Alex E. Felice, on behalf of the Malta Chamber of Scientists, write:

Mario Tabone, who passed away a few weeks ago, pursued a strong interest in science policy for many years, indeed, as long as he was active in politics and dedicated to his clinical specialisation in ophthalmology.

Mario Tabone

Undoubtedly influenced by extraordinarily wide reading, his interests may have also been shaped by his medical specialty that he excelled in. For him, the pathophysiology of the eye and the physics of optics may have served to anchor many of his ideas in science and technology.

In his mind, socio-economic development of a very small country like his, depended as much on a liberal parliamentary democracy and free social markets, as, on a vibrant sector of higher education and research.

Tabone had many of the qualities that Henry Kissinger attributed to “leadership” in his recent book bearing the same title. He “thought and played between the past and the future, between abiding values and aspirations” (Leadership, Penguin Press, NY, 2022). Yet, his creativeness seldom found enough support to have been manifest during his time.

Others have written about his contributions in related sectors. Ranier Fsadni (August 24) wrote about Mario’s pioneering work at AŻAD and the publication of Politika, and later at Heritage Malta, calling him a democrat. I was privileged to contribute to one of the earlier issues of Politika in which, like him, I argued in favour of  ‘research for health and wealth’.

Jean Pierre Farrugia (August 24) wrote of his impeccable bedside manners that reflected his style with friends and colleagues. Former librarian Paul Xuereb (September 4) described him as a “walking book”.

Tabone was at the helm of the Medical Association of Malta in the difficult transition at the turn of the century. There, he gave adequate space to those of us in medicine or biomedicine who were more academically inclined. He spoke and wrote widely about the values of science and technology from the moral to the intellectual and economic perspectives.

His support of early efforts to implement high standards in biomedical ethics complemented many struggles to foster a well-endowed national research fund. It remained an essential tool to strengthen investigator-initiated research subject to external peer review that guaranteed effective support of competitive research with high value added in both intellectual and economic terms. While research ethics and data protection surveillance have become overwhelming, a national research fund of that type remained a wishful dream.

Few, however, were familiar with his efforts at the Malta Council for Science and Technology (MCST) to promote science. He suggested a science museum at St James Cavalier that now houses a centre for creativity. The proposal, as often with him, may have been before its time. Later, following the Gonzi initiative, the MCST under Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando gave rise to Esplora, that is enjoyed today by many children and families.

Together, we had argued for the MCST to establish a professional organisation to serve in bringing together scientists from different disciplines working in different sectors. Earlier, the chairperson had wished for an academy, but we thought it was premature, because the number of doctoral level scientists was indeed miniscule at the time. It is still not enough, though an academy is necessary today. 

Instead, we set up the Malta Chamber of Scientists followed by its journal Xjenza. Although he was not elected to the first council, Mario continued to work for the future of higher education and research fundamental for the long-term development of our society.

While we are saddened by his departure, we are enlightened by the memory of his contributions.

We would have gladly joined him, Fsadni and others, on ‘the next step’ in upholding ‘research for health and wealth’.