A government of all the talents

Gonzi’s private complaint to a former US ambassador – that he had a limited talent pool from which to choose his ministers, and his secret wish to appoint technocrats as Ministers – may well have been small talk of little political significance. 

But seen in the light of the ‘GonziPN’ strategy, through which Gonzi lent his surname to his party’s brand name, it could represent a yearning for a more ‘presidential’ style of government where the Prime Minister has a freer hand in choosing his team of Ministers.

The yearning for such a system has also affected the Labour Party, which is increasingly associated with Joseph Muscat’s ‘progressive and moderate movement’.  Labour also seems to be pushing ‘soft’ candidates hailing from civil society, the arts or from the professions, ranging from paediatrician Chris Fearne to orchestra director Sigmund Mifsud.

Although Gonzi has kept his thoughts on adapting the American system of technocratic governments to the realm of private conversation, to some extent he has already shown a willingness to defy convention in his political appointments.

His decision to appoint one of the smallest cabinets in Maltese history could well be seen as a reflection of his preference for a more manageable and focused cabinet. So was his decision to defy convention by appointing a President from another party rather than one of his own, thus disappointing party stalwarts.

Yet the appointment of a smaller cabinet has come at a political cost with backbenchers taking advantage of a one-seat majority to make their presence felt.

This eventually led to the appointment of most of them as parliamentary assistants, a step that contradicted Gonzi’s initial preference for a leaner administration.

Moreover, his presidential campaign in 2008 could well have backfired when a number of cabinet stalwarts – such as former education minister Louis Galea – failed to get elected. In this way, Gonzi ended up with a smaller pool of talent without having the constitutional power to widen it through appointments from outside parliament. 

Neither did he propose any change to the system, a move which would have further unsettled the backbench, some of which already embittered by his decision to exclude them from Cabinet despite getting more votes than some of those appointed.

Curiously, upon being re-elected, the same Gonzi who expressed a private wish to appoint ministers from outside parliament immediately decided to start paying his ministers the honoraria paid to MPs.

Probably, if government opts for the appointment of non-parliamentarians to ministerial posts it would have to entice them with higher salaries, but it would not be able to do so by paying them as MPs.

Technocrats in a parliamentary democracy

One possible problem facing technocratic governments in parliamentary democracies like Malta could be a weakening of the bond between ministers and parliament.

In the US, cabinet secretaries are directly accountable to the President, who appoints them as expected in a presidential system. But in a parliamentary system like Malta’s, ministers are directly accountable to their peers in parliament. 

Moreover, the Maltese prime minister is technically a minister appointed by the President. The Maltese constitution states that it is the President of Malta who appoints as prime minister the member of parliament who, in the opinion of the president, is best able to command a majority of the members of the House of Representatives.

The Prime Minister then advises the President on the appointment of the other ministers from among the members of parliament.

Although in normal circumstances the power of the president is merely ceremonial – in the sense that the president appoints the leader of the party commanding a majority in parliament as prime minister – this could greatly increase if a government loses its majority, or if no party holds a majority in the house.

In fact, endemic political instability has greatly increased the clout of the Italian presidency, even if it has the same constitutional powers as in Malta.

But one notable difference between Malta and Italy is that Presidents can appoint ‘technocratic governments’ headed by outsiders, like former central bank governor Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, who was appointed Prime Minister during the turbulent tangentopoli years. 

Following the collapse of the first Berlusconi government, a government led by another banker and former IMF official Lamberto Dini was appointed. In fact, technical governments in Italy are mostly associated with attempts to construct governments enjoying support across the political spectrum.

But some brilliant technocrats (like oncologist Umberto Veronesi) have also served under political governments.

Bring on the talent

Gonzi’s complaint in 2008 echoes UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s declared policy of appointing a ‘government of all the talents’ by appointing political outsiders in his cabinet.

Brown was not reinventing the wheel (since other British Prime Ministers had also done the same) however, it was Brown who turned this into a declared policy to widen the talent pool.

Brown still respected the convention that ministers have to be serving parliamentarians. In fact, the newcomers were granted a peerage to serve in the House of Lords.

Some of these appointments were based on the expertise of the new ministers in a particular area, and some lacked parliamentary experience.

These included Lord Ara Warkes Darzi, one of the world’s leading surgeons at Imperial College London, Lord Paul Myners –former chairman of Marks & Spencer and Guardian Media Group – and deputy chairman of PowerGen and Admiral Sir Alan West, the former head of the Royal Navy.

Yet the appointment of political outsiders failed to reverse Brown’s declining fortunes and growing unpopularity, which led to voters voting Labour out after three consecutive terms by voting in Britian’s first coalition government.

Some of the ‘outsiders’ also left government after a relatively short time. Darzi only served for two years.

Banning MPs from cabinet

In contrast to Malta (where ministers can only be chosen from elected MPs), in countries like the Netherlands, Sweden and France, ministers are not allowed to serve as MPs.

Ministers are usually given specified seats and given the right to speak, but no right to vote. They still remain accountable to parliament and have to answer questions and appear before committees.

The appointment of ministers from outside parliament is quite common in France (which like the US has a presidential form of government), but most ministers are former MPs who resigned their seats.

France also had two unelected Prime Ministers, namely Georges Pompidou (1962-1968) and Raymond Barre (1976-1981) who had never served as MPs before their appointment.

The US model

But it is in the United States that the appointment of technocrats is the order of the day. Although the president nominates Cabinet Secretaries, the Senate must confirm them. This means that the president has a vast pool from which to choose his appointees. The only constitutional constraint he faces is Article I of the Constitution, which prohibits any sitting member of Congress from holding executive office.