Tourist guides as speaking tools

Why write another opinion piece about the Lm500 fine that the MTA slapped on Mr Frank Boffa? The event has already been condemned as absurd by the MUT. Ordinary people are outraged. Minister Louis Galea and his shadow Mr Evarist Bartolo have both said that the official arrangements have to allow for educational tours. So why write another opinion piece?

Because the condemnation does not go far enough. The criticism has broadly been twofold. First, that the law prevents teachers from doing their job well. Mr Boffa was fined for telling a group of foreign students something about Malta's Neolithic history while on a Valletta outing; and the law states that only licensed tourist guides can lead "organised excursions" (that is, an "excursion or tour for five or more tourists or other persons to one or more places in or around Malta").

Second, many people have noted that the law probably prevents any ordinary person, out with a group of five friends, from stopping in front of a historical building or monument and saying something about it.

In short, this condemnation is based on the idea that the law grants too much protected territory to licensed tourist guides. I have yet to see a condemnation of the principle of granting tourist guides any protected territory at all.

The point of a tourist guide's licence is to guarantee a minimum standard of service and assure people who book a tour. Instead, the idea behind a licence has been turned on its head: the MTA's enforcement director, Mr Frank Farrugia, has said that the law is there to protect the livelihood of tourist guides. In some cases this has come at the expense of people who requested a service.

As an illustration of what's wrong, take this case that arose a few years ago. A group of distinguished scholars from the Commonwealth were guests of the University of Malta. The university wanted to take them on a tour of the Tarxien temples. But it was prevented from having Prof. Anthony Bonanno, Malta's senior archaeologist and a distinguished scholar, conduct the tour himself: Prof. Bonanno was not a licensed guide. Someone with a licence had to be engaged.

The result? The guests were robbed of a tour by an expert. The poor guide was embarrassed and kept looking anxiously at Prof. Bonanno throughout her exposition.

The licence, which should be a guarantee of a minimum standard of service, has been transformed by the law into an instrument that can prevent tourists from getting the highest standard of service. Guides have been transformed by the law into speaking tools - the only kind of tool, no matter your needs, that one can use.

I have cited this example to show what's wrong with the law in principle. But the example is also a sign of things to come. It is the intention of the MTA to promote cultural tourism in Malta. Arguably, the future of the industry depends in part on its development. But cultural tourists cannot be served well by a law that prevents them - as the current one does - from getting a high quality service from a specialist who is not a licensed tourist guide.

For instance, next May a baroque festival will be held. It will celebrate the baroque style in its various cultural forms - music, architecture, etc. - and it should help locate Maltese baroque within the European one. Guided tours will feature as part of the festival. The hope is that this festival can become a regular item on the cultural calendar of Europe and draw many lovers of the baroque to Malta.

It is no disrespect towards licensed tourist guides to insist that these cultural tourists will not be served well by a tour conducted by an ordinary guide. These tourists have a specialist love and will only be served well by people with a specialist knowledge of baroque culture. As it stands, the law sabotages the aim of developing cultural tourism.

What this means is that the law should not be changed only to allow for educational tours for students. The law must allow other people to take tourists on a guided tour against payment.

To my mind, 'other people' should mean anyone; for in a world where tourism is a global industry, ordinary tourists are savvy enough to know the risks of not hiring licensed guides. But there is no question that the law should allow cultural specialists to lead organised tours. It's ridiculous to have a law that acts as a curb on quality.