It is grossly unfair and historically incorrect to accuse the Nationalist government, as Labour have done these past few days in the debate on the transfer of the dockyard to an Italian company, of having undermined the shiprepair company as a strategic asset for years. The Nationalists can indeed be accused of a number of shortcomings in their handling of the privatisation process. They must also share part of the political responsibility for the 'yard's dismal performance over the many years they have been in government too. But, surely, the largest share of the blame has to be shouldered by the Labour Party and the General Workers' Union, which both considered the dockyard as their power base.

The 'yard as a commercial enterprise has never really took off, as even the profit made between 1973 and 1981 was small. As is the case of other state-owned companies, it was well over-manned. However, one of the biggest problems all along the commercialisation process, starting from the time Baileys took over in 1959, was the difficulty of changing the workers' mentality, to make them adapt to commercial work practices.

A council of administration had in later years appointed Swan Hunter as managing agents but even these could not bring about the required change in mentality. Appointing workers' representatives on the board, in direct elections among the workforce, did not help either. But a strong factor that contributed to making the dockyard a debt-ridden enterprise was the politicisation of the environment as best exemplified by a seven-month overtime ban in the time of the Nationalist government of George Borg Olivier.

The action was obviously meant to cripple the Nationalist government. It did. By then, the Labour Party-GWU hold on the workforce was total, as could be seen from the mammoth meetings held at Gavino Gulia Square in Cospicua by the union's metalworkers' section of the time and the show of force the most militant of the workforce so freely displayed at required political moments to the dismay of the people in general.

When Dom Mintoff took over, he thought he could easily bring the workforce to his way of thinking and tried to drive the point home to them in his inimitable manner. There is no doubt about it, he was the man best placed to do the job. But even though some improvement in performance had been made, his effort did not bring about a lasting change.

With all the reforms made over the years, with the exception of one year, the 'yard had continued to make a loss every year. Productivity may have increased in recent times but, excluding the work on the last two loss-making contracts, it had not been anywhere near what was required to bring about long-term financial viability. There were other factors that contributed to the 'yard's closure, including, of course, weak management and lack of investment.

History will show that the workers were often politically misguided and used to serve the interests of the Labour Party and the GWU. The workers inherited great skills and could rise to the occasion any time they were required to do so. But they could not break out of the political mould. The writing was on the wall a long time ago. Will Palumbo, the Italian firm chosen to run the facility, make a success of it? Who knows, only time will tell. But, at least, they deserve a word of encouragement at the start of their new venture.