WHAT? New Air Terminal = New Air Routes?

A spokesman (presumably a Government spokesman) speaking about the Government visit to the 5th edition of the Routes Europe Forum is reported as having said "The Gibraltar Delegation will be having a number of pre-arranged meetings with airlines to discuss new market opportunities in Gibraltar upon the completion of the new Air Terminal next year; a new Air Terminal of which Gibraltar will be justifiably proud"  . The Minister for Transport, Joe Holliday, is reported as saying that the new Air Terminal "... will provide the Gibraltar Delegation with the ideal opportunity to promote the excellent facilities that will become available in the New Air Terminal to a wide audience airline executives."

I do not profess any great knowledge of the travel or airline industry save as a passenger but am I expected to believe that the new Air Terminal is considered by the GSD administration to be a determinative factor in attracting new air routes to Gibraltar?   Am I expected to believe also that the failure of the air routes to Madrid, Tangier, Casablanca and Marrakesh that have been established and failed during the time in power of the present Government is down to not having a spanking brand new Air Terminal costing tens of millions of pounds?

I always thought it was down to other considerations like catchment area, demand, competitiveness, lack of alternative destinations nearby and I imagine much more.  Past events indicate that Gibraltar has issues on many of these fronts that have not been surmounted by any government and certainly not by the GSD Government.

Am I missing something?  Is the new Air Terminal the panacea that will cure everything that has led to such a singular failure in the past of new air routes or to attract new airlines and routes to Gibraltar?  I have my doubts but I am no expert.  I am sure that the Minister is advised by those far better qualified than me to know what a great competitive difference the new Air Terminal will make such as to attract new airlines and routes to Gibraltar.

But one second doesn't Malaga have a spanking new Air Terminal?  Will our spanking new Air Terminal be able to compete with Malaga's new Air Terminal, if indeed airlines seeking new routes are so persuaded by spanking new Air Terminals? I hope so, because, otherwise, Gibraltar is back where it started after having spent an inordinately large amount of public funds on a new Air Terminal and, to make matters worse  taxpayers will be lumbered with enormously increased running costs without additional revenues.

Change for the Sake of Change?

In a few earlier blogs and comments, I have suggested that Gibraltar is ready for a change of government.  The reason that I have put forward in support of this view is that  Peter Caruana has become bigger than the electorate. It is worth exploring available options but, before I become the subject of criticism on this point, I do not suggest that I have covered all possible options.

I have suggested ("The Quest for Good Governance") that change could come about by a reform of  the electoral system. Such reform is not on the cards and so is improbable before the next election.

Before exploring other options, let me dispel some assumptions made about me, for example, I have been accused by several commentators that I am anti-GSD (if there is a party beyond Peter Caruana) and pro-GSLP/libs.  First, I do not belong to any party.  I was, about 20 years ago, a member of the GSLP.  During their second term of office the GSLP behaved generally in an undemocratic fashion, exemplified at a personal level by its treatment of my law firm, Triay & Triay. I gave up my membership the GSLP at that time. Since then, I have remained independent of any political party.  This reigns true to the present day.  With this independence comes the freedom to explore options.

The available alternatives are limited, so my having come to the conclusion that Peter Caruana has grown larger than the electorate, what are the available choices or the choices that may become available for someone like me (and I believe that I am not alone in having to look for alternatives)?

If the GSD exists as a party at all beyond what Peter Caruana thinks, says and does, they could improve their chances by making acceptable changes within the party and offering the electorate a renewed GSD.  One suggestion is that they should retrace their history and revert to their democratic roots, for example, by  ridding themselves of those wrong practices that they so vociferously criticised the previous GSLP administration for adopting.  I suggest that they read their own early manifestos and remind themselves of the fundamental promises they made to Gibraltar in this regard. If they do that, they may not even have to substitute Peter Caruana as leader.  The difficulty of not doing so, however,  is that they will have to climb a high mountain to convince many disaffected voters that there really has been a return by the GSD to its democratic roots.

In the absence of change within the GSD, the only two alternative parties offering themselves for election are the GSLP/Libs or the PDP as discussed in greater detail in an earlier blog ("GSD Supporters Mutiny") .  The PDP are shown in recent polls not to be making any headway.  If that remains the case, which is likely, then the only feasible alternative (in the absence of internal fundamental and not merely cosmetic changes within the GSD) to ensure a change is vote for the GSLP/Libs.  They have a critical core of voters that makes it credible that they can get elected if there is small swing in voting patterns.  Two main changes will improve their chances, first Joe Bossano standing for election but not as party leader.  Second, if Fabian Picardo does take over as leader, an effort by him to disavow the public of a perception that he is not suitable for the post of Chief Minister.

There are other options.  A new party coming to the fore.  The likelihood of this is minimal in the time available between now and the next election.  Even if one were to come about its chances of election success can only be measured by comparison with those of the PDP.  What could be considered but would require a massive campaign starting very soon and, even in those circumstances with a very small chance of success, is for voters to be persuaded to split their vote by voting for the best candidates irrespective of their party allegiances.  this would result in a hung Parliament, which would be a major catalyst for parliamentary and electoral reform.  It is what is happening in the UK.  We yet have to see how revolutionary any reforms that come of it in the UK really are.  These are interesting times in the UK, which could be replicated in Gibraltar.

The Quest for Good Governance

There are good governance practices that could and should be revived.  These do not require any change of law or to the 2006 Constitution.  However, they are unlikely to be implemented without some catalyst to force their introduction.

The first is the use of cabinet government, which in the 2006 Constitution is referred to as the Council of Ministers. The electoral system is intended to elect a government, not a President.  Yet the system, ever since the days of Sir Joshua Hassan, always defaults to government by the Chief Minister.  One reason for this occurring is the ineffectiveness of other Ministers.  They do not yield their power over any incumbent Chief Minister.  Their power lies in their individual or collective ability to either depose their leader (and so the Chief Minister) or, in more extreme situations, force the fall of a government, leading to an election.

The fact that Ministers invariably avoid using their power shows them up as weak, ineffectual  and self interested.  Self interested because this benign behaviour, epitomised by deference to one individual, owes its existence to both the ego of each minister and their interest in retaining their highly paid positions.  Ego because, seemingly, they each enjoy their positions, their title and their preeminence too much to risk it by rocking the boat.  Salary, because how many of the incumbents to ministerial positions over the past 20 odd years or more would have earned as much in other employment?

Secondly, the encroachment by Ministers, especially in the period of the GSLP and the GSD governments, into the administrative arena as opposed to staying within their political remit.  This unfortunate cross-over is adverse to good governance.  The ease in which this happens is worrying.  The Civil Service has its General Orders and exists to give effect to the rule of law.  General Orders and the law provide a framework to safeguard the independence of Civil Servants.  Why the Civil Service permit the encroachment to occur is unknown but the symptoms are obvious.  The cure is easy to prescribe, put the Minister in his place. The reality is that it is more difficult or nigh on impossible in practice.  A good start might be for promotion in the Civil Service to be structured in a manner that their role is better learnt and understood but faced with a powerful individual as Chief Minister, the difficulties are obvious.

The failings in the system can be identified.  Implementing solutions without attacking one fundamental is difficult.  This fundamental is the undermining of the stability and comfort of any Chief Minister by weakening his ability to retain power.  This objective can be achieved through electoral reform.  A reversion (because it is that system that has existed in Gibraltar in the past and has delivered good government) to a system of Proportional Representation is an answer.  

A new electoral system will increase the chances of multi-party government by maximising the chances of the election of candidates from more parties and of independents.  The inherent instability that such sharing of power builds into  a government would, in a place the size of Gibraltar, not be detrimental to strong and effective governance.  In fact it would be beneficial.  It reduces the concentration of power in one individual by compelling the sharing of power amongst Ministers.  Cabinet government will become the only way to govern. One additional benefit of undermining the concentration of power in one person is that it will revive the ability of the  Civil Service to administer Gibraltar according to the law.  

Proportional representation will help destroy the politics of personality and encourage issue based voting. Each cross on a ballot paper will carry weight rather than (as under the present system) all of them being a vote for one person to be Chief Minister.  This process of democratisation can deliver better government and administration.

Is Tolerance Enough?

Gibraltar prides itself for being a tolerant society and so it is, with all the emphasis on the word "tolerance".  We have a habit of tolerating but not being inclusive.  It is a society that tolerates minorities by turning a partial blind eye to obvious inequalities in treatment. The obvious example is Gibraltar's Moroccan brethren and friends who have so helped during Gibraltar's dark days when it was deprived of Spanish labour and who continue to help the community at large.

Legalities are not necessarily what this issue is about or what I will deal with in this blog.  Affordability is not what it is about either.  It is a subject about human treatment of a minority community that has helped so much.  It is about giving to that minority group full integration, inclusion, acceptance and  equal recognition and ceasing to take them for granted, for example, the ability to live with one's wife and children in decent accommodation.  Also to have their applications for naturalisation dealt with promptly, fairly and with a positive attitude.

I can hear the screams of protest as I type this blog.  These screams say: there is not enough physical space, are we to provide more housing on top of what is built for the Gibraltarian, the cost will be prohibitive.  Unfortunately these complaints may be valid and have a basis but their very foundation is a selfish desire to provide for ourselves that which we will not provide to the Moroccan community. In this way the Moroccan community is disadvantaged  in order not to reduce the ability of Gibraltar's government to provide better lives for Gibraltarians partly funded by the tax revenues paid by the Moroccan community.

The discrimination against Moroccans is palpable and obvious.  It does Gibraltar no credit to ignore it for any longer.  It is not commensurate with but rather belies the description that Gibraltar is a tolerant society.  It is more akin to a society that "puts up with" a minority group rather than tolerates them in the wider and more acceptable sense of that word.  Gibraltar needs to change. The economic cost of that change will need to be managed in order to mitigate the effect on the community at large.  For example, just the housing aspect could have the beneficial side effect of renovating the older more slum-like parts of Gibraltar: something which, if memory serves me right, the GSD Government said they would do many years ago.