Surprisingly, on an island which has few secrets if any at all, Air Malta’s real position is not quite identifiable. No details have been leaked, for instance, regarding the restructuring proposals submitted to the EU for its kind consideration. That is not to say that hypotheses do not exist, or that there are not confusing signals from some of the actions taken by the government regarding the running of the company.

One hypothesis doing the rounds among a number of Air Malta employees is the following:

The government has submitted to Brussels a ‘soft’ new business plan. It provides for downsizing of the airline’s operation and its staff, both operational, office and other ground. But the authorities know it won’t be enough. More cuts will be made after the next general election.

One can understand the reasoning underpinning this hypothesis. It stems from what happened before the 2008 election. After several years of tough reining in on certain expenses through a multilateral memorandum of understanding, instead of following up with further necessary medicine the government gave the green light for fresh salary increases, ignoring the mounting losses.

The fall guys for that blatant politicking was not found where it resided in the political class. Austin Gatt, for instance, remained in his pomp more than ever before. It fell to Joe Cappello and Alfred Lupi to be made the fall guys and to be pinned with ‘executive responsibility’, despite the heavy ministerial hand on them and the rest of Air Malta. To rub salt into their wound – they were unceremoniously sacked – Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi lamented that proper action was not taken when it was required.

It says much for the professionalism of Cappello and Lupi that they remained silent in the face of the unjust treatment imposed upon them. Though the current staff hypothesis is nourished by both knowledge and silence, I do not fully share it.

My own says the government has presented Brussels with proposals that, hurt though they must, are not tough enough to enable Air Malta to make a fresh start, and then build carefully and patiently upon it.

The proposals were deliberately diluted, to leave it to Brussels (where some officials hold that Air Malta must be ‘punished’) to counter that more must be done, allowing the government to say it had no choice but to embark on harsher restructuring, blaming Brussels for it.

Moving from hypothesis to known facts there is the non-reappointment as chairman of Sonny Portelli, after a mere 17 months in office. He too kept his mouth shut but it was almost comical to see that the so-called expiry of his appointment coincided with the presentation of the restructuring proposals to Brussels. Did he agree with them or not? Mum’s the word.

There is no doubt, however, about what took place next. In appointing Louis Farrugia as the new chairman and Roderick Chalmers and Alec Mizzi as directors the government drew upon the best pool of managerial talent available in Malta.

But what, exactly, is the new board to do? Its high-level input would surely have been far more valuable when the new business plan was being drawn up.

By the looks of it the board will have to implement what Brussels will turn into an imposed deal. One other appointment is the most mysterious of all. Alan Caruana, a political person, being the close aide of Finance Minister Tonio Fenech, who took over from Austin Gatt after the mess hardened, has been appointed executive director. What, exactly, is the gentleman supposed to execute?

The company, for which read the government again, has appointed an expatriate chief executive officer. It was silly of the Labour opposition to concentrate on his pay packet. That can only be measured against results, which lie ahead.

The results required from him are operational, making a leaner Air Malta efficient and profitable, for downsizing does not automatically ensure that. The CEO’s worth, therefore, remains to be seen.

Meanwhile the company, again aka the government, has also appointed an expatriate chief restructuring officer. His job, the facts make obvious, is to implement what has eventually been set by Brussels. He has to respect Malta industrial relations legislation (e.g. first in, last out). He has little, if any, room for initiative. He has to be an overseer, not an ideas man.

All that, plus the new talent-laden board, the appointment of a CEO and a chief restructuring officer, what is the new political executive director expected to be doing? One newspaper said (without being corrected) that he was to be in charge of the day-to-day running of the company. Were that really to be the case, why also appoint a CEO and a chief restructuring officer?

Another hypothesis is immediately born – Caruana will be playing a political role as the eyes and ears of his minister. But seeing and listening to what?

Farrugia, the new chairman, will no doubt be working through the CEO. He knows board best practice inside out. To be able to do his new task properly he even dropped the position of chairman of the Malta Tourism Authority, just when his input might have been expected to be felt. What will be his relationship with the political executive director?

It is essential that Air Malta flies fully visible on the radar, if it is to continue to exist. Flying below the radar as if in some spying thriller will not help it at all.

It certainly will not thrill those – taxpayers, employees, the tourist sector and so on – who hope and pray that the company will rise out of the ashes and become whole once more.