Editorial: Bigger isn’t necessarily better

The election campaign was built on promises of more spending, more giveaways and more government largesse. The last firecrackers from Labour’s victory celebrations had barely faded before Robert Abela signalled that the bonanza would continue, unveiling the largest and most expensive cabinet in Malta’s history.

Twenty-one ministers and two parliamentary secretaries will cost taxpayers millions a year, and that does not include consultants, allowances and the wider machinery that follows every ministerial appointment.

Ministers can appoint up to 19 people to their secretariats, while parliamentary secretaries can appoint 11. The result is a sprawling political structure that appears designed around the need to accommodate those elected on Labour’s ticket and to keep their constituents happy.

The prime minister will argue that modern government is complex and requires specialisation and, of course, few would disagree.

Malta in 2026 is not Malta in 2008, when Lawrence Gonzi governed with just eight ministers.

But there is a difference between ensuring effective administration and creating a cabinet so large that economies of scale cease to make any sense. Imagine, a single ministry in 2008 is now run by four ministers! Surely, modern government has not become four times more complex since 2013.

Malta is the EU’s smallest member state, but it now boasts a ministerial structure that rivals or exceeds those of countries many times its size. Just for context, Germany currently has 17 federal ministers plus the Chancellor.

Speak to any established civil servant and they will tell you many ministries could easily have remained merged.

A leaner government makes it easier to identify who is responsible for delivering results. A sprawling cabinet risks creating a system where responsibility is diluted and accountability becomes harder to enforce.

The problem is, of course, not the dedicated public servants who keep essential services running but the continuing growth of politically appointed structures that often appear detached from reality. It’s simply jobs for the boys.

Equally troubling still is the message such expansion sends. For years, Malta has been grappling with labour shortages, with businesses across multiple sectors struggling to recruit workers.

At the same time, the government has continued to absorb (Maltese) workers into ministries, authorities, agencies, government-owned companies and a growing ecosystem of publicly funded entities.

As Farsons Group CEO Norman Aquilina recently argued, the public sector’s reach has expanded to the point where it risks distorting the labour market, draining local talent away from productive enterprise and making foreign workers crucial if they are to continue operating. 

There are also legitimate questions about some of the individuals entrusted with key responsibilities in cabinet.

We spoke to government insiders and they told us that Abela simply wanted to keep everyone around him happy to minimise dissent, which is why the cabinet size is bloated.

There are, of course, also positive elements in the new cabinet. Several portfolios have been reshuffled in ways that may inject fresh energy into ministries that had grown stale.

Some ministers have been performed well and deserve the opportunity to continue their work.

But the broader picture remains troubling.

Cabinets should be designed around the needs of the country rather than the demands or whims of party management.

Labour won a fourth consecutive mandate and remains politically dominant. Last weekend’s victory gave Abela an opportunity to demonstrate confidence and discipline. While it is very clear that he intends to continue promoting a feelgood factor, it should not come by plundering public coffers to placate his supporters.