Over a decade and a half, the percentage of women in employment in Malta has more than doubled to 77.2 percent of the population, exceeding the rate of 71.6 percent in the EU.  As women have entered the workforce in ever greater numbers, the consequent increase in total hours worked has boosted productivity in the country, offsetting some of the otherwise unhappy decline in total productivity due to other factors.

Left unchecked, the economic system doesn't necessarily provide a level playing field for women.  The lack of diversity in many social and economic sectors has its origins in gender stereotyping from the earliest years of a child's life. This affects both boys and girls,

Lately, the Malta Women's Lobby expressed concern over what it described as a severe under-representation of women in senior public sector appointments.  It was commenting on the fact that out of 22 permanent secretaries appointed in the Public Service, only three were women.  Similarly, out of 20 chief information officers appointed, only one was a woman.  These numbers look extremely odd given that women account for 60 percent of tertiary graduates in the country.

Malta scores 58.9 points out of 100 in the European Commission's Gender Equality Index, holding the 16th place in the EU. This is due to low performance in the domains of money (21st) and time (20th).  Although the Gender Equality Index score has increased by 12.8 points since 2015 and by 8.6 points since 2020, Malta is still performing worse than the EU.

Regrettably, the contributions of women are not always valued as much as those of their male colleagues. This means that potential productivity gains arising from women in all sectors of the workforce are not always realised. Their insight, innovation and energy may be lost and with it much of the potential benefit, both for the individual and the overall economic system.

Why should this be? There are multiple causes, ranging from the glass ceiling preventing women from realising their full potential through discriminatory patterns of working hours to a shocking lack of investment in female-founders. The advantages of a workforce with diverse life experiences and ideas cannot be exploited if the workforce is, in essence, a monoculture.

Recent research found that there is a close association between the number of women in the workplace and more positive organisational outcomes for men too. The positive outcomes include lower levels of stress and burnout and increases in job satisfaction among men working for those organisations where there are more women in the workforce.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that collaboration and productivity in mixed gender teams is better than those of teams that are made up of a single gender. Women are often noted for being able to unify teams, creating a more open environment in which everyone can participate.

Businesses should also pay more attention to diversity in leadership and across the workforce.  They need to think harder about the benefits of diversity for their bottom line, something the evidence shows up time and time again.

Poverty shapes brains.  It is a well-known fact that children are especially vulnerable to poverty. They are more likely to live in poverty than adults, and it can have greater consequences on them during key developmental years.  It is therefore very worrying that, according to UNICEF, around 900 million children worldwide experience multidimensional poverty    ̶   meaning they lack basic necessities like food, water, shelter, education, and healthcare.

Unfortunately, child poverty (anybody under the age of 18) is also a problem in Malta.  In 2025, the rate of child poverty in the population was 21.2 percent and their number was almost a quarter of the total in the country.  It is no joke that we're talking about 14,140 children.  It is good to note that this rate is some three percentage points lower than two years ago, but it is still unacceptably high.

What makes child poverty particularly disturbing is that it plays a major role in children's brain development.  According to a new study by researchers at Washington University, a child's family financial situation and surroundings may have a stronger impact on brain development than previously thought.  Every experience leaves an imprint on the brain, influencing development and function for the rest of their lives.

The study established that socioeconomic factors accounted for about 16% of the 649 variables affecting children's brain function, having a greater impact than intelligence quotient (IQ), parenting style, and health history.  "The brain of a child from a low socioeconomic background looks like that of a child from a high socioeconomic environment that has been sleep-deprived and stressed," said Nico Dosenbach, senior author of the study.

Dosenbach cautions he is not talking about a "less-smart brain."   In fact, he argues that, if one could improve sleep and reduce stress for children from households with more limited socioeconomic opportunities, differences linked to these circumstances could be reduced.

The physical environment and financial status stand out as main drivers. They were closely linked with functional features in the motor and sensory areas of the brain.  "I started calling it the 'elephant in the brain," said Scott Marek, another author of the study. "I thought socio-economic opportunity would matter, but I didn't think it would matter this much. It just dwarfed everything else."

The burgeoning evidence of the costs of poverty to children's early development, combined with evidence of the benefits of early intervention, have triggered calls on policymakers to preserve and support society's most important legacy, the developing brain. 

What can we do?   For a start, we could support families in building higher levels of human capital so as to increase earnings. Giving the families concerned higher income and non-income transfers would allow them to make good for the cost of raising children.  These transfers would be linked to educational, social, and cultural activities attended by the children concerned.  

I estimate that if the government were to pay €2,200 to all poor children under the age of 18, it would cost the public purse around €31m annually   ̶   that's a mere 0.4 percent of the government's projected recurrent expenditure this year.   But it would push some 14,000 children up the scale from 40/50 percent of median equivalised income to the at-risk-of-poverty threshold.  That still leaves them poor, but materially less so.

Reversing the negative consequences of poverty for children's brain development is not just imaginable but is also actionable.

Societal resilience.  The former Speaker Anġlu Farrugia told the Press, on termination of his 13-year span in the role, that any proposal to elect the Speaker by a two-thirds majority would be a dangerous choice. This is an idea that has been floated from time to time, on the ground that it would ensure the holder of the office enjoys cross-party support that is "independent" of any political party.

As it happens, both Dr Farrugia's successor   ̶   Mr Carmelo Abela   ̶   and Deputy Speaker Dr Bernard Grech were appointed by the House of Representatives through unanimous backing, in a rare show of consensus between the new government and the PN. 

Although there is clearly a case for requiring a two-thirds majority in elections to certain state institutions, such as the President, the Chief Justice, the Ombudsman, and the Auditor General, the use of this threshold on a wider scale is debatable.  The positive side includes the assurance that whoever is selected for these offices enjoys widespread support.  On the negative side, the prospect that the parties might not agree on a suitable candidate runs the risk of leaving a state office vacant.

The pre-election spat on the appointment of a Chief Justice shows that the risk is a real one, though in reality, there was no such risk given that the incumbent could stay on in office until his successor is appointed.   The postures of the PL and PN leaders were pure theatre for the rank-and-file.

The Prime Minister has proposed the introduction of an anti-blocking mechanism to be used in the event of an impasse on certain appointments.  This would effectively make sure that the two-thirds mechanism is way-laid by any government wanting to appoint its own candidate.  The proposal is disingenuous and should be resisted.

In my view, if the two parties honestly believe an anti-blocking mechanism of some sort is required, the proper way to address this is to appoint an independent vetting panel, made up of one appointee for each party in Parliament and three other appointees (the most recent former holders of the offices of Chief Justice, the Ombudsman, and the Auditor General).  The panel's evaluation would be conducted according to five-six criteria laid down in the Constitution.  This panel would evaluate candidates nominated by the parties in Parliament and recommend one person to the President, who would appoint the recommended person to the office.

What the country cannot afford is a return to a "winner-takes-all" political environment, which reinforces political polarisation and increases public distrust in state institutions.  The four offices requiring a two-thirds approval mechanism must, in all circumstances, continue to enjoy long-term societal resilience.

Quote of the week.   "I am part of the CID (Criminal Investigation Department)." (Miriam Caruana, alleged swindler of €160,0000 in cash and jewellery from a 94-year-old woman)