It looks as if the government has not found its feet yet following the March general election, which it won by a slim majority. This may be due, in part, to the fact that the Nationalists had not prepared themselves well for another win, thinking perhaps that, in the wake of so much unfavourable criticism in the months leading to the election, the electorate was bound to vote for a change of Administration. The fact that they had in fact won is another story but it is becoming clear that the government needs to re-establish its bearings well before moving on to carry out its programme. Nine months into its third successive Administration, signs of bad timing, and arrogance, even at ministerial level, are indicating lack of preparedness. Arrogance is earning it much displeasure, but, strangely, it does not seem to be noticing it.

The government is right in deciding to do away with subsidies but it has to do so gradually and, more importantly, at the right time. The timing of its decision to remove the subsidy on electricity, for instance, was bad on two counts: first because of the impact the recession abroad is likely to have on industry and tourism, and, secondly, because, the move has come at a time when the price of crude oil has plummeted. True, the government, as it has been repeatedly saying all along, buys fuel in its refined state but even so, psychologically at least, the timing is incorrect. The government would have to keep in mind, too, the impact the rise would have on those who, due to a drop in order books, have found themselves out of work or are working a reduced working week.

The timing is considered even more incorrect when considering that the government has said that its primary aim is to make people cut waste. This is a laudable aim but the exercise should be done over time and certainly not in the slipshod manner in which it is being undertaken. The government should have known that a sudden sharp rise would provoke a strong reaction but it did not factor this in, causing much confusion, uncertainty and even a street protest by the trade unions, which, for once, forgot their usual parochial rivalry and joined forces to press for the re-opening of talks with the government.

Even the way it "consulted" with the social partners was wrong. The government either believes in consultation or it does not but if it does it should not deal with the social partners in the way it did over the water and energy rates. The social partners within the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development felt hurt and irritated by the government's attitude. They felt the way they were treated was disparaging and unacceptable. Had the exercise been done properly it would not have dragged on and much energy - and disagreements - would have been avoided. If anything, therefore, the issue should serve the government as a lesson not to take consultation lightly, as it did at first over the water and energy rates.

Timing and consultation also come into play in the matter over the government's plan to move Parliament to a new building at the old Royal Opera House site and the rebuilding of City Gate. The project, long, long overdue, would have to be seen as an additional economic stimulus as otherwise its timing would be wrong too, considering the difficult economic times being forecast. Here things need to move ahead... and fast.