Malta does not come out smelling of roses in an index of sustainable governance indicators compiled by a German foundation. It is unlikely that this will cause a stir or any sleepless nights for, although there is usually much talk about good governance, particularly at the political level, action does not generally match words, and when it does, it only comes after a painfully long time.

Commitments are made and unmade according to whims or, more precisely, political convenience, making a mockery of good principles. The development of the institutional infrastructure required to ensure good and, just as important, sustainable, governance did not keep pace with economic development, even though progress has now been made in a number of fields.

However, further tangible improvement in matters that involve politics or that require direct political action or participation can be expected to remain excruciatingly slow as party interests take precedence over other interests.

The problem is that in the polarised community we have in Malta, what ought, by any standard, to be considered unacceptable can easily come to be politically acceptable, if not a norm.

The German study was quite emphatic when it said that appointments in the public sector were based on recommendations from party headquarters. It sounds crude, but who would dare contradict the statement? At least this is the general perception, and perceptions are not created out of thin air. For this reason, Malta scored just 5.1 out of 10 in policy performance.

The authors of the report wrote that “discrimination or lack of political trust on behalf of the government has caused this problem and until merit becomes the established criteria for government recruitment, the problem will persist.”

Labour leader Joseph Muscat promised a radical break with the past in the last general election and staked his credibility on meritocracy. In government, he has largely been seen to be doing exactly the opposite, however much he may protest this is not the case.

Malta has failed not only on this score, but also in environmental policy. In light of the change planned to be made in the planning and environment regulatory set-up, many now fear that the outlook looks even worse as the government is seen to be increasingly pandering to developers.

At least the country now appears to be inching forward in the drive towards enacting party financing legislation, though what will matter most is not how well the law is drafted, but how effective the machinery is to monitor both political parties and politicians.

The German study also brings to the forefront, as expected, matters relating to the appointment of judges by the government, and issues over inadequate consultation. The change in administration since the compilation of the study has not brought about any notable improvement in the matters that contributed to Malta’s low ranking.

In the case of appointments in the public service, for example, the situation is worse. The health service is deteriorating, presenting new challenges to an administration that told people to believe it had all the answers to our problems.

By contrast, fresh winds are blowing from the justice ministry, raising hopes of some long-hoped-for improvement not just in the time taken for justice to be done but also in the quality of the judiciary.

Working towards raising the governance ranking will be a good sign of political advancement. It will also help to enhance the island’s image.