Labour in business

You're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't. The recent setting up of the Labour Party's business forum has caused some debate on the party's past business credentials. It doesn't matter that a political party is not a fossilised museum piece but an organism which evolves, adapts, responds and, most of all , is willing to create change where need be. But there you are.

When the Labour Party was officially set up in 1921, its first members were a combination of workers, the self-employed and the legal and medical profession. But, over the years, the party led by Dom Mintoff did not articulate this alliance across different social classes. Mr Mintoff pushed a workerist ideology, which fitted with his strategy aimed at weakening the hegemony of the Church and professional middle classes (because he felt they did not share his vision of a new Malta) on the Maltese population and exulting the role and values of the working class. This, so that he would build an egalitarian society thus distributing the wealth that was being created by the new historical conditions that he created through his activist government, with an agenda to bring to Malta changes that had happened on the European continent over the last century: the building of the nation.

It is also a known fact, though, that, in the 1970S, Mr Mintoff sought the help and advice - not necessarily taking the latter - of captains of industry such as Albert Mizzi, Alfred Pisani, Joe Cassar , Barth Attard, Valhmor Borg and other entrepreneurs, to transform Malta's economy from one of servicing the British military to that based on industry and trade.

It was the time of the birth of Air Malta with the ensuing increase in tourism; Mid-Med Bank and Bank of Valletta; industrial estates teeming with activity coming from Maltese and international companies, and other ventures.

Put in context, it was an industrial development policy aimed at achieving economic self-reliance outside the ambit of a fortress economy.

There was also the downside of certain bad policies that were wrong for business and for which Labour had to pay a high price, at times eclipsing the hard work being carried out in the building of a strong welfare state for an improvement in the standard of living of thousands of families.

Times change. Today, even a staunch Marxist won't deny that private enterprise is a proven engine to fuel and to steer sustainable improvements in economic and social well-being. It is also a fact that this has not benefited everybody. That it can be abused.

Even in the highly-developed countries there are excluded under-classes..

Pure private enterprise alone is not enough. We must make sure that it is part of a civilised democratic society. That excesses are curbed, rules are set and welfare nets sustained for those excluded from its benefits. The relationship between business and society need not be a zero-sum game where one can only gain at the expense of the other.

It is good for business to have a commonality of interest with the wider society and to help create a prosperous, stable, well-governed society. Thus, business needs to acknowledge societal obligations and expectations. Entrepreneurship is vital for sustainable development, economic growth and the generation of revenue to pay for social goals. How this all gets balanced remains of course at the heart of our political debates whereby the best way forward in wealth creation and social justice will be employed.

Much still needs to be done. It is an oft-repeated fact that small and medium enterprise is the motor of our economy. It needs to be helped and nurtured. We need to continuously be in touch with what the problems - old and new - are. I regularly have meetings with people in business as part of my constituency work and on a national level when problems are related to government bureaucracy and policy. Needless to say, the albatross hanging around entrepreneurs' necks right now is in the form of the utility tariffs. No relief to these economic operators has been offered. There are those who are being left with no choice but to close down. But it is not only that.

Other problems abound, especially where government bureaucracy is concerned. Delays - which translate into loss of business - to get answers from government departments; confusion and a lack of information about relevant EU polices, which affect sectors of the business communit. How is it that we don't have a parliamentary secretariat for the self-employed anymore?

There is then the anomaly whereby at one end of the spectrum unemployment keeps rising and at the other end certain businesses do not find an adequately-trained workforce because of skills mismatches and bottlenecks in the labour market. That is a vital aspect, which ought to be addressed in order to establish the much talked about link between education, training and national development.

No doubt, the new Labour economic forum will be examining such issues. Lessons have been learnt - that's how we grow - from the party's history in this area of policy and we shall move on all the wiser. Our detractors will keep on reminding us of past mistakes, as though they are without sin. But, then, they would, wouldn't they? If anything, to deflect attention from the increasing widespread discontent.

Dr Dalli is shadow minister for the public service and government investment.