The Prime Minister continues to distribute candy to the naughty boys rocking the government boat. After the parliamentary assistants' scheme, he still needed to placate the harder nuts. Last March, we saw the appointment of backbencher Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando as chairman of the Malta Council for Science and Technology and, now, just after being appointed deputy Speaker, Ċensu Galea was given some more booty as chairman of the Building Industry Consultative Council.

There are various ways in which a party in government can exploit patronage, two of which are: (1) patronage as wrong-doing aimed at sustaining the support of specific individuals and groups through favour or awards; and (2) patronage as aid and control in governance where appointments are used to ensure loyalty and foster support. Thus, political patronage is deployed both as a tool for control and as a form of wrong-doing.

This means that merit and expertise do not provide the main motivation behind filling appointments in the public sector because partisan issues are of primary relevance. The same goes for the awarding of contracts for capital projects. Political debt then becomes a critical resource through which the party can develop and sustain its organisational structures. Observe how the Nationalist Party remained silent on the JS list for instance. Or you may care to look at how the power station extension project - as amply demonstrated in the Auditor General's investigation - falls in the first category of patronage used for wrong-doing and the appointment of the aforementioned backbenchers falls in the latter category. In this latter category fall also the innumerable appointments on government authorities (the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, Malta Enterprise, etc).

This, of course, goes against pledge no. 258 of the GonziPN 2008 election manifesto. Under the heading Peace Of Mind Provided By A Government That Listens To You And Takes Care Of You and the subheading Proposals For A More Efficient And Open Public Service and under yet another title More Transparency, we were promised that "Appointments to government boards will be made after a public call for applications".

That pledge was probably included to bring back to the fold those referred to in a report commissioned by the PN (an analysis of the 2004 EP election result) which spoke clearly about the way the patronage system - both as wrong-doing and as a way of controlling governance - was operating. Those interviewed for the report were quoted as saying that it was wrong that there were people occupying high posts in the civil service and in the various authorities and agencies who did not merit to occupy such positions. While those who deserved to be in these posts - but were not in the inner PN circle network - were sidelined.

The same goes for the awarding of contracts. If you're not an insider, you're out of the game. We have seen one tainted project after the other, the latest being the White Rocks property development (300 apartments, four-star hotel, commercial and entertainment services) plus some sports facilities. But our mind was put at rest by the Prime Minister when he announced that it is not going to cost the Maltese public anything. Nevertheless, the developers will be getting (for a period still to be stipulated) €500 million worth of public land.

In his book The State In Africa: The Politics Of The Belly (the 1993 translation of L'etat En Afrique: Politique Du Ventre, published in 1989) Jean Francis Bayart, one of France's leading political scientists, had come up with the multi-faceted metaphor of "politics of the belly" whereby one dimension refers to the interdependence of an elite wielding power in the public and private spheres and using this power to control and perpetuate political and economic power. He was writing on corrupt African states where government and business use their influence to devour whatever is on the national table.

The more stories I hear on government and investment, such as this latest White Rocks ouevre, the more Bayart's metaphor about gluttony, the political elite and the entrepreneurial chosen few comes to mind, especially where nepotism is concerned.

But, then, who would dare compare the way we do politics and business to that of some African states? We like to believe that we are modern, transparent, efficient, accountable, meritocratic. But are we? The powers that be may negotiate and stab serious competitors behind the scenes with style and elegance but, in essence, is the result much different from that of those who go about their business with less finesse? Nepotism is just as networked. Deals are just as shady.

Classic "politics of the belly" patron-based relationships are considered an element of pre-democratic societies but then that couldn't be us as we boast of a democratic polity.

Or could it be? It is time that a mature debate regarding the issue of government and political party patronage is taken seriously, even if there's the risk of generating more heat than light.

Dr Dalli is shadow minister for the public service and government investment.