I was not surprised at all when I heard the news that no formal Cabinet papers and minutes pertaining to the three Mintoff-led administrations (1971-1987) were found. I had heard this information during the first Cabinet meeting of the Fenech Adami administration elected in May 1987.
At that point, a formal Cabinet Office was set up within the Prime Minister’s office at Castille as there was hardly anything that would fit that description at the time. There is, in fact, no case regarding any ‘lost’ Cabinet papers. They just never existed. Only some notes were taken, and minutes of a meeting were not approved in the following one.
Lino Spiteri’s article in The Times last Monday confirmed that this was the case. Mintoff’s style had no time for recording decisions that would present problems if they were to be recanted, and he just led his government in his own inimitable way. As Spiteri wrote, Mintoff “preferred to call ministers or a small number of them for specific meetings, surrounded by his advisers”.
How very convenient for Mintoff to lead his government in this way! How silly of the Labour Party to talk of good governance practice with such skeletons in their cupboard.
It is not the only instance where Mintoff took advantage of doing away with so many inconvenient formalities, of course. It is obvious that Cabinet collegial responsibility under Mintoff was a sham and that he preferred to ‘challenge’ directly any minister whom he thought was out of line, rather than discuss issues during formal Cabinet meetings.
What is even more incredible is the fact that when Mintoff decided to ‘fuse’ the Malta Labour Party with the General Workers’ Union, the later was given the privilege of nominating two representatives to attend Cabinet, so that – as Mintoff used to explain it – ‘the workers’ would be participating directly in the decision-making process of the administration.
In turn, this led to Mintoff further reasoning – with incredible chutzpah – that as ‘the workers’ were in government, they could not strike or take any industrial action against themselves.
Now we know that Cabinet meetings were very few and far between, and the input of the GWU’s representatives in Cabinet must have been very near zilch. Yet, it was only after the PN won the 1987 election that the formal tie between the MLP and the GWU was undone. To their credit, all subsequent Prime Ministers – including three Labour Party ones – did not adopt that way of doing things, and the Mintoff period therefore sticks out like a sore thumb.
Eddie Fenech Adami was a stickler to formalities. He scheduled Cabinet meetings every Monday morning, starting sharply at the indicated time and keeping to the agenda as was prepared beforehand.
Ministers wanting to consult Cabinet or ask for some decision that pertained to the area covered by their portfolio had to prepare a memo beforehand, submit it to the Cabinet Office and then the memo was put on the agenda.
In some rare cases when the Fenech Adami felt the item did not merit discussion, the minister concerned would be told to discuss the issue with the Prime Minister. This does not mean, however, that only memos with which the Prime Minister agreed were put on the agenda.
Monday was chosen so that Cabinet members could have the time to go through the different memos in the agenda during the weekend. Sometimes, people preferred to rest a bit on Sundays, and as more time passed it was obvious that some ministers would attend Cabinet without forming beforehand a clear idea of the issue to be discussed, namely without having actually read the relative memos before the meeting. Everybody is human, of course.
Yet the disciplined way that the Fenech Adami Cabinet met, discussed matters and took decisions, made that Cabinet a cut above the previous Cabinets appointed since independence.
Mintoff’s style had no time for recording decisions that would present problems if they were to be recanted
The decision to pass the Cabinet papers to the National Archives is to be commended. Eventually, also those of the post-1987 administrations will be passed on for posterity.
Unfortunately, no indication has been given of the time period after which Cabinet papers are to be passed to the National Archives.
Britain has decided on a lapse of 30 years before official documents are put in the public domain. Even so, if these contain information about issues that are still sensitive, this period is extended.
Historians delving into Malta’s political past usually used to look up for relevant documents in Britain. The information in the official British public records on Malta’s colonial history is extensive, and many historians delving into our country’s past have made good use of this information.
After independence in 1964, Malta no longer figures as much – excluding interesting insights on the British view regarding incidents in Malta’s bumpy ride to unhitch completely from the British connection.
The availability to the public of the country’s post-independence Cabinet papers should therefore be a new source for those carrying out research on Malta’s more recent history, more so this year when we will be celebrating the 50th anniversary of Malta’s independence.
micfal@maltanet.net