being held, there will be a lot of spend on alcoholic drinks, sometimes in an uncontrolled manner (not to mention drugs). Does that fit the quality label?

Then reference to big spenders is made regarding tourists who go to luxury hotels that belong to a global brand. But will they come because of the hotel or because of the tourism product outside it? Tourists who come for big conferences, like the Sigma event, are mentioned as well. Exactly why are they big spenders? Similarly for tourists interested in culture or sports. What exactly makes them spend a lot? And is it true that they spend more?

There's a further point regarding how quality tourists will be arriving in Malta. A very large percentage of the flights from and to Malta are now of the low cost sort.  Will quality tourists be arriving on them and spending in Malta what they save on the cost of their flight?

***

PRIORITIES IN EDUCATION

Quite rightly, it has been emphasized that education must be given full attention to ensure that it serves as the motor for the economic and social development of the island. In fact comparatively, what we spend on it ranks among the highest in Europe. Yet - and this is wellknown - the outcomes achieved in a number of areas are totally unsatisfactory.

Which is why the situation that has prevailed at a state college for higher learning is most frustrating. A persisting "industrial"  dispute with the academic staff  has led to educational activities remaining suspended as part of the measures that were adopted. Yet, "industrial" negotiations that were supposedly much more delicate - like with doctors and the civil service - have been resolved.

Meanwhile, it is not so clear what the problem is. Disagreement over pay? Over hours of work? The practice and methods of teaching? The status of the academic staff?

***

"STUDY-IN"

At Harvard University in the US, students and members of the faculty have discovered an innovative way by which to run a pacific protest and express condemnation for the inhuman manner by which Israel is conducting its war against Gaza and the rest.

They go to the University library and spend hours reading and studying there, in quiet, with no hullabaloo at all. The activity has been labelled a study-in. It's difficult to imagine a protest that can be more civil and peaceful than this. It still offended. Participants were censured by being excluded from from the library and from physically consulting its catalogues for a number of days. There's no doubt that if the protests had been carried out in support of Israel and the "demonstrators"were treated in the same way, the University would have been accused of having adopted anti-semitic policies (which by the way is also happening but for other reasons).