In its pre-budget document for this year, which was far less technical than that for next year published a few weeks ago, the government had laid down as one of the objectives in its information technology strategy the re-invention "of the government of Malta by transforming the public service in terms of its service delivery and governance". It sounds a bit bombastic, but at least insofar as the first part of the objective is concerned, great progress has indeed been made. Indeed, it was announced only recently that Maltese e-government services have made it to the final stage of the European e-Government Awards 2009 organised by the European Commission.

However, as regards governance, taken in all its aspects, the wheels still grind excruciatingly slow, leading to frustration and shortcomings that are all too often so evident that one wonders how the whole public service machine works.

It is greatly ironic that, while Malta is earning kudos for its e-government services, other aspects of the service appear stuck in traditional bureaucratic mire that has no place in today's competitive environment. It is precisely for this reason that glaring administrative shortcomings stand out. One trade unionist could not take the situation anymore, and spilled out his frustration over this in public. His complaint, a very serious one, is that he has often to refer to the Prime Minister over trivial problems that could well be thrashed out with other public officers in the service. He went so far as to call on the Prime Minister to get rid of those officers who were acting as stumbling blocks to the settlement of small disputes.

The trade unionist, Gejtu Vella, general secretary of the Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin, quite rightly remarked that, in an established hierarchical structure, decisions ought to be taken at the appropriate level, avoiding any necessity on the part of trade unions of having to refer to higher authority. "If there are people who are failing to assume responsibility, remove them," he was reported saying. This is easier said than done in an organisation that is heavily unionised, and Mr Vella obviously knows this only too well, but his point should be well taken by those who ought to shoulder responsibility for the duties they are charged to carry out and for which they are paid out of taxpayers' money.

According to Mr Vella, the situation was leading the union, and probably other unions too, to call industrial action when matters can well be nipped in the bud, or properly discussed, or negotiated, by public officers.

The matter is important enough for ministers to go into it in line with the natural overall desirability of ensuring that public officers do their duty to the full. Not only that, but there ought to be, at all levels, greater accountability than that usually shown so far. Had there been strict accountability, for example, the fraud that has taken place at the VAT department could have perhaps been detected in its early stages; overdue payment of tax to the government would not have grown to a gigantic proportion; and the UĦM's general secretary would not have been driven to air his frustration in public. All this naturally applies also to workers in government-controlled entities.

So, while great progress has been made in the provision of government services electronically, there is much that has yet to be seen to in order to bring about greater efficiency in other equally important services.