Editorial

It is difficult sometimes trying to make heads or tails of an argument in Malta. When one government minister expressed an opinion some time ago that there would be no textile firms in Malta within 10 years' time, he was undoubtedly reflecting the generally held belief that Malta's future, at least insofar as manufacturing industry goes, lies in having firms making goods that have a higher value added content than a range of those being produced at present.

Was he saying something that did not make sense? Of course not. Malta had already been moving away from the first-generation firms attracted to the island in the first phase of the industrialisation drive in the late 1950s.

Then, just because the same minister and his government were doing their best to see how can they salvage part of the operation of a textile firm that is closing down, political opponents tried to ridicule both the minister and the government.

Moving higher up the scale in manufacturing takes time, so one can surely not blame the government for its eagerness to find a new investor to take over the plant of another that is closing down. Opposition Leader Alfred Sant said in Parliament that the failure of the talks led one to wonder if the whole thing had been an exercise in political manoeuvring.

He went even further than this when he asked if this had been a publicity stunt or a real project. Really! As if a government, any government, including Labour, goes about intentionally raising false hopes of immediate new employment among people suddenly finding themselves out of work. Was not this what the Opposition Leader was implying in his comments? God forbid politicians have grown so insensitive to the workers' plight as Dr Sant's comment could make people believe.

The Austrian textile firm that had had shown interest in branching out to Malta, Gama, had been prepared to take over Denim's plant and was planning to employ about 400 of the workforce discharged by Denim. However, the deal has apparently fallen through as it was not prepared to give part (25 per cent) of the required loan guarantee.

If the information that has come out so far is correct, the government and the bank were expecting the firm to put something up as a sign of commitment. One of the first questions that would need to be reflected upon is the reason, or reasons, that led to the call for such a commitment to be made in the first place.

Is it not absurd to throw bad light on the intentions of those who have been trying to negotiate a deal with a foreign firm simply because the firm in question has not come up to their expectations? It was said that everything had been falling into place until a few days ago when the firm declined to put up the required capital.

No one, least of all politicians aspiring to be in government, should expect Malta Enterprise, Bank of Valletta or the government, for that matter, to do anything less than what is normally required in similar circumstances. That would not be professional.

However much one sympathises with the workers that had found themselves out of work, and understands the anguish they must be feeling following the collapse of the deal after the initial high hopes that the firm's interest generated in Malta, it does not appear, at least at this stage anyway, that the bank or the government is to blame for the failure of the talks. It might have been too quick in announcing the firm's interest though.