How smart

The Investments Minister would have been a tad smarter had he condensed his views on SmartCity into one, at most two articles in this newspaper, instead of stretching them to breaking point into four.

He begged more questions the longer he took to try to make his point. The minister's message was that the deal with Tecom of Dubai was a good one for Malta.

He did not give all the details why. He will tell all to the House of Representatives, he said. Which is as it should be.

The opposition, in the meanwhile, is clearly staying mum until the full scheme is laid on the Table of the House. It is not certain that the details which the minister will give to the House will convincingly explain why the deal took so long to conclude.

The minister claimed that was due to the way lawyers have of being obsessed with details. That does not quite tally with his earlier semi-blunt declaration to the effect that, should Tecom continue to drag their feet, the government would not idle its engine to their pleasure forever and ever. Tecom didn't roll over and acquiesce to the minister's pleasure in response.

MPs might be interested to learn why not, and what persuaded them to commit in the end. Everybody welcomes foreign direct investment of the right type. Tecom intend, among other things, to build up a smart infrastructure to attract investment in information, technology and communications. May that happen over a time span rather shorter than the decade-and-a-half indicated by the minister.

The timeline of the Smart project is one of its more intriguing aspects. Stretching to 14 years, it does strain the imagination and relevant comparisons a bit. Rome was not built in a day. I doubt, though, that there was much caesarean or plebeian talking projected across the unknown of 14 years. The minister may also take the opportunity to explain to the people's representatives how it was calculated that the government should have a nine per cent stake in the project.

The minister made it clear that a shareholding was selected instead of ground rent at commercial rates. In outlining - one cannot really convincingly say "explaining" - the financials (February 3) he protested a mite too much that a shareholding would eventually be more remunerative than ground rent at commercial rates.

Who's to say? Only time can tell whether the government was right to opt to run counter to its philosophy of moving out of commercial activities on this one. Meanwhile, it will be interesting to learn why the government settled on a nine per cent Smart stake. Why not 10 per cent?

The discussion in the House of Representatives could throw up some interesting reflections. Meanwhile, the best early-stage aspect of the project, to my mind, lies in the choice of venue. The promoters, said the minister, initially preferred Pembroke. He steered them towards the south. The selected area was begging for an infusion of care, attention and energy. It had been left to become shamefully derelict. Locating SmartCity in that part of Malta should at least compensate for the neglect governments have shown towards it over the years, both during the Labour period of 1971-87, and the Nationalist years since then.