Who’s fit for the job?

Even in a single-party government like the one we have had for decades now, a prime minister does not, in practice, have total freedom to appoint whoever he or she wants. In practice, the composition of a Cabinet will depend on a range of considerations.

Choosing a Cabinet is a prime minister’s primary responsibility. If he gets this wrong, he will suffer difficulties ranging from poor policymaking to constant threats to his position. It may seem simple to choose the best men and women for the job, but there is more to it than that.

With a Cabinet of 21 ministers and two parliamentary secretaries, the prime minister’s choice has an additional six ministers and a quarter of the previous parliamentary secretaries. All previous cabinet members retained their roles but with different responsibilities. The most notable aspect is that all five Labour women candidates secured positions.

Robert Abela’s Cabinet selections seemingly promote harmony and strengthen his grip on power yet could suppress the crucial critical perspectives that enhance policymaking. He might employ this strategy, given his exceptionally assertive leadership and unwavering resolve.

In forming his Cabinet, Abela seems to have been guided, in his own words, by ‘delivery, delivery, delivery’. Those with new jobs and those promoted seem to have the qualities of being tried and trusted, experienced old hands, and people who are expected to push things along.

There may have been several factors Abela considered and I will attempt to consider some of them.

First of all, he would have looked to reward loyalty, seeking to surround himself with colleagues whom he felt would help drive forward his agenda. In this respect, he did not have to face the awkward job of sacking the wets and replacing them with dries who shared his ideological vision. He simply confirmed the absolute loyalty shown towards him by all incumbent ministers.

I believe that Abela faced certain restrictions, as he had no choice but to reappoint the well-known personalities and influential members of his Cabinet. Significant figures, including Clyde Caruana, Ian Borg, Byron Camilleri, Clifton Grima, Jonathan Attard, Anton Refalo, and Miriam Dalli, had to be included. Probably, he felt it was better to have such people inside the tent than outside. For the same reason, he could not avoid appointing the likes of Rosianne Cutajar, Glenn Bedingfield and Chris Fearne, since he would be severely weakened by the possibility that they would have campaigned against him from the backbenches.

No one expected Abela to have carte blanche when selecting his ministers and parliamentary secretaries. He needed to account for the representativeness of his Cabinet team in terms of gender, region, party faction or tendency. Naturally, several other characteristics such as the candidates’ age, their scandal-proneness, their policy preferences and their competence needed to be considered as well in the selection process.

Abela clearly aimed to establish a balance, which is reflected in the appointment of all five elected women to sensitive positions.

Despite the Labour Party having been in power for 13 years, the average member of the ministerial team leading us through the coming five years or so has, relatively speaking, average Cabinet-level experience. The ‘veterans’, if it is indeed the most suitable descriptor, can be counted effortlessly.

But while some columnists out there might have expressed disquiet at the possible weak experience or outright incompetence of the Cabinet, one could question whether experience is everything. After all, the ministers who, according to opinion polls, were doing the best job in the eyes of the public were MPs with zero initial ministerial-level experience under their belt. Given the substantial economic and social transformations anticipated in Malta Vision 2050, introducing a fresh perspective could be precisely what is required.

I would argue that a one-size-fits-all approach does not apply when selecting ministers; rather, a more situational selection process is needed. Highly experienced ministers, such as Clyde Caruana and Ian Borg, who possess both practical skills and political acumen, are perfect candidates, though unfortunately rare. A balanced approach that combines technical expertise with political skills may allow for a more informed decision-making process and resilient policy implementation.

Two distinct species, ministers and civil servants, inhabit the government environment, enjoying a symbiotic relationship. Effective leadership hinges on the differences between them—the characteristics of one balancing those of the other. Ministers bring to Castille democratic legitimacy and accountability, political direction and a common-sense approach to government. Civil servants, on the other hand, bring expertise, specialist knowledge, objective advice and continuity. The differences between the two species can, however, lead to misunderstandings, confusion and frustration.

This is why it is imperative for every minister to ensure three fundamentals: setting their departments’ strategic direction, making policy decisions, and presenting and accounting for policy publicly and in Parliament.

Ministers will also be acutely aware of the Ministry of Finance’s control of the purse strings. Money often dictates what can and cannot be done.

But with the government’s actions during the coming years likely to be scrutinised intensely, defining Abela’s premiership and chances of eventual re-election, questions will continue to be asked about whether he was wise to put his faith in a new-look team at the top.