When Glenn Micallef was announced as Malta’s nominee to the European Commission, there were many rumblings of discontent.
Some local politicians felt slighted. How could Robert Abela prefer this 35-year-old with no political experience to them, they fumed.
There was also some concern among some Brussels insiders, who feared Micallef’s youth and inexperience would be weaponised by MEPs braying for political blood.
In the end, they need not have worried. Micallef coasted through his MEP hearing and was approved by all of the European Parliament’s major political groups. Only the right-wing Patriots and Europe of Sovereign Nations groups sought to block Micallef’s nomination.
Micallef started off shakily and his voice and delivery betrayed his nerves. But as he rolled with the questions, he found his stride and visibly grew in confidence.
For a man with no experience of frontline politics to face that level of scrutiny and emerge unscathed is no mean feat, and Micallef deserves praise for that.
Granted, many of his replies were little more than policy waffle. He spoke of developing a “culture compass” and the importance of “European Union values”. He praised Europe’s “cultural tapestry” and pledged to “give youths a voice”.
It was all high-minded, inoffensive and rather thin on detail.
That is not entirely his fault. As EU policy experts have noted, Micallef’s portfolio is highly reliant on member states, which have ultimate control over legislation in his portfolio sectors. Many of the initiatives he has been tasked with will also require the input of other commissioners on Ursula von der Leyen’s team, with the commission president having intentionally spread responsibilities across her cabinet.
Given those two considerations, Micallef could not have given MEPs too many clear commitments or policy pledges, even if he wanted to. Von der Leyen’s mission letter for Micallef sheds some more light on what Micallef will prioritise once he and other commissioners are sworn in later this month.
The European Commission wants to place significant emphasis on what it calls “youth dialogues” and Micallef is expected to organise the first such event within his first 100 days. Whether or not these sorts of initiatives will make a difference in getting young people to engage in politics remains to be seen.
What seems to be more pressing, and potentially more effective at encouraging a change of attitudes and political engagement among young people, is Micallef’s assignment of taking a closer look at the impact of social media and excessive screen time on young people.
Social media has rapidly become ingrained into our lives in a way other mediums never did, and the reality is that societies remain ill-equipped and under-informed about its long-term impacts on citizens, most especially those whose minds and personalities are still being formed.
There are indications that social media platforms themselves are well aware that their products have harmful impacts on young people – look at the way in which Meta buried damaging research about Instagram’s impact on children just a few years ago. It is about time policymakers have their own data to work with, and act upon it.
Micallef’s work to prepare an EU strategy on cyberbullying is also one to watch. The strategy must toe a fine line between protecting people from online mockery and torment and protecting people’s right to free speech.
One also hopes Micallef will also play an important role in shaping the EU’s perspective on the working conditions of artists and other creatives. Just this week, we revealed how people in the film sector are waiting months to get paid by government entities. If they cannot even trust their own government to pay them, what chance do they have of finding reliable employers or clients in the private sector?