Back to the Jungle

The Malta Independent - Friday Wisdom

It took no more than 24 hours from the end of the Malta CHOGM to receive a rude awakening from the illusion and the “make-up” we put on for our distinguished visitors. We are still in the jungle of shoddy service from public entities which is not even up to third world standards.

Monday evening, while having dinner with my family, a power outage forced us to continue in unromantic candle-light. A glimpse outside provided the dubious comfort that our problem was shared with most neighbours and the consolation that given the spread of the problem somebody must have alerted Enemalta to it.

Darkness forced an early night but during the night, I started getting concerned that power was not restored. For several times I tried to contact Enemalta by phone to check if they could provide any information on the progress of the repair job. To no avail! All attempts simply went unanswered.

When finally on Tuesday morning the switchboard was manned again, the operator assured me that the corporation was fully-aware of the problem and that we should have power restored by about 10 o’clock that same morning. By 11.30 power was still down and on contacting the corporation they now informed that it would be late afternoon before we could have service again.

When I complained that 20 hours to repair a very localised fault was very poor service, the operator tried to put me through to Enemalta’s customer service office. Each time after several unanswered ring tones I was switched back to the operator, who after the third unsuccessful attempt cordially requested me to contact them directly, giving me their number. Several unsuccessful attempts forced me to resign and wait patiently for the power to be restored at the corporation’s leisurely pace which eventually they did around five o’clock Tuesday afternoon – more then 20 hours after the fault occurred.

Now I can understand that faults do happen and when they happen, certain discomfort is quite unavoidable. But 20 hours for a very localised fault is way, way below the minimum standard of service that consumers have a right to expect. What is worse is that the corporation seems to make no effort, for all the over-manning which it carries at our expense, to keep consumers informed to ease pain when faults do occur.

I ended my article last week stating that “Investment is attracted by reliable marathon runners rather than excellent but moody sprinters, who tend to relax unduly between one sprint and another.” It took less than 24 hours after the CHOGM sprint to fall back to our jungle mentality.

The “back-to-the-jungle” feeling is also reinforced by the industrial action brewing between the GWU and all the rest. The GWU certainly has a habit of exposing itself to criticism that it can do little else than protest and in the process compound the problem which gave rise to the protest in the first place.

But it would be unfair to put all the blame in the GWU’s court. The problems we have can only be solved if we all accept the need to lower our standard of living to adjust to the reality that our economy has lost its growth momentum because it has lost its international competitiveness. These problems were fathered by the same administration that is pretending that it has the will, determination and ability to solve them by putting most of the adjustment pain on consumers in general and private sector employees in particular.

The simple truth that needs to be understood and accepted by one and all is that the problems can only be solved by a national effort which causes substantial adjustment pain and that in the name of social equity this pain has to be spread fairly across all sectors.

The problem is that the government has poor credentials to broker such a national agreement as it gained our democratic mandate to govern after it categorically and falsely assured us that public finances were in good shape and that our joining the EU would magically produce strong investment inflows and steady economic growth. Where in the government’s manifesto were we promised higher VAT rates, higher utility rates (which at least are partly needed for reasons other than oil price hikes) and payment for “free” health service which is clearly on the cards?

A new administration free from the guilt of commission for the economic problems we have and from the sins of misrepresentation in order to secure our electoral mandate would have a much better chance of brokering such badly-needed national agreement.

EU negotiations coming up regarding the budget for 2007-2012 also gives a sense of going back to the jungle. The French feel that their agricultural subsidies from the EU budget should be untouchable for the duration of the budget, postponing to 2013 the possible removal of such subsidies which apart from absorbing half the EU budget also create problems for the poorer countries who are clamouring for their removal at the Doha round of the WTO due to meet in Hong Kong later this month.

The British argue that unless the agricultural subsidies are revisited during the next budget period, their rebate from the EU budget is untouchable as the rebate is meant to claw back the disproportionate load carried by UK to fund agricultural subsidies that favour the French.

So once the giants will not budge from their vested positions, the law of the jungle is made to apply by cutting the budget for the minnows. The new entrants, Malta included, are being presented with Hobson’s choice of having no budget or a reduced budget from what was previously promised to them by way of structural funds meant to help their speedy integration within EU economic structures.
Malta will fare worse than most. Whereas new East European EU members can boast of higher FDI flows, which in some way compensate for the lower EU funding now being proposed, Malta has no such FDI flows to compensate the cut it has to accept.

I am already missing the CHOGM dream.