(An English version can be read below the Maltese)
Qed ngħixu kummiedja. Qed ngħixu żminijiet fejn d-deċiżjonijiet li nieħdu huma ikkundizzjonati mill-popolarità iktar milli mis-sugu ta’ dak li jiġi mwettaq. Lill-Malti spiss issibu japplawdi inizjattivi idjoti u jiċċelebrahom bħala ‘milestone’ fl-istorja ta’ ħajtu sforz l-immedjata popolarità jew ix-xewqa li jkun assenjat tron f’xi olimpu fittizju. Dan mingħajr ma jagħraf in-narrativa tal-ingann li fl-aħħar snin ixxeblek mal-valuri intrinsiċi li kienu jiddistingwuna bħala poplu u qed jifgahom.
Fil-kummentarju tiegħu tal-bieraħ filgħodu, Mario Aquilina; li jiena nqisu fost l-aqwa letturi li qatt kelli, spjega kif l-awtorità risponsabbli mis-settur ambjentali, mhux talli mhix tiprattika r-rwol tagħha ta’ tarka għall-ambjent iżda, għal raġunijiet varji, qed “tiffaċilita t-tkissir tal-ambjent”. Aquilina tkellem dwar kif it-tentattivi tiegħu sabiex jikkomunika mal-entità sfalu suf u ddixxerna dwar kif l-istituzzjoni fil-każ m’għandiex saħħa, m’għandiex riżorsi, jew m’għandiex volontà sabiex twettaq id-dmirijiet tagħha.
Wara dak li spjega b’tant reqqa Aquilina, sfajt ispirat naħseb, nixtarr u nitħadded dwar is-sintomu tas-serviliżmu li osservajt tul is-snin kemm matul il-ħidma tiegħi fis-settur pubbliku kif ukoll wara bħala ċittadin distanti mis-sistema. Is-sintomu tas-serviliżmu kontemporanju Malti huwa mżewwaq minn cocktail perfett ta’ populiżmu u dilettantiżmu u nħoss li huwa mxerred sew fl-entitajiet pubbliċi. Dan jista’ jiġi osservat f’varjetà ta’ realtajiet li minnhom xtaqt nosserva tlieta.
Forsi l-aktar evidenti huma mexxejja ta’ entitajiet pubbliċi li jemmnu b’ruħhom u ġisimhom li huwa sagrileġġ li tkun tarka għall-poplu u tmur kontra l-Gvern, jew agħar minn hekk, il-Partit fil-Gvern. Ħafna drabi dan il-kredu jiġi pperpetwat konxjament jew inkonxjament fuq il-ħaddiema tal-istess entità li frott l-ubbidjenza u l-bżonn ta’ introjtu, jagħżlu li jaqdfu b’lealtà fl-istess direzzjoni ideoloġika mingħajr ma jfittxu risposti għall-mistoqsijiet il-kbar li jittormentawhom fil-ħidma tagħhom. Dan iwassal għas-sitwazzjoni li semma Aquilina stess, fejn l-entità tispiċċa tkisser dak li suppost qegħda tistinka għalih.
Realtà oħra evidenti hija dik tal-varji premjazzjonijiet li ħafna entitajiet pubbliċi saru jorganizzaw. Entitajiet pubbliċi u kulturali varji jidentifikaw proġetti għal premjazzjoni billi joħroġu sejħa għal nominazzjonijiet. Wara l-fażi tan-nominazzjonijiet, dawk nominati jiġu ffiltrati sabiex fl-aħħar jiġu mħabbra l-uħud li jmorru għall-vot pubbliku li jaħtar rebbieħ finali. Dan il-proċess b’mod naturali jelimina ċ-ċans li artisti kritiċi lejn il-Gvern u artisti li mhux moħħhom biex jimlew il-karti sabiex jirċievu premju, jiġu rikonoxxuti.
Jekk kien mingħalik li xi artist lokali jinnomina lil xi artist kollega tiegħu, probabiltà kbira hi li sejjer żball. Huwa fatt magħruf li dawn it-tip ta’ premjazzjonijiet fis-settur kulturali ikunu imżewwqa minn nominazzjonijiet sottomessi mill-artisti stess jew it-tim tal-midja tagħhom sabiex huma jkomplu jkabbru l-profil medjatiku. Ħafna drabi r-rebbieħa jkunu dawk li l-aktar kellhom il-ħila jkabbru l-popolarità tagħhom fuq il-midja soċjali u fil-klikka relatata u mhux neċessarjament dawk li tassew wettqu l-aktar ħidma valida. Ħafna drabi l-proġetti nominati jkunu ġew iffinanzjati mill-istess entità li sa fl-aħħar tippremjahom! Parodija ikbar minn hekk? F’mumenti nissuspetta li ċertu entitajiet iħossuhom obbligati jiffaċilitaw il-ħadd lil xi proġetti sforz il-pressjoni medjatika li jkun hemm madwarhom u mhux neċessarjament għax hemm valur fil-ħidma.
Għalkemm fil-konċepiment tagħhom dawn il-proċessi seta kellhom l-intenzjoni rispettabbli tad-demokrazija, nemmen li fi żmienna, fejn kollox jitkejjel bil-likes, hemm bżonn li l-professjonisti fis-settur jinħallu mill-populiżmu u jerġgħu jibdew jinżlu fit-toroq jirriċerkaw, jidentifikaw u jixtarru artisti li jinsabu moħbija jaħdmu, jiskopru u jwettqu l-bidla permezz ta’ mezzi varji u mhux jippremjaw il-bajtra li taqa’. Hawn ukoll, inħoss li l-entitatjiet tal-arti u artistiċi għandhom id-dmir ikunu xprun u mhux xkiel għal min ġenwinament qed jistinka favur ideoloġija jew ħsieb soċjali u/jew kulturali aktar milli s-suċċess tiegħu nnifsu.
L-aħħar aspett li xtaqt nixħet dawl fuqu huwa dak tal-Kunsilli Lokali. Sistema diżinjata sabiex tfalli. Ma hemmx fejn iddur. In-nies li jitħajjru jkunu ta’ servizz matur fil-Kunsilli Lokali bis-sistema preżenti huma dawk l-uħud li jew għandhom ħobżhom maħbuż, jew jaqilawha tajjeb u jibqalhom ħafna ħin f’idejhom jew lesti jċedu l-impjieg u l-imħabbiet personali tagħhom.
Hawn ukoll is-sistema hija cocktail perfett ta’ populiżmu u dilettantiżmu. Ir-realtà ta’ ħafna kunsilliera u Sindki dilettanti mhux niskopriha jien. Il-Kunsill huwa l-“hobby” għal ħafna; biex jibqgħu popolari, jew forsi biex iħossuhom influwenti. Huwa fatt magħruf li f’ċertu lokalitajiet il-Kunsill jiffunzjona biss grazzi għall-kariga professjonali tas-Segretarju Ġenerali. Mill-bqija bi stipendju ta €200 fix-xahar, l-ebda kunsillier ma jixraqlu li jieħu intrigu tant importanti daqs, ngħidu aħna familtu jew il-karriera. Il-volontarjat nafu biżżejjed fejn nistgħu noffruh.
Għaldaqstant sakemm is-sistema politika tal-Kunsilli Lokali ma tiġix riveduta, nemmen li l-ebda professjonist serju li jaħdem mill-inqas 8 siegħat kuljum ma jista’ joffri l-maġġor parti ta’ ħinu għall-kawża tal-lokalità. Il-fatt li meta ċempilt, l-Assoċjazzjoni tal-Kunsilli Lokali lanqas kellha l-kapaċità tipprovdi l-politika tal-Kunsilli Lokali, turini biżżejjed il-livell ta’ dilettantiżmu prattikat. Sadattant iżda, iċċelebrajna t-30 sena mit-twaqqif tal-Kunsilli Lokali… xejn xejn qassamna ftit premijiet oħra sabiex intaptpu fuq ftit spallel.
Nagħlaq billi nikkwota silta mill-kitba tal-Professur Henry Frendo “The long road to responsible government: Maltese politics and society under a nonrepresentative constitution 1903-1919” tal-1991 b’riferenza lejn Manwel Dimech: “Filwaqt li ffavorixxa lit-trade unions, filwaqt li kkastiga s-serviliżmu, appella lill-foqra biex ma jiskambjawx ħobża għad-dinjità tagħhom meta jiġu avviċinati minn xi uffiċjal tal-gvern: ‘għid lil dawk li jiġu jagħtuk ħobża li m’intix skjav jew bhima, li dak li trid mhuwiex il-ħobża tal-karità, imma l-ħobża bl-għaraq ta’ xbinek.’
A loaf for dignity
Malta exists in a parody of sorts – no two ways about it. We navigate times where decisions are shaped more by popularity than the actual value of our actions. There’s a tendency to applaud misguided initiatives, hailing them as personal milestones driven by immediate popularity or the aspiration to claim a metaphorical throne in a fictional Olympics. Unfortunately, this celebration occurs without a critical examination of the deceptive narrative that has emerged in recent years, eroding the intrinsic values that once set us apart as a people.
In his recent commentary, Mario Aquilina, one of the most esteemed lecturers I’ve had the privilege of learning from, discussed the environmental sector. He highlighted that the relevant authority, rather than acting as a protector of the environment, seems to be unintentionally or perhaps intentionally contributing to its degradation. Aquilina shared his frustrating experiences attempting to communicate with the concerned entity, revealing its apparent lack of strength, resources, or will to fulfill its responsibilities.
Aquilina’s insights prompted me to reflect on the symptom of servitude which I noticed both during my tenure in the cultural public sector and also later as an observer from outside the system. The contemporary servitude in Malta is a troubling mix of populism and amateurism, widespread within public entities. This is evident in various aspects of our reality of which I’d like to highlight a few.
One glaring example is the leaders of public entities who staunchly believe it is sacrilege to stand against the government or, worse, the ruling party. This mindset often permeates down to workers, who, driven by the need for income and the fruits of obedience, serve loyally without questioning the significant issues that trouble their souls. This leads to the situation Aquilina himself mentioned, where the entity ends up breaking down what it is supposed to be striving for.
A second noticeable issue that poses a challenge is the proliferation of awards in Malta’s cultural scene. Public entities value the contributions to the arts by seeking nominations for potential projects. After nominations, there’s an internal filtering process, and finally, the public votes to decide the winner. Regrettably, this approach inherently reduces opportunities for artists critical of the government, those unwilling to compromise their principles for an award, or those uninterested in bureaucratic paperwork and questioning to gain recognition.
Did you wonder if any artist nominates a fellow practitioner for consideration? Highly unlikely. It’s widely acknowledged that awards in the cultural sector often suffer from nominations submitted by artists themselves or their media teams, aiming to boost their media profile. Frequently, the winners are those adept at growing their popularity on social media rather than those truly engaged in valuable work. Very often the nominated projects would have been funded by the entity that would be handling them the prize itself! There are indications as to how entities feel compelled to reward individuals due to their media reach rather than the intrinsic value of their work.
While these processes may have initially aspired to democratic ideals, the contemporary landscape, dominated by metrics like social media likes, calls for a departure from populism. Professionals in the sector should detach themselves from popular trends and actively hit the streets to conduct research, identify, and reflect on artists who may be hidden in the process of working, discovering, and effecting meaningful change across infinite media. It is essential to shift the focus away from rewarding those already in the limelight to recognizing the genuine contributors. There is a vital and urgent need for entities within the Arts and Culture to redefine their role. They should act as driving forces for those genuinely dedicated to ideology, social impact, and cultural enrichment, rather than self-centric success.
The third and final aspect I wish to highlight pertains to Local Councils—a system designed for failure. Those inclined to provide a responsible service in Local Councils within the current system are often those whose livelihoods have been accomplished, those with secure financial standings and ample time in hand, or those prepared to forsake their careers and personal pursuits.
Here again, the system presents a potent blend of populism and amateurism. The prevalence of amateur councillors and Mayors is a reality that doesn’t escape notice. For many, serving on the Council is more of a “hobby”—a means to maintain popularity or perhaps to feel influential. It’s widely acknowledged that in certain localities, the Council’s functionality relies heavily on the professional office of the Secretary-General. Given the meager stipend of €200 per month, it’s hardly fair to expect councillors to engage in matters as significant as their families or careers. Volunteering has its place, but expecting such commitment with minimal compensation is a notable challenge.
So, unless the political system of local councils is overhauled, I firmly believe that no dedicated professional working elsewhere a minimum of 8 hours a day can allocate a significant and diligent amount of their time to the local cause.
The fact that the Local Councils’ Association couldn’t provide the Local Council’s policy when I reached out underscores the prevalent ambition to keep this structure at a level of amateurism. Meanwhile, we’ve celebrated the 30th anniversary of Local Councils, yet nothing substantial has been achieved beyond and despite the accolades and the trophies distributed the underlying issues have not been addressed.
I conclude by quoting an excerpt from Professor Henry Frendo’s writing “The long road to responsible government: Maltese politics and society under a nonrepresentative constitution 1903-1919” of 1991 with reference to Manwel Dimech: “Favouring trade unions, castigating servilism, he appealed to the poor not to exchange a loaf for their dignity when approached by some government official: ‘tell those who come to give you a loaf that you are not slaves or beasts, that what you want is not the loaf of charity, but the loaf by the sweat of your brow’.”
