There are many misconceptions regarding tourism in Malta. A common one is that tourism contributes about 40 per cent to Malta’s GDP.

This cannot be true. The figure is nearer to 15 per cent. This means that tourism is still a very large economic sector and its contribution has probably exceeded that of the manufacturing sector. It is true that tourism has a high income multiplier effect, but when expressing a given expenditure as a ratio to GDP, we calculate its direct value added only. All other final expenditures have an income multiplier effect.

Another misconception is that the main tourism attraction in Malta is its culture. In reality, the main attractions are its climate and its sea. If we did not have these, very few tourists would visit Malta. Our cultural heritage may be considered as the cherry on the cake, but not the cake itself.

A related misconception is that given that some other countries have practically the same sea and climate attractions Malta has, we should not base our publicity on sea and climate. This is not a valid argument.

Tourists like to vary their choice of places they visit and it does not matter much that other countries have the similar sea and climate attractions. What matters more in this case is the competitiveness of the host country, the quality of services offered and community safety.

At present, about 50 per cent of tourists are aged over 45. A fourth misconception is that Malta benefits more from younger tourists than from older ones.

While all types of tourists should be welcome, older tourists tend to spend more per capita year round, and are generally not as bothersome, socially, as young visitors.

A fifth misconception relates to the role of government in the recent surge in the number of inbound tourists (I’m not referring to Labour or Nationalist governments here but to government in general).

The main reason for the increase in inbound tourism experienced in recent years was very probably the result of the introduction of low-cost airlines, because this has connected Malta to many European cities.

Initially, in an attempt to protect Air Malta, government policy would seem to have been against low-cost airlines. However, eventually, common sense prevailed. Government policy in this case was only relevant because it opened a door the government itself had previously shut.

Of more importance than the government’s role is the role of the private sector in offering value for money to visitors.

The government’s role with regard to tourists should be similar to that applicable to local residents, namely providing well-functioning public amenities, including roads, water and electricity, overseeing public cleanliness, limiting environmental degradation and ensuring community safety.