People who claim that the maritime sector deserves more attention will always be right even if what they lobby for is already being done. This country is built around the sea and in many aspects depends on the sea, even if that dependency has diminished during the last century or so. Most of our natural assets reflect the ties to the sea of an island situated in the middle of the Mediterranean. We must continue to enhance those ties.

A problem however is that many concrete proposals that are advanced as to how to do so,  turn out in fact to be repetitions of approaches that have already been attempted. One is left with this impression even by the Vision 2050 report. About the development of more physical facilities there can hardly be any contestation, except where environmental concerns arise, which cannot be seen as a minor problem. Then there are the problems posed by false starts, which like in the case of the ex-Marsa Dock, should trigger warning red lights. What really went off the skids in that project?

Similarly for the proposal to set up a separate ministry for maritime affairs. The suggestion is interesting but as of now, ministries are double the number of the country's economic and social sectors. How would the addition of yet another ministry serve any  useful purpose?

***

REAL POWER

Where does real power lie in this country? In the political sector?

That's what the traditional media encourage us to believe. But when one considers issues in depth, frequently one finds that in what they proclaim, political "actors" are reflecting for better or worse, the mantras of other sectors.

So could it be that  the dominant player is the religious - the "Church" - sector? Hardly. Unless it feels confident it can ride on some strong social current of sentiment (abortion, euthanasia...) , the "Church" prefers to keep off the front line (gaming, minority rights...) and act like an NGO.

For meanwhile in the social sphere' NGOs strive hard to influence how decisions are taken. All do it according to the logic of the field in which they're active, sometimes with success in achieving their goals, frequently not.

No matter how one turns, it is the financial and economic sector that comes into the limelight. Is the real power in the hands of the barons who run it, or are they actually sharing it with the political sector?

***

COALITION BLUES

In Germany it was argued that the coalition between two parties (the christian democrats in the lead, allied with the socialists) under chancellor Merz would be a more stable arrangement that its predecessor run by chancellor Scholz (the socialists in the lead allied with the greens and the liberals). The latter was characterised by continuous disagreement between the allies.

The new coalition needed to be more compact and ready to take radical decisons fast,  as Merz did right from the start on issues like the military posture of  Germany and the national debt. Still controversial among other isues has remained the challenge of how to handle immigration.

Politically the beginnings of the new coalition weren't blessed. For the German Parliament to confirm Merz's appointment as chancellor, two votes were needed, as the first vote was defeated. In the socialist party congress a short time later, the leader, finance minister and vice chancellor Klingbeil obtained a stingy vote of confidence in favour with much less than 70 per cent, which was without precedent.

Worries about whether the "new" German government can be long lasting are not trivial.