Technocrats and ministers

Labour's proposal to give the chairman of the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development (MCESD) the equivalent of ministerial rank was one genuinely innovative and fresh idea in the local political scene.

I was present when it was announced at a meeting with social partners in Attard and could see many of the representatives present whispering appreciatively when Alfred Sant made this announcement.

The idea of having the MCESD chairman formally present for the relevant Cabinet meetings will give this forum more importance and elevate it from its present glorified talking shop status.

The government's efforts to shoot down this proposal were trite attempts at petty partisan politics. The government first said it cannot be done and then retracted that it is already doing it. I find this pretty baffling.

What the country needs is a wide-ranging debate on such ideas.

I would go one step beyond and say that any government - present or future - should seriously consider the option of having technical ministers in its Cabinet. Legal minds will immediately tell you that our system does not allow this. Well, if it doesn't, then the system is up for a change.

The question should not be whether we can or cannot do it but whether the country needs this development or not. The basic facts are that we are a young, independent country with a population of under half a million. Given the limited size, we are trying to win the challenges of globalisation and put our house in order. At the same time we have to manage the higher standards and hefty institutional burden of being the smallest member state of the European Union.

Our electoral system has many advantages, including that of the electorate directly choosing their representatives without the imposition of a party list. Needless to say, this system also has its disadvantages because the resulting representation might not be adequately balanced in terms of skills. For example, it is obvious there are not enough finance-minded people and persons with a scientific background in Parliament.

I do not think one should try to change the system and interfere with the people's choice of who they want to represent them in Parliament. The fact that our system gives so much power to the elector is clearly an important credential of our democracy.

The appointment of technocrats to Cabinet can be an important innovation complementary to our system, thus helping us tap into what is, to date, the underutilised potential in our society. There is a prospect of synergy between technical people and those having political experience.

There need not be the dilemma on whether to appoint a technocrat or a politician to Cabinet as there is enough work for everyone to do. Furthermore, the appointment of technocrats can be envisaged in the more specialised niches rather than at the helm of broader policy offices.

To start on the right foot, we must have clear, pre-defined rules to guarantee accountability - even of a political nature - in the case of such appointments. Technocrats cannot expect to be given such a responsibility unless they identify themselves in the electoral manifesto of the party elected to government and are ready to subject themselves to public and political scrutiny.

Just as a politician might not make the perfect minister, there is no guarantee that technocrats can do a better job. Nevertheless, the key in this proposal is to bring together the best of our country's resources.

I do hope we can have a frank discussion about such an option and other important related subjects such as the need or otherwise of a full-time Parliament and increased powers of scrutiny to parliamentary committees, with the latter being given a more important and executive function.

Mr Muscat is a Labour member of the European Parliament and vice president of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee.

www.josephmuscat.com