Opposition spokesman on education Evarist Bartolo focused on the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage, which he likened to "a car with one wheel". Although it had an important role to play, last year its human resources had been at the least ever level in recent years - only eight out of a target of 30.
He raised a number of questions regarding the Stage of Heritage Report, an obligatory publication under the 2002 legislation. This linked to the national strategy for cultural heritage.
Mr Bartolo said this was important, but not even stakeholders were conscious of this plan. Had it been drawn up? This should address public awareness to end the perception that the national heritage was only for tourists.
He appealed to those drafting the national curriculum proposals not to make any false move by eliminating history from schools. With intelligent use, one could make history lessons interesting and relevant. No wonder the Maltese had a general amnesia of their cultural roots.
The national heritage strategy should address the national media to widen the acknowledgement. This should include the internet and online services.
Mr Bartolo said the superintendence should have made the sector more inclusive - not just accessible to people with disability but attractive to people who never bothered about culture. The last survey, carried out in 2000, had yielded disquieting results. Had the situation changed? His perception was in the negative.
There were a number of obligations under the law which the superintendence was not adhering to, including the draft of the national cultural policy, the national agenda for research and the Guarantee Committee, which was only meeting sporadically when its role was to develop, monitor and evaluate the national strategy.
It was important that there be a national cultural heritage inventory, as well as the database which had been promised way back in February 2007 but to date was not accessible.
Mr Bartolo said the government had promised more synergy between heritage and the arts, but results were not satisfying and better initiatives were needed to have more social inclusion.
He called on the National Statistics Office to raise the visibility of heritage by including it in statistics. Heritage was absent in Malta in Figures. It was important to know the sector's contribution to the economy.
Out of seven Council of Europe conventions, Malta had signed only five; and out of 10 UN conventions, Malta had signed only three. Why?
What had happened to the proposed travelling exhibitions?
Mr Bartolo said there was disparity between the standards of national museums, and he paid tribute to Maurcie Degiorgio for his dedication to detail in the exhibitions which he organised, including the recent one about the works of Edward Caruana Dingli at the Palace.
As the challenges were enormous, resources had to be used effectively.
He also asked about the public-private partnerships and called for a fiscal policy to encourage the private sector more.
Nine NGOs and two local councils had confirmed their intentions to take up the conservation and care of historical buildings, and five other NGOS' applications were pending.
Concluding, Mr Bartolo said that eight years from now, Malta together with the Netherlands would be assigned the title of the heritage capital of Europe, and warned that things must start to be tackled now to make the best of this opportunity.
Owen Bonnici (PL) said the protection of cultural heritage must be of primary importance. Why should a minister beg Cabinet for more funds to take adequate care of heritage, when funds were found for other projects?
Heritage Malta was saying it needed at least €300,000 more to function at a minimum level. This was less than half of what had been spent on the inauguration of St George's Sqaure.
He asked what developments there had been on what had become of ancient Jewish tombs in Malta, and augured an amicable solution in this cultural conflict.
The government seemed to be eyeing the Mediterranean Conference Centre for technical improvements as a way of placating the chorus of artistes against the proposed roofless theatre on the site of the opera house. It had already committed itself through the payment of €16,000 to companies for plans on the management of the MCC.
There seemed to have been no known developments since February when a working group had sent a report to the government and Unesco following the latter's threat to strike Valletta off as a world heritage site. This was a matter of concern not only for the population today but also for future generations.
Dr Bonnici said he had not yet had an answer to a parliamentary question on how to protect Fort St Angelo. What about plans for the renovation and regeneration of Fort St Elmo?
Besides the request for EU funds for maintenance, the people wanted meaningful action for the preservation of Mdina. Real action was also wanted for the Cittadella in Gozo.
Heritage Malta had done wonders to reduce its financial deficit last year, and was projecting a surplus of €200,000 for this year besides the debts brought forward. But besides its efforts to cut down costs and allowances and improve policies, the improvement had also been due to a special injection of €500,000 to pay NI arrears on behalf of the workforce. This was shocking because the government should be a model employer.
The opposition was against the steep increases in the entrance fees to Heritage Malta's museums. The Maltese needed more incentives, not less, to visit their cultural heritage. There had been higher revenues in spite of less visitors. So why, in spite of the current difficulties facing the tourism sector, was Heritage Malta prospecting €500,000 more in entrance fees?
Why was Heritage Malta now proposing a reduction by half of the exhibitions and events vote? And why should the agency be paying the government €233,950 for the leasing of its sites?
Dr Bonnici observed that since the creation of Heritage Malta and the SCH in 2003 there had not been much stability in the top posts. This did not augur well for continuity. The agency must have pre-defined aims with an element of political independence.
Despite the lack of funds the heritage sector in Malta was labouring under fragmentation instead of consolidation. There were different superintendents under different ministers. The sector should be much more efficient, with better management of scale.
Two very positive points were the agency's recent changes in its training programmes, which was expected to yield good results, and its new policies in a number of sub-sectors.
Heritage Malta had almost become synonymous with the Ħaġar Qim park and visitors' centre. The extension of summer opening hours, as well as informative panels and better management of the visitors' centre, were all good points. Still existent problems were the perennial water supply problems, an inadequate ticket sales point and a canteen-shop-restaurant that was not operational.
Dr Bonnici said it now seemed that the government intended to splash out again on the reinauguration of the park and centre. The calendar temple was unique to Europe and should be seriously marketed as a landmark, but it was important to keep feet on ground as far as festivities were concerned.
Concluding, he suggested the setting up of a fund, such as a percentage of court funds imposed to the tune of €4 million in 10 months, to be passed on to help Heritage Malta in its mission. This would be turning something negative into something positive.