Until a few days ago, Malta was breathing a sigh of relief that, at least for this summer, it seemed to have escaped the recurring COVID-19 nightmare that several other countries cannot seem to wake up from.
New cases were very rare. The number of active cases had gone down to a handful. People were starting to enjoy the islands again and spending money in hotels and restaurants. Business was beginning to pick up. The veins of the economy were getting unclogged. All thanks to a prudent, structured approach to the crisis.
Then two things happened. On July 15, Malta greatly eased its travel restrictions, opening the floodgates, as it were, to visitors from all over Europe and beyond. The prime minister also rescinded the ban and social distance measures in place for large public gatherings.
This made Malta an exception in Europe. But in gung-ho fashion, it went a step further, promoting itself as a destination for big parties.
After the outbreak from the pool party two weekends ago, many have pointed a finger at the organisers of such events. They are not blameless, especially if there was not even a pretence at implementing social distancing best practices, but they broke no laws. They were acting on the carte blanche given to them by the government.
The responsibility, therefore, lies firmly with those who should be guiding this country through this crisis and enforcing measures to ensure we safely navigate the gathering storm.
There is growing public pressure to review the decisions on travel and mass gatherings. The prime minister appeared to reject such an idea last Sunday. Labour Party media, and individuals well-known to be linked to the government, have for some time attacked those who have been urging a more cautious approach.
As their voices grow louder, so do the rebuttals. The government appears to have thrown caution to the wind and if proven wrong, this approach could rebound badly both in terms of the economy and the nation’s health. The prime minister is playing with fire.
Risk assessments and reviews have been drawn up in tandem with the public health department, aimed at gradually – and safely – opening up our economy. The fact that the government refuses to make the conclusions public gives rise to justified speculation about whether the recommendations are being followed.
Whatever the reason, it certainly does not breed public confidence in how the developing situation is being handled. And a lack of confidence can lead to panic and confusion. Those in charge need to reassure the public. It is all very well, for example, to tout the strategy of early case identification, isolation and contact tracing. But surely this is not failsafe when it comes to mass events, which are often filled with revellers unknown to each another and who may be reluctant or slow to answer the call to be tested, meanwhile being free to roam in the community.
Surely the difficulty of isolating these cases makes mass events more risky that an influx of migrants who are easily tested and quarantined.
Lack of trust in the authorities’ response has the potential of doing more harm to our economy than any cancellation of mass events and proper monitoring of incoming commercial travellers, such as through an obligatory COVID-19 test prior to reaching Malta.
The prime minister’s actions and public statements have raised questions about whether decisions are being taken in the interest of the public or to appease the business lobby.
It is up to Robert Abela to prove otherwise.