The two items of news that were seen to be important from an economic perspective over the last two weeks have been the privatisation of Malta Freeport and the disagreement registered between the government and Skanska, the designers, contractors and builders of Mater Dei Hospital. I think they have something in common as they both signal an element of change in approach, in style and in tactics by the government.

They reflect the need that today, with the EU membership issue behind us and with most of the strategic goals set by the Nationalist administration way back in 1987 having been achieved, we need to focus more strongly on internal economic issues, principally how we can ensure that internal economic and bureaucratic rigidities are removed to make firms operating in Malta more competitive.

The importance of the issue of the Mater Dei Hospital is critical because it shows the government's resolve to tackle issues head on when it comes to public sector spending. In fact this is the crux of the issue.

The Times, in its editorial of October 2, asked for the stoppage of what it called the haemorrhage and a common front to address the issue. One can argue about a number of aspects in relation to the Mater Dei Hospital (although I believe no one can justifiably try to wash his or her hands from this issue considering the change of designs to the building that have occurred in the last nine years under both parties' administrations).

However, what really counts is that the government has correctly reached the conclusion that enough is enough. Enough is enough in terms of the government taking a tough stand with its suppliers and contractors; and enough is enough in terms that the government is not willing to allow one project to act as a drag on the economy. This approach does signal a change; a change that shall eventually benefit the whole economy.

The privatisation of Malta Freeport together with the various changes to work practices in relation to the movement, clearance and haulage of containers that are being introduced is another signal of change.

The setting up of Malta Freeport with its vision of being a prime maritime transport hub in the centre of the Mediterranean has been one of the most significant achievements of this country. Not many thought this would really work out but it did.

In the meantime, several were those that tried to milk the cow more than it could sustain (the blockade of the Valletta harbour with a ship that was in Malta for repairs some 16 years ago is a reminder of this).

The evident risk was that the activity would eventually become uncompetitive, especially at a time when, because of increased competition, prices for the transport and transhipment of containers were being pushed downwards. The concession agreement given to CMA by the government, with the government retaining title over the property (a formula that has now been successfully tried and tested in this country) is a continuation of the government's policy to move away from the role of an operator in the economy to that of regulator.

In fact, the importance of this deal is that the government is seeking to privatise entities controlled by itself not simply to raise revenue, but also because it is a recognised fact that a strong operating role on the part of the government in the economy creates rigidities in the economy itself.

The expectation of the workforce, of suppliers, of sub-contractors is that because the entity is government controlled, then it does not need to be run on commercial lines and it can be ransacked in whatever manner possible. In fact, the attitude of such persons changes totally when they have to deal with a private company.

As such, I find the issue of raising revenue from such a privatisation as secondary. This is also possibly a wind of change.

In effect, these two issues are not the only ones that are signalling the winds of change. The assumption of direct responsibility for the Finance Ministry was already the first signal that there was something brewing in the way the government wants to tackle the major issues facing the economy.

Moreover, the work being done to speed up the privatisation process and the work being done to restructure several government-controlled entities point to one direction - change!

Winds of change are at times harbingers of bad news. In this case they are certainly not. Any analyst (economic, social or political) would tell you that any policy requires review and revision after a number of years. Today's realities in this country are different to those of 10, 15 or 20 years ago. As such, several of the policies are up for review and revision.

It is against this scenario that we need to assess the various decisions that are being taken by the government. Obviously, for a while, some of these decisions may appear to be uncomfortable for some. However, the benefits for the whole economy are there for all to see.