On July 28, I arrived at 11.25am to catch the noon Gozo ferry. I was waiting in the fifth lane and there were nine or 10 lanes of other cars waiting to board. I presumed I would be able to board the noon ferry without difficulty. But I was wrong.

The MV Gaudos, which has no hoistable car decks, started loading. The problem started when someone instructed the sole Gozo Channel worker there to allow some vans to jump the queue.

Numerous protests, including mine, were in vain. He kept saying he was given orders but would not say by whom.

None of the many managerial staff members/consultants appeared on site except for an unfortunate junior official who was there for the 12.45pm trip. I approached this person, formally lodged a complaint and asked for it to be registered.

We spent one hour and 20 minutes in the unbearable heat with no shade at all. It was excruciating.

Millions of euros were spent and, yet, no provisions were made at both ends for temporary shelters to protect passengers from the excessive heat of summer or for an indoor bar at the terminal facilities.

There appears to be absolutely no adequate plans of how to improve Gozo Channel whether short or long term

Although I prefer not to write about Gozo Channel, as I used to sit on its board and also served as chairman in the past, I simply cannot fail to focus on what to me appears to be managerial inadequacies.

There appears to be absolutely no adequate plans of how to improve the company whether short or long term. This when there are so many management members and consultants. There are bad agreements too.

The lack of a clear vision for the present and the future is so evident that it makes one cry.

To start with, I wonder why an agreement between the company and the trade union representing workers, signed years ago, was based on open sea terms and not on inland sea.

If the company offered a ferry service to Europe, an open sea agreement is required. This was the case when MV Għawdex used to carry passengers to Sicily.

Thus, instead of employing five sailors, twice as many were required and additional staff had to be employed according to passenger numbers.

In my view, the open sea agreement was signed only for political expediencies, to enlarge and double the workforce. Who did this agreement benefit? The simple answer is: the politicians in charge of Gozo Channel to the detriment of the country and its financial viability. This unnecessary financial burden also helped to make it financially unstable.

In addition, a most discriminatory system was introduced. Workers doing the same work and shifts were not paid the same wages. This went on for years with the union appearing to be doing nothing about it and failing to refer the matter to arbitration.

It was only now, under the present Administration that the matter is being resolved.

What plans do management, consultants and the ministry have to better the company’s fortunes, both financially and operational, for the present and the future?

One also wonders whether three ferries are adequate to meet the island’s transportation needs.

Each one of them spends a few weeks out of service to undergo routine maintenance and every four years they have to do general maintenance.

If during such refits, one of the other two vessels still operational develops engine trouble or the ramps are jammed (as frequently happens), the workload will have to be handled by one ship. That would surely not be enough to meet the demand.

Gozo Channel said that last year it reduced its financial loss by 32 per cent. This means it is still posting substantial losses even if, for the past years, Gozo Channel was boasting of the increases in the number of vehicles and passengers it carried, giving the impression that all is well on the Western front.

I cannot understand given that almost every ferry is full to the brim with passengers and vehicles, who all pay up front.

If both passenger and vehicle records are being broken regularly, how is it that the company is not making a profit?

During the last part of my stint at Gozo Channel, apart from separating vehicles carrying heavy cargo from the normal flow, we were studying the possibility of former navy barges being used to ferry heavy vehicles between the islands.

The fuel consumption of such barges was so minimal that profitability was guaranteed. Also, they could land even in shallow waters. Unfortunately my term in office terminated prior to the final evaluation of these plans.

A general revision is definitely needed.

Gozo Channel does not lack managerial staff because there are more than enough members. Nor does it lack expert consultants.

However, it definitely lacks the ‘think tank’ elements for new outside-the-box policies.

So what’s new? What sort of plans are aimed at the company’s future enlargement and to address past and present financial deficiencies?

Where is Gozo Channel heading?