Remarks last week by former PN minister and general secretary Chris Said about having Gozo run by an elected council have sparked fresh debate on the governance of the sister island.

It has been almost 38 years since Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami took the bold decision to appoint a minister for Gozo.

That decision was hailed at the time for giving Gozo a voice at Malta’s top table after years of Labour government during which Gozo was seen as having been ‘forgotten’ by Castille.

Is that decision still relevant now? Has the setting up of the Gozo ministry benefited the island? Has the Gozo ministry become too powerful? Can there be an alternative?

Gozo has seen various forms of government over the years, each adapting to the needs of the time. And the time has certainly come for a fresh look.

But the tiny island’s biggest problem is not its form of governance, but governance itself. It has too much of it – layers of councils over councils, committees and authorities and an administration which now sees more than a third of Gozitans directly employed by the government, and almost half reliant on government contracts.

Said has proposed that the Gozo ministry should be devolved to an elected council enjoying executive powers.

There would still be a minister for Gozo in the central government, but the council would be the decision-maker on the things that directly impact Gozo, he says. How that would work is unclear. Too many chiefs come to mind. And unprecedented levels of political nepotism of the kind the Gozo bishop already complained about. 

Last October, Noel Formosa, one of Gozo’s longest-serving and respected mayors went a step further, arguing that Gozo’s geographical identity provides a clear argument for autonomy. Separated from mainland Malta by the Gozo channel, the island has its own unique challenges and opportunities that merit specific governance closer to the people, he said.

Formosa cited the Aaland Islands, in Finland, and Sardinia, in Italy, to show how autonomy could help regions thrive economically, socially and culturally, although the comparison is not like with like. Full regional governance, he claimed, would allow Gozo to address its specific challenges – from tourism and environmental sustainability to infrastructure – on its own terms, with policies tailored to its residents’ needs.

Which leads to another major issue which needs to be factored in when Gozo’s governance is considered. How and to what extent is Gozo a ‘distinct region’?

It is separated from Malta by just three miles of water, with good and frequent sea connections. Malta and Gozo share the same language, religion, cultural characteristics and, indeed, problems.

 Similarly, what makes Gozo a ‘distinct’ tourist destination compared to Malta? What are the ‘specific challenges’ that make it really different from Malta? And why do problems have to be fixed ‘on its own terms’? What terms? In this day of the global village should we continue to speak of Gozo’s double insularity’?

That is not to say that there aren’t differences between Malta and Gozo. Living in a small island, even smaller than Malta, does have its problems, but does catering for those differences require a government within a government and a mountain of bureaucracy? Does it, for example, justify the fact that there is an infrastructure agency for Malta, and a different set-up for Gozo?

Formosa has argued that only through autonomous regional governance can Gozo truly flourish, fulfilling its potential as a vibrant and self-sustaining island community.

So what has been holding it back?