Within less than 24 hours of the general election date having been announced, Bernard Grech unveiled the 10 main areas of economic activity being proposed by the Nationalist Party in government.

Metaverse, 3D printing, AI applications, e-sport, video gaming, energy optimisation, compliance and diligence servicing, specialised manufacture and sports industry.

The reactions we had to these proposals have been varied, from “exciting”, “ambitious”, “brave” and “finally” to “Meta-what exactly?” and “don’t we have AI already?”

We are emerging from a period driven to a significant extent on the continuing performance of economic sectors introduced before 2013.

These last years benefitted from the fallout of sprawling construction and the effect of the passport sales scheme. They were not, however, marked by the launching of new, forward-looking sectors having the capacity to propel quality investment, provide quality employment and preserve positive economic trends.

In between, of course, we have experienced the sad spectacle of the Blockchain island project. Flamboyantly rolled out at the cost of millions of public funds ‒ our funds ‒ spent on self-aggrandising PR, we swiftly moved from the ceremonious name-dropping of the biggest around in the cryptocurrency exchange world to absolutely nothing.

Nothing for Malta, that is. One matter still not addressed is exactly what took place during that generous one-year ‘transitory period’ throughout which companies operated unlicensed and effectively unregulated, only to disappear when regulation was to take effect.

How many high-risk cryptocurrency exchanges took place during this free-for-all period granted by Malta, contributing to the steep descent of our national reputation? 

Suffice it to say that the person entrusted by the government and who actually coined the phrase ‘Blockchain island’ has now disassociated himself from it completely, citing “...the grievous events, criminal acts and widespread corruption of the Maltese government and the recent FATF grey-listing of the country…”

What can be more damning a judgement than this to the thousands whose jobs, and the quality of life these jobs ensure, depend so much on our international reputation?

Malta did not ‒ as it should have and very much needed to ‒ embark on new areas of economic activity.

In an economy as essentially and necessarily open as ours, the cyclic launching of new and innovative areas of economic activity is a must. It may also well be the ingredient of survival in the challenges which this ever-more globalised world can unexpectedly present. 

In an economy as open as ours, the cyclic launching of new and innovative areas of economic activity is a must- Alex Perici Calascione

Hospitality, development and manufacturing will always require particular attention as even they go through changes in patterns and priorities. At the same time, we cannot but reflect, away from partisan rhetoric, how we could have faced so many international challenges to the resilience of our economy, without that vision which dreamt up, planned and successfully launched our financial services, iGaming, aircraft maintenance, pharmaceutical and other spheres.

In a marked shift from the manner in which this government drummed up disjointed and separate initiatives, the PN’s economic proposals stem from a clear vision, forged as a result of dialogue, research, planning and participation.

Any proper and serious consideration of the economic proposals laid out in the PN electoral manifesto, however, is essentially futile or will, at best, be merely academic were it not for the assessment of the credibility of the party presenting them.

As it is said, talk is certainly cheap. The past years have also shown that fancy talk wrapped in the most impressive PR presentations available on the market would actually be cheaper, were it not for the fact that these are financed by the shameless use of millions of our public funds.

It is, therefore, only past performance which can give that level of credibility with which this economic vision and the proposals stemming from it may be properly assessed.

This is an assessment which we must all make dispassionately. The Nationalist Party most certainly had its shortcomings and made its mistakes. The platitudinal “we paid the political price for it” would be absolutely useless were it not for the fact that, apart from paying this price, we have also learnt the lessons intrinsically tied to it.

One area in which, however, the party has excelled in applying a forward-looking, incisive and ambitious political vision is in the economy. It was the proper application of this political vision which contributed so strongly to the impact of the 2008 crises and which played an important role in keeping the ship afloat in the more recent pandemic onslaught.

Resilience does not fall from the sky. Success does not come on a wing and a prayer. They are strategically kneaded into an economic sector if this is properly dreamt of, carefully planned, preceded by an adequate serious legal and regulatory framework and implemented as a direct result of targeted educational investment and high standard professionals.

Resilience and success, however, fail miserably in the ‘Blockchain island’ manner of doing things. Years of unbridled, often unwise and unchecked public spending and of an uncontrolled rise in our national deficit partly to fund this have seen many benefitting and many benefitting much more. They have, however, left their toll.

The alternative proposed is one which is based on our full confidence in our country’s ability to rise to new challenges, embrace new and exciting areas of activity and do so with maximum success.

We have done it before. We can do it again.