Interviewer

Uday Nagaraju
Executive President & Co-founder, Global Policy Insights

Questions

1. Your Excellency, you were appointed to head the Maltese High Commission to the United Kingdom during a tumultous state of affairs in British politics, how would you evaluate your time so far and what objectives do you intend to achieve over the course of your tenure?

Indeed since commencing my term in London in August 2018 I have since witnessed a constant flux in the political situation, which has, needless to say, kept me very busy. This has not deterred me, however with working on my key objective, namely working with the government of the United Kingdom in furthering the strong relations between our two countries and in advancing my country’s interests.

2. In addition to your current tenure as High Commissioner, you have also served as the Deputy High Commissioner to the United Kingdom in 1998. Can you elaborate on the evolving nature of your political office and engagements with the British counterparts?

The requirements of my role as Deputy High Commissioner in 1998 and my current role are very different in light of both the job description and the different circumstances both the UK and Malta find themselves in. In 1998, Malta had just reactivated its application for membership to the European Union and that was the key task at hand for diplomats spread across all of Malta’s missions around the world – working with our future EU partners in attaining support for our application and in the negotiations that eventually led to Malta’s accession in 2004.

Our relationship with the UK, as was our diplomatic and foreign policy drive, was marked by Malta’s EU ambitions. The Commonwealth also played a key role in my work at the time in that this was, and still is, one of the main international organisations Malta was very active in. In my current term, my engagement is of a different nature, particularly as this is undertaken from the perspective of a representative of a member state of the European Union.

My work involves building and maintaining bilateral relations with my British counterparts however there is as yet much uncertainty in light of Brexit negotiations and matters may not always proceed as swiftly and efficiently as I may wish. The engagement has remained however very positive and productive due to our two countries’ strong historical bonds.

3. Are there any significant takeaways of your experience, dealing with the current administration in contrast to Tony Blair’s government in 1998?

Relations with the United Kingdom have always been excellent as have my dealings with the United Kingdom’s government, irrespective of the time at which these have taken place. However, the context in which we carry out business is entirely different. In 1998, Tony Blair’s government had just come to power with a landslide victory in the previous year’s parliamentary elections, promising a new way of doing politics– the mood was one of enthusiasm, internationalism and drive for reform and initiative.

The UK was a strong and proud member of the European Union who would prove to be of much support to Malta’s endeavours within the Union in its accession as well as eventually a fellow European Union member state. This contrasts with the current situation where one witnesses a completely different political scenario providing interesting new challenges. This is not to say that our bilateral engagement has weakened. On the contrary, this is stronger than ever and we have worked firmly with the United Kingdom on Commonwealth and multilateral issues

4. According to the Central Bank of Malta’s Policy Note from March 2017, the share of Malta’s export of goods to the United Kingdom has fallen from 40% in the early 1970s to about 3% in recent years, whereas the share of UK tourists has fallen from nearly 80% in the early 1980s to less than 30% currently. What factors do you amount this decrease to? How do you think Malta can increase British investments in its economy and is this an important theme in your Brexit negotiation considerations?

These changes are by no means a reflection of a weakening in relations between the United Kingdom and Malta but rather a change in Malta’s economic circumstances and a broadening of the reach and scope of its policies. Firstly, in the 1970s, Malta was a newly independent country that had for years been dependent on the shipbuilding and repair industry that had been borne of Malta’s strategic location in the Mediterranean. With the departure of the British forces from the island, Malta’s successive governments were compelled to broaden the country’s horizons and diversify its economy. Manufacturing was a key component of Malta’s economic growth, particularly due to low-cost human resources. However, as Malta’s economic development advanced, the cost of resources no longer remained a competitive advantage. Greater value-added and less resource intensive industries needed to be sought and, in fact, such industries such as textiles saw a decline as these moved to other countries. Exports of manufactured goods have decreased overall as a result, as nowadays, Malta’s exports are of a different nature, with Malta’s economy a service-based one, with Malta being a hub for financial and maritime services.

With regards to tourism, the same developments have occurred. Malta’s tourism policy has evolved substantially and whilst the UK market is still the largest one in terms of tourist arrivals, the share of tourists from all over the globe has increased, which explains the decrease in percentages. The product Malta offers is a diverse one that caters for various tastes and hence various cultures, nationalities and age groups. The increase in flights by low-cost carriers has also aided this development.

With regards to your last two questions, work on FDI (Foreign Direct Investments) with the United Kingdom is constant and ongoing and British investment is still strong. Brexit would feature to a certain extent due to possible tariffs being in place however, some investments in Malta precede both countries’ accession to the European Union. Furthermore, decisions on future British investments in Malta will also be based on factors other than the trade limitations that may arise following Brexit.

5. Former British Secretary of State David Davis wrote in the Times of Malta (March 2018), (https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/race-to-the-top-on-standards-david-davis.672553) that the two nations will maintain close cooperation irrespective of the terms of Britain’s exit from the European Union and reiterated the same in his meeting with the Maltese Prime Minister, Dr. Joseph Muscat. How have negotiations since resulted in concrete arrangements or the strengthening of the pre-existing instruments?

It is expected that pre-existing agreements shall remain in place following Brexit so key concerns we had, have been somewhat assuaged. However, as a European Union member state, Malta is not in a position to enter into agreements that fall within the remit of the Acquis as such agreements are negotiated by the European Union, on behalf of its members, with the third party in question.

6. The 2017 Commonwealth Local Government Conference (CLGF) was held in Valletta and co-hosted by the Ministry for Justice, Culture and Local Government and the Local Councils' Association. What impression did the Conference leave upon the local networks of governance in the country itself?

The CLGF conference was a wonderful event that followed Malta’s hosting of The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) 2015. There was still much enthusiasm and excitement following the excellent outcome of the Malta CHOGM and seeing this enthusiasm spill over in a somewhat smaller setting, in a conference that dealt with a key aspect of a country’s governance, was immensely positive.

The conference brought together local government representatives from all over the Commonwealth to share experiences and learn from each other, proving yet again that the Commonwealth can be a force for development. Needless to say, local networks of governance in Malta benefitted from this event and the resulting exchanges amongst representatives from such a diverse group of countries that makes up the Commonwealth family. As a small nation, such interactions with other nations sharing similar circumstances, of which there are 31, are crucial in small-state public policy.

7. Chairman of the International Relations Committee of the British Parliament, Lord David Howell often refers to the Commonwealth as the ‘mother of all networks.’ What is the Maltese understanding of the Commonwealth in the 21st century? Can it be viewed as an institution that defines the values of democracy, good governance, peace and justice, and other political values of our times?

Lord Howell is a true Commonwealth expert and has engaged with the organisation for several years. What he speaks is most certainly true and I find his outlook on the Commonwealth particularly refreshing. It goes beyond the fanfare of the regular Heads of Government Meetings, the negotiations and bilateral meetings - all of which are positive - and addresses that which truly makes the Commonwealth so unique– its people and that which unites them in their diversity.

These linkages, made possible through the institutions and associations that fall under the Commonwealth umbrella have a far reach and have proven, time and time again, that the Commonwealth can indeed be a force for good. Some key examples that rely heavily on local networks and grassroots organisation are activities in the field of local governance, the CLGF being a case in point; health and education, as well as initiatives and activities undertaken jointly by groups of Commonwealth countries on issues of common interest, such as fisheries or maritime/ocean matters.

These particular examples may not directly relate to political values but developments in these and the networks that result are conducive to peace and democracy, both within nations as well as amongst themselves. Therefore, yes the Commonwealth is indeed an institution that fosters political values. These values are enshrined in the Commonwealth Charter and countries are bound to espouse these principles, with those that do not abide by the Charter’s tenets taken to task, as has happened with the Maldives for instance. On the other hand, countries such as Zimbabwe and the Gambia, which have re-embraced these values, have looked to the Commonwealth once again as a beacon of light in their re-joining the international community in earnest.

The need for further reform of the Commonwealth remains however paramount if it is to be an organisation that is relevant and fit for purpose in the 21st century. My government advocated strongly for reform throughout its term as Chair in Office and persists in its belief. Such reforms are in progress towards streamlining activities undertaken by the Commonwealth down to the core areas where the Commonwealth has the highest competence and which are most relevant to its member states. It is through the constant re-evaluation and assessment of the Commonwealth countries’ needs that one can ensure that this institution truly works in supporting the promotion of political values.