Tony Zammit Cutajar (How Taxpayer's Money Is Spent, January 30) took the government to task for squandering people's hard-earned money. Here are some details to help the public decide whether the money was well spent.
Mid-Med Bank: The value of the bank at the time of sale was nowhere near the present scenario. The government would have never managed to sustain the then Mid-Med Bank and obtain the same performance. When HSBC took over, the bank went through a vast restructuring, including early retirement, which contributes to the present performance. ATMs took over from personnel and cash tills were reduced to a minimum.
The question is, would the government have been able to introduce such measures? It would have encountered objections from the unions and the public. The €200 million may be looked upon as on the low side but one has to understand that the government saved on the annual salaries and is pocketing much more from tax on profits made by HSBC. Besides, Malta has benefited tremendously from having HSBC operating here. To a certain extent even Bank of Valletta and the other banks benefited. To say nothing of the new foreign investment and financial facilities available, to which HSBC has surely contributed.
Dar Malta: It is next to impossible to claim that this was money wasted because its value is increasing by the minute. It being in a prime position, the return may be quite encouraging. One would be able to make a proper assessment when the building is disposed of by the government.
Malta Shipyards: I totally disagree with Mr Zammit Cutajar. As a businessman he cannot look at just one aspect, that of paying so much to downsize the workforce and get so little from the new bidders. It would have been ideal to recoup what the government paid from the bidders but let us analyse the process of the whole saga.
The shipyards burdened the taxpayer with hundreds of millions of euro over the years. It would have still been worthwhile to pay €50 million once and offload and save on the annual salaries and running costs. Besides, the government had a European commitment to stop all subsidies. Anything that is now being pocketed from the sale of the shipyards is over and above and to safeguard the remaining 50 or so employees.
Public transport: It is too early to comment but prima facie the government is constitutionally bound to offer compensation when it takes over the livelihood or property from anyone. Public transport is in urgent need of reorganisation and time will tell whether this was money well spent. It should improve the image of Malta. As an example, take the landscaping project. It might have looked like a great expense but can one now imagine doing away with the planted areas to save on costs? Every project starts with ifs and buts - the airport, Mater Dei Hospital, telephone exchanges, social services, etc - but we have to admit that Malta is slowly catching up with other European countries.
City Gate and St George's Square: Mr Zammit Cutajar tends to forget that St George's Square was also the target of criticism when plans were on the drawing board.
Today he seems to be in line and is suggesting that we should do more or less the same at City Gate. This is an ambitious project and it is next to impossible to please everybody. I for one would have loved to see the Royal Opera House built to its original glory, even if the interior is used to different purposes, but who am I to decide?
Thank God that we have great minds leading our small country and in a world of ups and downs have managed to survive. Until a few years ago the electorate was being begged to join the European Union.
Since then, Malta has shown progress, as reflected in the comments of Frank Salt. What we are investing in now will reap a future harvest. Let us hope, for the good of our island, that the investment will not be ruined by spokes in the wheels or bad weather.