Was Dom Mintoff right?
Ronald Reagan’s phrase “Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem” encapsulates the spirit that has been predominant in the era that followed the collapse of the Berlin War. Capitalism and private enterprise were thought to have been confirmed by history as what can bring about wealth and well-being.
Interference by the State in economic matters, even if inspired by the best of intents, came to be considered as detrimental if not utterly ruinous. Individuals, we were told, should be left to their own devices so that they stand up and create for themselves their own well-being. Private firms, it was thought, would generate jobs and wealth. Government should no longer feel duty- bound to provide for those who cannot make it.
No one owed anyone a living. The market’s invisible hand would for the most part ensure the optimisation of outcomes. Those who failed would not have tried hard enough. Free-trade enthusiasts suggested that we move from a nanny-state to a night-watchman government.
On the local scene, the march of history was for many represented by the change in government that occurred in 1987. As the local myth-ridden history goes, under pre-1987 Labour, the State used to ‘control’ society in general and the economy in particular.
The latter was at best termed a mixed-economy, at worst a socialist one. Private enterprise was apparently shackled and restricted. The State used to create wealth and jobs; inefficiently and uneconomically (and this despite the positive balance in the country’s coffers. What’s that for finanzi fis-sod?).
Then Fenech Adami comes along (heralding a bright new ear according to the PN and New Labour alike) and private enterprise starts to run on its own feet and generate wealth. The State becomes more of a regulator than a distributor of goods.
The latter’s function however, is not abandoned straight away. In the 1980s and early 1990s the PN’s Christian Democratic wing was still strong. But then the neo-liberal wing faction started not only to dominate the party but also to convert to the virtues of the free market their opponents in the opposition camp.
That this widely-accepted history is myth-ridden is obvious if one asks him/herself some simple questions. If the economy during the 1970s and 1980s was socialist, why was there a proliferation of private investment from capitalist Europe (yes, the Europe of Cain), which included the opening of two factories a year from West Germany as well as major capitalist investment like ST Thompson from Italy? (For some serious studies debunking the myths commonly associated to Labour’s economy, the published works by Mario Vella are a necessary starting point).
Regarding the current economy, would many of the contractors who have thrived in the past decades have prospered as they have without State-financed projects? Would, for instance, certain contractors in the construction industry have made it so good, simply by selling their services to private individuals?
In case the answer to the latter question is negative, as it obviously is, aren’t they as dependent on the State (i.e. on the taxes we pay) as a single mother or someone who is on dole is?
Regardless of their fictitious nature, these myths are accepted by many. Neo-liberal mantras accentuating the need for the State to divest itself of any form of participation in the economy were/are continuously repeated whenever a subsidy had/has to be eliminated, a sector was/is being privatised or a function that was normally carried out by the public sector was/is sub-contracted. So hegemonic has the perpetuation of these myths been, that they started to be dogmatically accepted not only by many in the opposition party but also by trade unions and the people at large.
Then this election comes around and the incumbents are seriously in danger of losing their throne. Despite the more recent mantra regarding others being worse than we are, few people have found their argument convincing. The (supposed) elimination of certain subsidies and of certain (supposed) white elephants has not led to a healthier economy. The standard of living of many has continuously been slumping, even though the elite continued to treat itself as an aristocracy.
In every day terms, not merely has the cost of living gone sky-high but the quality of jobs has, in many cases, deteriorated. The possibility of making ends meet with one wage is for many a distant dream.
So what is the proposed solution by both incumbents and aspirants on the eve of the election? Not less government, but a State that provides you with tablets of all kinds, subsidises the purchasing of your property, provides you with medicines at your doorstep, funds your pregnancy with a hand-out and promises more cash if you are a pensioner.
Obviously answers regarding who is to foot the bill if the have-nots and have-less are to receive this boon have been rather economical, but the underlying message is simple and clear.
The State is your nanny. Laissez-faire has failed. Dom Mintoff – largely ignored by friend and foe during the current electoral campaign – might have been right after all.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
23 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Raymond Grech
Feb 28th, 20:20
That Mintoff's economic policies were deeply flawed cannot be denied, but the results obtained in terms of export-oriented industrialisation were impressive. It is reliably estimated that in 1986 the larger foreign-owned export-oriented manufacturing operations generated some Lm 150 million worth of exports and employed over 11,000 persons (almost double the total in 1971).
VINCENT WILLIAMS
Feb 28th, 18:09
The PN's economic and financial policies collapsed because such policies are based on debt. The €5.9billion millions of National Debt clearly shows how great such PN's policies failed. Not to mention the €200 million yearly bank's interests.
GL Calleja
Feb 28th, 18:00
Dom Mintoff did a lot of good and he did an awful lot of bad. He ran a dictatorship Government with the help of his right hand man Lorry Sant. Please do not start me on that one. I have one thing to say "REQUISITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTIES."
GL Calleja
Feb 28th, 17:58
"The State used to create wealth". If you stop and think the State is still creating wealth for some, this oil scandal is prove enough. People in high places are getting rich while the rest of us are struggling to make ends meet. We do not have the State to bail us out if and when we get into financial trouble. People in high places seem to have the way and the means to generate "State Money."
Mr Andrew Camilleri
Feb 28th, 12:36
God keep Dom Mintoff and those who admire him - far away from us.
GL Calleja
Feb 28th, 19:34
Amen to that.
Mr Ronald Micallef
Feb 28th, 12:02
Mr Waschnig you are wrong on so many counts. But the worst assertion is that during Mintoff's time there were decent jobs for Maltese workers when all we had was Pijunieri, Dejma, Izra u Rabbi, Dirghajn il-Maltin and many other dead end jobs with absolutely no future and more importantly no production.
No wonder our expectations were so poor as we were on par with Albania.
Mario Vella
Feb 28th, 11:25
A thought provoking piece. Perhaps one reason why privatisation has not led to a more efficient and healthier economy is that the enterprises concerned continue to monopolise the market or, together, with very few others, they constitute an oligopoly. This government merely pays lip-service to promoting competition. Mario Vella
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 11:00
7. Yes Dom Mintoff is a true SAINT and Malta´s greatest son. He helped the poor and he was right that a capitalistic system needs a strong government to interfere in order to protect the people.
Dom Mintoff must be taken as a shing example by all Maltese. I am sure the Labour Party if winning the next election will govern Malta in Dom Mintoff´s spirit.
charles caruana
Feb 28th, 12:18
Mr Waschnig, you have a truly profound expertise in all matters political and ecclesiological. May I suggest that you immediately embark on the beatification process of Dom Mintoff with the Vatican authorities, of course under the new Pontiff, who may turn out to be as progressive and socialist as your prayers now are. I'm sure, calling for.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:56
6. The proposed solutions by both incumbents for the next election in Malta are” not less government, but a state that provides you with tablets of all kinds, subsidies...” . All that proves that both major political parties want a strong role of the government and interference in economic matters. Yes MALTA´S GREATEST SON DOM MINTOFF is right.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:55
5. Capitalism and private enterprise were at risk and without the interference by governments in economic matters the global capitalistic system would have been destroyed. Ronald Reagan is wrong when he said “Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem...”, never before in the history of capitalism governments interfered so heavily as it is happening currently.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:55
4. And Dom Mintoff was a visionary, he wanted an end to Malta´s exploitation by foreign powers, a revival of national dignity and economic and diplomatic ties with nations that could underwrite Maltese neutrality. I am of the opinion monuments of Dom Mintoff should be built all over Malta and Gozo. Capitalism and private enterprise failed completely.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:54
3. Dom Mintoff had dreams as mentioned above and a vision and he greatly expanded Malta´s welfare state. And under his leadership the government introduced a wide range of social benefits and raised living standards. Even after stepping down as Labour leader in 1984, Mr Mintoff continued to play an influential role as a member of parliament untill 1998.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:53
2. Nowadays Malta faces big political problems like other European countries and in order to solve these problems the Labour Party and all Maltese should think of Dom Mintoff and consider what he would do to figure out solutions to solve everything. Dom Mintoff as Malta´s greatest son should be taken as a shining example by all Maltese. That would help to solve all economic problems.
Kurt Waschnig
Feb 28th, 10:52
1. Dom Mintoff was right there cannot be any doubt. He was a political genius and he had visions, determination and the political will to fulfil his dreams of an independent and economic strong Malta.
Dom Mintoff is Malta´s greatest son and he will be unforgettable forever. He achieved so much in his political life and he did everything for the Maltese.
Roger Vella Bonavita
Feb 28th, 10:31
Mintoff was wrong on most counts: a dismal record on human rights and a mainly abysmal industrialisation policy. When labour lost power in 1987 most of the state owned companies he established were tens of millions of Malta pounds in the red. The infrastructure (roads, water etc.,) were reminiscent of a third world country. There were some bright spots such as AirMalta. The bad outweighed the good
Mario Vella
Feb 28th, 12:00
Of the main exporting industries still in existence today how many were originally set up before 1987? How many were set up after 1987? What was the proportion of state-owned industry to private-owned industry (especially export oriented Foreign Direct Investment) up to 1987? That you were as shoddily treated by the University as I was by the MDC, is no excuse to get the facts wrong.
Roger Vella Bonavita
Mar 1st, 00:59
No need to get personal Mario. All I said was that Mintoff's record was abysmal - that is indisputable. Some of the companies he set up were successful but many failed and cost the country millions. The record since 1987 is far better even though many problems remain. There has been a tendency to sanctify Mintoff recently and that gets up my nose.
In medio stat virtus
charles caruana
Feb 28th, 10:08
Mr Grech, you are keen on asking simple questions, so allow me to put some very simple ones to you. Why did the labour party under Muscat change its name to Labour Party and not to Socialist Party? Were the governments who guided Spain and Greece into total ruin and bail out misery Capitalists or Socialists? Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Ireland, Portugal-not convincingly worse off than us?Seriously?
Carmel J. Caruana
Feb 28th, 07:41
Dom Mintoff was right on most counts and he had the best ideas - he also put Malta first and foremost - something which the PN has consistently failed at. If he hadn't made the mistake of allowing some hotheads to run rampant he would have remained in power.
Mr Andrew Camilleri
Feb 28th, 12:38
Mistake? Are you serious? Hundreds of people can recount the brutality of the Mintoff regime, like students, doctors, businessmen and the ordinary man in the street who had to call at the local MLP club to obtain a telephone and TV licence. Mintoff is responsible for the reign of terror we went through under him and KMB (even worse).
Luke Scicluna
Feb 27th, 20:54
Unfortunately the electorate would rather cling to slogans and ignore what is really at stake - "Malta taghna ukoll"? Why is this proclaimed by the centre-left-turned-capitalist? "Finanzi fis-sod?" At what point did money become the key factor in the running of a country? Do people really only want a country with a balanced budget yet unbalanced classes and alienated citizens?
Please choose the reason of your report below: