One can only consider with mixed feelings the measures being undertaken by the EU to set out a common policy for tourism. On the one hand, it does make sense to lay out rules for this sector-which has become so economically important - regarding the provision and delivery of tourism services to consumers who now amount to millions of Europeans, mainly workers and pensioners.The aim to prevent their being cheated or short changed is laudable.
On the other hand, time after time, common policies agreed n Brussels have been turned into one-size-fits-all structures. This just does not makes sense for a small island like Malta. Since it became an EU member, it has made huge progress mostly in sectors where the EU does not have a common policy, among which tourism. What will happen if in this sector as well, we end up with a common European policy structured around a one-size-fits-all legislation?
***
GOZO HARBOUR
In recent years, Gozo's economic development can without any exaggeration, be labelled as spectacular. To be sure, Gozo always possessed the human, physical and environmental endowments that could enable it to achieve impressive economic targets.
During the same period, much was proclaimed about what needed to be done for things to get even better. Two projects were emphasized as best suited to decrease the island's isolation. They were the establishment of an airport and the creation of a tunnel between Malta and Gozo. Personally I always considered them as white elephants... still do.
But now, a "new" consideration has curiously been gaining relevance. In the wake of the significant progress achieved by Gozo, an important choke point has been ignored. Due to the very successes that have been achieved, Marfa harbour is finding it difficult to keep up with the ever-increasing traffic of persons, cars and lorries that arrive there by land and sea. An interesting report by the Gozo Regional Development Authority highlighted this problem last month. On close reading, the report makes it clear than unless the port is urgently modernised and extended, the rhythm of the progress that has been acquired will be put at risk.
***
IS NATO ON THE WAY OUT?
We used to think that NATO existed to service the best interests of the US... while also safeguarding the security of Western Europe against the real or imagined threats issuing from the Soviet Union in the past - today from Russia.
The Trump admnistration has made it clear that not only does it disagree with this perspective, but according to it, in what has been happening and is still going on, the contrary is indeed the case.While Europeans have been spending nothing or next to nothing on their defence, Americans have been spending more and more on military programmes, and dedicating more and more resources to the defence of Europe. But then, when the US needs military support from the Europeans... as recently in the Iran war... the Europeans are nowhere to be seen.
On this basis, President Trump declares he sees no value in the US membership of NATO. But is it possible that they got it wrong, all those who for long decades argued that NATO was simply a US military institution?