For example, during my teenage years, I befriended someone from San Ġwann and became familiar with much of the Mensija area. I continue to spend Saturday mornings in San Ġwann, where I have established relationships with several residents while running errands. Swieqi is another locality where I have spent considerable time with close friends, fostering an attachment to the area. Għarghur, where Ray’s maternal family originates, holds particular significance for me, evoking memories of Auntie Vitor and Ray’s mother, Żarena. Choosing another district proved challenging, as I felt it would be unfair to run in a district alongside colleagues I had recently supported. So, it was natural to choose the ninth district.

After more than three weeks of campaigning, I have observed that the second and ninth districts require distinct policy approaches. The second district faces urgent social housing challenges, particularly regarding the timely completion of units in Hanover (Bormla). Over the past four years, I have advocated for the prompt delivery of these units. The PL’s manifesto addresses affordable housing within the current economic context, an issue I am deeply committed to and have consistently campaigned for. As someone hailing from the second district, I am acutely aware of the community’s needs. Many residents seek little more than secure shelter and the opportunity to improve their lives. Some face insufficient income to maintain a decent standard of living or are excluded from qualifying for social housing. I recognise that social housing should not be a permanent entitlement. Individuals who experience improved circumstances should be provided with a transition period and, if appropriate, transition to affordable housing options. Addressing these issues is essential in the short- to medium-term.

Conversely, the ninth district requires targeted economic and environmental policies. In Swieqi, for example, residents struggle to open their windows during summer due to bitumen production coming from distant but yet close zones, which negatively affects their air quality, and the quality of life. I have engaged with residents who contacted me through social media and email, and I fully support their concerns. It is imperative that authorities intervene to ensure collective interests are protected over private gains. This is not a topic I am speaking about now. I have been advocating for better environmental management, and social matters for more than four years.

In Swatar, the community awaits a decision on a significant development project originating from the 2006 rationalisation under a PN government. The transformation of ODZ land in this valley raises concerns, particularly regarding the inclusion of a sufficient green buffer space. While private land development is understood, proportionality must guide such decisions to safeguard residents’ quality of life. On the other hand, in Pietà, increased traffic and problematic traffic lights in Msida and other areas exacerbate congestion. It is essential that residents are consulted before implementing pedestrian projects. This is what I believe, and compromises must be the norm not the exception.

Certainly, additional issues remain to be addressed, and time constraints prevented me from covering every locality in detail. I have valued the opportunity to engage with residents and learn about the realities of both districts. I respectfully request your support and assure you of my continued commitment to residents, regardless of the outcome. Observing how both districts evolve in the coming months will be insightful, particularly if the PL is re-elected. While some individuals express disappointment with certain candidates, ministers, or parliamentary secretaries, I encourage you not to abstain from voting. Instead, consider supporting new candidates on the PL’s ticket to effect change. Abstaining may inadvertently enable those who have disappointed you to be re-elected. Therefore, I urge you to participate in the election and make an informed choice. Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge the PL’s contributions to economic growth, social support, and national stability over the past few years.

Finally, I think Dr Robert Abela deserves another chance. His leadership contributed to continued stability. And frankly, Dr Abela has had to govern under exceptionally challenging circumstances, from shifting geopolitical realities and a global pandemic to yet another energy crisis stemming from the Middle East. Surely, we need to choose between stability and the unknown. And people stand to lose what they have achieved in the past years. The PL in government delivered most of its promises and improved people’s lives. Risking everything for an unknown recipe is not the best option. Hence, choose wisely.

The post Examining some of the realities of the second and ninth districts first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Yet, such strong economic growth comes with its challenges. For instance, Malta today faces two systemic challenges: housing unaffordability and chronic traffic congestion.

To understand why a nation that is much wealthier today, than some 10 or 15 years ago, struggles with such fundamental issues, one would have to look past traditional supply-and-demand metrics and view the problem through the lens of behavioural economics – the study of how psychological biases, status, and human habits override rational economic decisions.

Traditional economics suggests that when an economy grows, everyone’s purchasing power should scale accordingly. However, the prevalent economic growth model adopted in Malta has left many low-to-middle-income earners, particularly youths, priced out of the housing market.

Malta’s economic growth required a massive influx of foreign workers to sustain momentum, coupled with a massive growth in tourists’ numbers. This caused an abrupt population spike, triggering specific behavioral shifts among investors and landlords.

Maltese investors have long exhibited a cultural bias toward brick-and-mortar investments, viewing property as the only “safe” asset class. When the population grew, a herding mentality took over. Capital flooded into the buy-to-let market and short-term tourist rentals (like Airbnb) because landlords chased immediate, high-yield gains from foreign workers and tourists. Landlords looked at the highest-paying segment of the market – foreign tech and finance executives – and mistakenly treated this premium demand as the baseline for the entire market. As a result, the development of affordable, traditional family homes was abandoned in favour of smaller, high-density apartments aimed at transient workers. While average domestic wages grew steadily, they could not compete with the compounded momentum of capital, creating an environment where a young couple on average incomes can barely access a fraction of the market without substantial parental support. The psychological security historically attached to Maltese homeownership has transformed into an anxiety-inducing financial barrier. Add to this reality is that any fiscal incentive to help make housing more affordable will likely make housing more expensive, as this will likely result in a short-term demand boost.

If housing is an issue born of rapid population growth, gridlock is another issue born of population growth coupled with psychological paralysis. Ahead of general elections, political parties frequently float grand promises of mass transport solutions. From a behavioural economics standpoint, none of these multi-billion-euro systems will ever be feasible or self-sustaining unless any government actively introduces pain points (disincentives) for private car use.

After all, Malta already made its scheduled bus service completely free for residents. Yet, the roads remain paralysed. Why? Commuters prefer the immediate comfort, privacy, and perceived autonomy of their air-conditioned car today, even if they know it means sitting in gridlock. They heavily discount the long-term societal costs (pollution, wasted time, respiratory illnesses) because the immediate alternative (waiting for a bus in the summer heat) feels like a loss. Moreover, in Malta, the private vehicle is deeply tied to social status. Decades of outdated urban planning have conditioned the collective psyche to view public transport as a low-status alternative. All the research in the world indicate that human beings are far more motivated by avoiding a loss than acquiring a gain. Offering “free mass transport” is a gain, and clearly, it is not enough to break old habits. To trigger a genuine modal shift, private car use must be made inconvenient or expensive through disincentives like implementing strict parking management, reducing free street parking, introducing congestion charges in heavily choked urban cores or repurposing car lanes exclusively into bus and active-mobility lanes, deliberately tipping the time-advantage in favour of public transit. Without these uncomfortable “stick” measures, any new mass transit infrastructure will become a financial white elephant, under-utilised while drivers remain frozen in traffic.

In the meantime, while a comprehensive mass transit network remains a distant reality, a high-frequency, tech-driven shared ride ecosystem could offer the immediate intervention Malta desperately needs. However, for this to work, it must be backed by aggressive fiscal incentives – such as corporate tax rebates for shared employee commutes or direct subsidies that make ridesharing cheaper than running a private car. By pairing these financial carrots with the on-demand convenience and air-conditioned privacy of a personal vehicle, dynamic ridesharing can directly challenge the status of private car ownership, allowing drivers to surrender the hassle of parking while instantly cutting the single-occupancy vehicles paralysing the roads.

Going forward, Malta must urgently pivot toward an economic transformation where growth is driven not by the unsustainable scaling of physical inputs – such as importing more labour and pouring more concrete – but by maximising value-added output per worker: true productivity. This structural shift can only be realised by aggressively injecting digital investment into existing economic sectors and strategically attracting new, high-value-added industries that require a smaller physical footprint but yield higher economic returns. However, executing this transition is exceptionally delicate. Given Malta’s currently high government expenditure, policymakers face the added pressure of financing and managing this massive economic overhaul with precision, ensuring that the transition does not inadvertently trigger lower economic growth or disrupt near-term stability. Balancing the withdrawal of old growth drivers while simultaneously nurturing high-tech productivity, all without denting economic momentum, represents one of the most formidable economic challenges the island has ever faced.

Malta’s current predicament serves as a stark reminder that an economy is not a collection of isolated columns on a spreadsheet, but a massive, deeply interlinked ecosystem. You cannot aggressively expand the labour market without instantly shocking the housing market. You cannot fix the housing shortage by simply pouring more concrete without worsening urban density and strain on utilities. You certainly cannot fix the traffic crisis by building more infrastructure if you leave the psychological incentives of driving untouched. True economic stewardship requires managing the invisible threads that connect behavioral and cultural attitudes with wealth and environmental limits. If a country only manages the numbers that go up, it will eventually be crushed by the unintended consequences that follow. To avoid this requires stepping from our comfort zone of instant gratification and short-term measures to one based on discipline and longer-term mindset.

Ultimately the mindset and policy decisions that brought us strong economic growth, will not be what is now needed to achieve sustainable economic growth. That is the basic underlying common theme of Vision 2050, which should become a true action programme.

The post What got us here won’t save us first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Now, the latest calculations by several academic and independent institutes estimate the figure to be even higher.  Benefits include cultural exchange, career opportunities (especially for young people), and simplified travel (e.g. no roaming charges, easier paperwork).  Significantly, this shift has been gradual but relentless.  It is driven partly by demographic factors: the age profile of how people voted in 2016 was such that, 10 years later, even if nobody had changed their mind, there would be a majority in favour of EU membership.  Furthermore, it is also driven by those “Leave” voters who were not gung-ho Brexiteers realising that Brexit bears no resemblance to what was promised.  

They were told that it would be easy, save lots of money (that billions would go to the NHS) and keep access to Europe while securing wonderful new trade deals across the planet.   It is true that UK increased trade with non-EU countries (e.g. US, China, India, Australia via new FTAs), partially offsetting EU declines.  However, new deals have had minimal GDP impact so far (e.g. ~0.1% each for Japan/Australia).

A significant number of “Leave” voters have therefore changed their view, especially if they work in a sector that has been particularly affected, or if they have been irritated by the multiple little things that Brexit has made more difficult, starting from ordering small packages abroad to joining the longer non-EU queue at border checkpoints if they travel. 

Neither of these two drivers of the shift in opinion – demography and changing minds – is going to go in reverse. Such an economic loss has tangible consequences.  It would have produced an extra £80 or £90 billion every year in tax revenue.  

The government is seeking to attenuate the economic damage of Brexit by aligning with the EU single market standards and rules in various sectors, to cut red tape, paperwork and border inspections.  It is starting with agriculture and energy, hoping to move on to other sectors such as chemicals and pharmaceuticals.  

This is sensible.  But it is slow, won’t change the economic dial for years, and if it succeeds will align Britain with EU rules on which it has no say when the EU wants to change them, virtually turning the UK into a non-voting member of the EU.  

Many are beginning to ask why not go the whole way and get Britain’s seat back at the table where decisions are taken that will in any case affect it.   With Putin on one side and Trump on the other, it is becoming more obvious by the day that the interests and values of Britain and its EU neighbours converge.  

Obviously, Britain can certainly no longer rely on a supposed “Special Relationship” with the United States, a notion given its last rites by Trump.  Many economists seem to be reaching the same conclusion. As an example, Iceland is to hold a referendum in August on applying to join the EU.  

In Norway a debate has started.  Every country in the western Balkans wants to join (some are already deep into their accession negotiations), as do Ukraine and Moldova.  If, Britain insists to stay out it will look isolated and irrelevant on the world stage.  Contrarily to Neville Farage’s political creed in favour of Brexit, this has turned out to be even more costly than anticipated.   

Recalling major analyses from economists at Stanford, NBER, and others; they conclude that by 2025, Brexit reduced UK GDP by 6–8% compared to a no-Brexit scenario.  Many now see Brexit as having failed to deliver promised gains, with regret increasing over time.  Will the blushing bride step forward?

George M Mangion is a Senior Partner at PKF Malta 

The post Is Britain wooing EU as a bride? first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

This evolving situation was laid bare at the International Charlemagne Prize ceremony in Aachen, Germany. The prestigious award was presented to former European Central Bank President and Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, recognised for his historic stewardship of the Euro. However, rather than delivering a celebratory retrospective speech, Draghi used the global podium to issue a chilling, clear-eyed deconstruction of post-Cold War Europe. He warned that the continent has arrived at a point of profound vulnerability, summarising the shift with the haunting observation that, for the first time in living memory, Europeans are truly alone together. The international framework that once guaranteed Europe’s security through the United States and fueled our growth through open trade with China has shattered.

Draghi argued that Europe’s traditional approach to governance, that of treating the Union as a post-political, purely administrative space governed by static rules and complex bureaucracy, is fundamentally obsolete. For decades, Brussels attempted to neutralise raw politics through market integration, but this reliance on external forces has left the continent dangerously exposed. Europe dismantled its external trade barriers and embraced global supply chains yet catastrophically failed to complete its internal market. Draghi correctly points out that Europe is now left with fractured capital markets, disconnected energy networks, and an economy heavily dependent on foreign demand. This structural failure is amplified by a widening chasm in innovation, particularly in Artificial Intelligence. Draghi warned that because AI advances exponentially with usage, early leaders will secure permanent advantages, and Europe is currently failing to mobilise the massive, coordinated capital required to compete.

To prevent systemic decline, Draghi called for a radical transition to “pragmatic federalism”. He urged European leaders to abandon the paralysing requirement for absolute consensus and the abuse of national vetoes, arguing that sluggish compromise is often more damaging than outright inaction. His solution demands an overhaul of institutional architecture, replacing an outdated EU budget focused on subsidies with a streamlined fund dedicated to joint sovereignty, innovation and defense. Crucially, Draghi reiterated that the sheer scale of this transition can only be financed through the issuance of common European debt, leveraging the collective financial might of the bloc to underwrite massive pan-European infrastructure.

Yet, the Aachen ceremony did not just reveal a unified path forward; it exposed the deep ideological rifts that shape today’s Europe. Standing at the same podium to deliver the eulogy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz enthusiastically agreed with Draghi’s grim diagnosis but directly attacked his proposed cure. Merz agreed that Europe behaves like a twentieth-century bureaucracy unsuited for twenty-first-century challenges, endorsing a total modernisation of the EU budget away from traditional regional and agricultural subsidies toward raw military power and economic competitiveness.

However, Merz drew an unyielding line regarding how to fund this new era. He explicitly rejected the concept of joint European borrowing, stating that Germany cannot follow the path of new EU debt for constitutional reasons, and warning that excessive indebtedness threatens national sovereignty while limiting the capacity to act. Furthermore, Merz’s stance implicitly defended Germany’s export-driven economic model, clashing with Draghi’s view that an obsession with chasing external trade deals has allowed European nations to evade the painful internal reforms required to build a self-sufficient single market.

Notwithstanding any macro-fiscal disagreement on the underlying funding mechanisms, the strategic consensus on the imperative to transition toward a model of “pragmatic federalism” is rapidly gaining institutional momentum. Europe is increasingly realising that deeper integration is the sole mechanism viable to safeguard its economic hegemony and geopolitical relevance in a fragmented global economy. Down this hyper-integrated route, Malta—as the smallest EU member state—faces asymmetric vulnerability, particularly regarding its fiscal sovereignty. This shift could imperil vital competitive instruments like our current six-sevenths tax imputation system. This specific mechanism has historically generated robust corporate income tax yield, allowing Malta to offset structural deficits and maintain ever-expanding public expenditure within a sustainable macroeconomic remit. Whilst the domestic run-up to the general election features an escalatory cycle of expansionary promises that will inevitably bloat public recurrent expenditure, this evolving macroeconomic backdrop constitutes a binding constraint risk that cannot be ignored.

The post The reality that awaits us first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

It also drives a “blue economy” with jobs, investment, and energy diversification. Launched around late 2024/early 2025 for Malta’s inaugural floating wind farm (target ~280–320 MW, reference 300 MW) beyond 12 nautical miles in the future EEZ. It uses a competitive dialogue process: Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ), dialogue, and best and final offer. Three applications were submitted by mid-2025 (consortia like Code Zero (a Malta applicant), Atlas Med. Wind (an Italian applicant), and MCKEDRIK Sole Member Ltd (a Greece-based sole applicant).

A typical large offshore Trapani application in the Straits of Sicily is the Med. Wind (Renexia). It is an ambitious 2.8 GW floating project (~190 turbines, up to 18 MW each from Mingyang). As can be expected a useful analysis is to indicate the future growth of offshore renewable (wind and panels) power in the Mediterranean. As can be expected the speed of growth will be driven by two main factors such as:

a) The cost competitiveness of energy production by the offshore wind industry; and

b) The level of policy support for the development of renewable energy. At no stage does the consultation document issued by Malta mention the generation and use of green Hydrogen using electrolysis. The possibility of looking at solar PV technology offshore is also an area of interest as a considerable number of installation projects using floating photovoltaic systems (FPVs) technology can potentially be operated in water bodies such as shallow seas, such as Hurd’s Bank, lakes and dams/reservoirs. However, deployment of FPVs offshore is still limited because of the existing characteristics of marine/sea environments which are different from onshore conditions, such as wind loads and wave loads. These challenges lead to higher costs than projects in the North Sea, particularly when compared with the central Mediterranean, due to moderate wind conditions, deep waters, supply chain limitations, and grid connection constraints.

A crowded sea (fishing, shipping, environment) in the Mediterranean creates fresh problems in locating the wind farm sites. All applications face resistance not to upset marine protected areas, biodiversity (seabirds, Posidonia), and multi-use conflicts. The good news for investors is that the Malta government has established a one-stop-shop that will act as a single point of reference for project developers to be guided through the permitting process necessary to construct and operate the offshore project. A single administrative unit will be responsible for this procedure, and it may act independently or involve other administrative authorities in the process.

This design increases the transparency of the process and ultimately saves time and resources. The inference is that the shallow waters around Hurd’s Bank, which cover an area three times the size of Malta, could logically be utilised more extensively. The government therefore prefers that the chosen developer is responsible for all planning exercises, project developments and actual implementation. There will be an open bid session and investors chosen based on technical and financial competence and the value of the option fee proposed.

The government expects that the cost of connection with the transmission to the grid has to be financed by the chosen developer. All this is in the light of the European Green deal, which is a transformative agenda to combine policies necessary to tackle climate change, to reverse biodiversity loss, and eliminate pollution by moving to a circular economy. Once there, the government pledged to reduce emissions by at least 55% by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.

Another potential is to develop a steady supply of green hydrogen. Readers may ask, how can industrial quantities of green hydrogen be generated? The straightforward answer is through electrolysis, where surplus renewable electricity is used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen.

Hydrogen is collected and stored in pressured canisters. It is used primarily in industry (in the case of Malta to run power stations or propel ships), while oxygen is released as a by-product for export. For example, the University of Malta’s HydroGenEration project (funded by the Energy and Water Agency) is a desk-based study on integrating floating wind with hydro-pneumatic energy storage and offshore green hydrogen production.

The storage potential of hydrogen is particularly beneficial for power grids, as it allows for renewable energy to be kept not only in large quantities but any excess to requirements can also be exported to Europe.

In conclusion, due to scale, land, and water constraints, Malta considers domestic green hydrogen production to be a challenging prospect. Instead, it is pursuing a hydrogen-ready gas pipeline to Sicily through Melita TransGas, enabling the potential import of renewable hydrogen or hydrogen blends with bi-directional capability.

George M. Mangion is a senior partner at PKF Malta 

The post Malta is not active in its quest for Green hydrogen first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

It once seemed impossible to imagine the future of Artificial Intelligence without ChatGPT at the centre. It was the first generative AI product to break through to the mainstream, reshaping how hundreds of millions interact with information. However, by the end of 2025, that dominance no longer feels certain. ChatGPT is still widely used and continues to improve, but the environment that made it feel inevitable has changed. Competition is growing, operating costs remain high, and some of its structural advantages are weakening.

OpenAI’s early success was built on a clear idea: make a powerful language model accessible to everyone. The timing was perfect. In November 2022, it launched ChatGPT to the public. Within two months, it reached 100 million users, becoming the fastest-growing consumer application at the time. By mid-2025, OpenAI reported over 700 million weekly active users.

Despite this growth, OpenAI is not yet profitable. Running large language models requires expensive computing infrastructure. Each query consumes power-hungry Graphics Processing Units (GPUs), most of which are supplied by Nvidia. OpenAI reportedly spends billions of dollars annually to maintain and scale its services. Subscriptions and enterprise deals bring in revenue, but high operating costs continue to limit profitability. As a result, more users do not always translate into more profit.

A major challenge is OpenAI’s dependence on Nvidia. As of late 2025, Nvidia remains the dominant supplier of AI chips, particularly the H100 and H200 GPUs used to train and run large models. The company controls more than 80% of the AI accelerator market. If supply is disrupted or pricing increases, OpenAI’s capacity could be affected. Other companies have taken steps to reduce this dependency. For instance, Google uses its own Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), while Microsoft is rolling out custom chips for use in its Azure cloud. OpenAI is reportedly exploring in-house chip development, but this remains at an early stage.

Meanwhile, the quality gap between foundation models is narrowing. In 2023, OpenAI’s GPT-4 was widely considered the most advanced publicly available model. But by the end of 2025, several competing models, including Google’s Gemini, Anthropic’s Claude, and Meta’s Llama, have reached comparable performance levels on standard tasks. Public benchmark results and blind testing show that differences in quality are now often marginal. As models become harder to distinguish, users are shifting focus to other factors, such as price, reliability, and integration with their existing devices.

This shift has exposed one of OpenAI’s structural disadvantages: it lacks a native hardware or operating system platform. Apple has announced its own on-device AI features, powered in part by Apple-designed models, built directly into iOS and macOS. Google is integrating Gemini across Android and Google Workspace products. Microsoft is embedding Copilot throughout Windows, Office, and its cloud services. In contrast, OpenAI operates as a standalone platform, mainly through its website and API, or via its integration with Microsoft products. Without its own ecosystem, OpenAI is more vulnerable to changes in its partners’ platform strategies.

The enterprise market also presents challenges. While OpenAI has business subscriptions and API access, most large organisations continue to favour providers with deep experience in compliance, security, and deployment flexibility. Companies such as Microsoft, Google, AWS, and IBM offer cloud infrastructure, on-premise options, and regulatory support. OpenAI has made progress, but its roots as a consumer-focused startup mean it must work harder to meet the complex demands of regulated industries such as healthcare, finance, and government.

Regulation is also becoming a defining factor in AI development. In 2024, the European Union passed the AI Act, requiring developers of high-risk AI systems to meet strict safety, transparency, and oversight requirements. In the United States, regulatory efforts are ongoing, with the White House issuing executive orders aimed at AI safety and risk management. These developments increase compliance costs and create barriers to entry. Companies with large legal and regulatory teams are better positioned to adapt. OpenAI, while growing fast, does not have the same global legal infrastructure as larger technology firms.

There is also a strategic shift taking place across the industry. OpenAI remains focused on building general-purpose, large-scale frontier models. However, the trend is moving towards smaller, more specialised models that are faster, cheaper, and easier to deploy. Several open-source models, such as Mistral and Llama, now deliver strong performance on specific tasks and can run locally without requiring expensive server infrastructure. This allows developers and businesses to reduce costs and maintain more control over their data. If the industry continues to move towards decentralised, modular AI, OpenAI’s model-centric approach could face added pressure.

Geopolitics has become another important factor. The United States government has introduced export controls limiting the sale of advanced AI chips to countries such as China. These controls affect Nvidia and the broader AI supply chain. In response, China is increasing investment in domestic AI development and chip manufacturing. Europe is also funding efforts to create independent AI capabilities. As a company with close ties to US policy and infrastructure, OpenAI may face limits on its ability to operate in other markets.

Developer sentiment is another area to watch. OpenAI was once the default platform for developers building AI applications. That is no longer the case. Usage data from platforms such as Hugging Face show increased adoption of open-source models. These are often cheaper to run and more customisable. Developers are also opting for local deployments, which avoid usage limits and reduce reliance on a single provider. This matters because developer choices shape long-term ecosystems. If developers build around other models, OpenAI’s role could gradually diminish.

Recent market data suggests that the shift is already underway. In January 2026, Google’s Gemini has been gaining market share (increasing 16% in a year), while traffic to ChatGPT has declined by 22% during the same period. Although usage patterns vary, these data indicate that ChatGPT is rapidly losing its dominance in this domain.

None of this means ChatGPT is failing. It remains one of the most widely used AI tools worldwide, supported by a large user base and a robust technical foundation. But it is no longer operating in a vacuum. The market is splintering, competition is intensifying, and users are becoming more selective about what they need and what they’re willing to pay for. OpenAI now faces a different kind of challenge, not survival, but reinvention. And with the company reportedly preparing for what could become a world‑record Initial Public Offering (IPO), the pressure to evolve is even greater. Without meaningful shifts in cost discipline, platform integration, and enterprise readiness, OpenAI risks settling into the role of a strong competitor rather than the defining face of the AI era.

Alexiei Dingli is a Professor of Artificial Intelligence (AI) at the University of Malta.

The post Is this the end of ChatGPT? first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Let us start with the facts. Below please find a quick overview of the trajectory of government finances between 2022 to 2025. One can see that on one hand government revenue increased by 43.7% between 2022 to 2025, while government expenditure increased by 31.8% for the same period.

Going forward one major unknown is how much Malta will need to spend in fuel and energy subsidies. In the height of the Ukraine war, between 2022 and 2023, Malta spent some €300-€400 million annually in such subsidies. Then come all the proposals flying around on a daily basis. A quick preliminary cursory estimate of the proposals put forward by each of the major political parties would cost the public purse something between €300 to €400 million annually in reduced tax revenue or increased government expenditure, if all are implemented at once.

If Malta’s economy is to experience a forecasted real GDP growth of 3.7% and assuming an average 3% inflation rate over the three years, Malta would hit a nominal GDP of €26.2b in 2026, €28b in 2027 and almost €29.9b in 2028. If this economic growth materialises as predicted, to remain within the 3% limit of annual deficit-to-GDP Malta could have annual deficits ranging from €800 to €900 million between 2026 to 2028. Assuming the 2025 baseline deficit of €545 million – achieved when energy and fuel subsidies had fallen to approximately €150 million – our so-called annual “war chest”, provided the projected GDP growth materialises, would amount to roughly €250-350 million per year. Which is why in my humble opinion, considering the instability and the unknown of the impact of the likely increased expenditure in fuel and energy subsidies in 2026, all the proposals flying around make some difficult reading. As I said above, all this is dependant that the forecasted economic growth for 2026 to 2028 will materialise as forecasted. As I write this I am reading the latest Moody’s credit rating report for Malta, which has reduced the 2026 economic growth forecast from 4% to 3.5% due to capacity constraints in tourism, labour shortages and geopolitical risks.

Besides the various eye-catching proposals by both parties, that impact government revenue and expenditure, there are also various proposals being put forward that will impact the labour market. These vary from extended maternity leave, paternity leave and also other rights in relation to flexible and remote working. I am not against such shifts, however, I am afraid that this could easily end up in a situation whereby we are putting the “cart before the horse”.

The below graph depicts the real labour productivity of Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, Malta and the EU average for the past years. You can see that Ireland stands in a league of its own, while Denmark is also on a strong upward trajectory, whereas both Sweden and the EU average have largely flatlined. Malta’s labour productivity trajectory has dipped in 2020 being the pandemic year, recovered a bit in subsequent years (but still not to pre-pandemic levels) and labour productivity is dipping down again in 2024 and 2025.

The challenge is clear. To be able to enjoy the benefits of an evolved labour market, we need first to boost our labour productivity by transforming our economy into growing further new high value-added economic sectors and by investing heavily in having present economic sectors become much more efficient by the use of technology. If we do not revert our present labour productivity trajectory and instead push through costly labour “reforms” we end up creating much more problems than the ones we are trying to address.

The data presented in this article serves as a stark validation of the Malta Chamber’s position in its open letter, issued on 2 May, to the leaders of Malta’s main political parties. By grounding its stance in hard facts and economic reality, the Malta Chamber has proven to be the leading balanced voice of reason in a landscape currently dominated by political posturing. Malta’s so called “war chest” is not infinite and Malta’s real labour productivity is dipping. It is within this context that the Malta Chamber rightly argues that implementing costly electoral proposals and labour reforms before boosting labour productivity does not serve the country’s common good.

The post The ‘war chest’ and productivity first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

After my submission, I was interviewed by the media. I was asked what my top priorities are for the second and ninth districts, which I am contesting. For the former, I campaigned for more affordable housing units and stronger social policies. For the latter, there are decisions to be taken in the near future, and my top priority in this district is protecting the environment and safeguarding nature and biodiversity. We cannot have a situation in this country where the PL is campaigning for a better living, and others disregard the country’s pledges. My top priority will be the environment, which I have been working on for the past four years in the banking and financial industry, alongside social and governance issues.

For the environment, I want to see better coordination between the multiple entities that govern this country. Also, I want to see better safeguards on how we decide on parcels of land, especially in highly urbanised areas. My pledge of the right to adequate green space in highly urbanised areas, which I proposed during the MEP campaign, is here to stay. I want to see a different Malta. A Malta that promotes the environment and nature before excessive development. I am happy to see people earning money, developing sustainably, and aiding their families and children. Who doesn’t? However, we need to have safeguards in place. And this is why the environment is a top priority for me. This ties with the social and the well-being of citizens in affected communities. We cannot achieve social justice if we do not safeguard our future resources, because resource exploitation comes at the expense of the collective. Which in turn ties to governance. We need a stronger framework and better governance structures for the environment.

There were many improvements over the years with the establishment of the Building Construction Authority. However, we need to do more to put people’s minds at rest. We’ve reached a crossroads, and Malta clearly deserves stronger safeguards. I am happy to be on the PL’s ticket. And this is why I am running a different campaign relative to others. Surely, my loyalty remains towards the PL. However, proposing policies to aid the country doesn’t mean abandoning loyalty. I am an economist by profession. True, principles do not change unless there are grave matters that require prioritising the collective interest over individual interests. Right now, the PL is the only party that proposed a well-being index and a costed manifesto. So far, we haven’t seen anything at this level. We saw other proposals that cast doubt without providing a proper cost analysis. The PL is pledging to increase the well-being index by 25% over the baseline in the upcoming five years, which aligns with Malta Vision 2050. The proposals have been studied, and the finance minister knows they are executable on both implementation and financial grounds. The idea of a manifesto with a well-being index is contemporary and one we have been waiting for over the past few years.

The proposal for affordable housing measures and a 25% interest-free mortgage is a brilliant idea. We needed this to help first-time buyers planning to purchase a new dwelling. I already said that this proposal is one I have been campaigning for and is among the best, providing social justice and security to many individuals. Whether we like it or not, we must admit that the PL in government has brought a revolution over the past years, with an increase in median income and better social benefits. We can do more. But the most pressing issues are now being addressed in the current manifesto.

Certainly, if the electors of the second and ninth districts give me their trust, I will never disappoint them. I will be there to continue assisting people as I have over the past years. I am a different politician. I debate ideas and propose solutions. I did not spend my years bickering and whining about everything without giving solutions. Au contraire, I used this weekly column as a vehicle for ideas. I propose ideas, others take note and implement. This is how we must make politics. We use every medium to promote change. And you, who are reading, must also bring change. Change can’t happen by staying at home. If there were politicians who disappointed you, simply vote for others; just don’t change the party. Thank you for the support you have given me so far. You know I respect you and love you. Two more weeks to go.

The post My top priorities are the Environment, Social and Governance first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Through this agreement, Malta aims at deploying 350MW of offshore renewable capacity by 2050, with intermediate steps in 2040 and 2030 of 350MW and 500MW respectively.

The National Energy and Climate Plan identifies that the development of floating offshore renewables in Malta will contribute to greenhouse gas emission reductions, renewable energy penetration, energy security, research and innovation, and competitiveness.

Hurd’s Bank is one of Malta’s two officially designated floating wind zones and is fully suitable for a 500 MW project, although it requires maritime rezoning and grid infrastructure upgrades. Floating wind turbines at Hurd’s Bank are technically feasible and are now included in a 300 MW offshore wind tender, with projected costs of around €1 billion and a realistic operational timeline in the early to mid-2030s. So far three applications were submitted, one local, another Greek and the third of Italian origin. What can readers need to know about this location? Briefly, Hurd’s Bank sits within Malta’s EEZ and is already identified by the government as a prime offshore renewable zone.

Its shallow depth of 50-150m (depending on location) make it ideal for floating platforms. Essentially the design incorporates 20-25 turbines (12-15 MW class) run on floating platforms (semi-submersible or spar). The offshore site will be linked via a 132 kV export cable system to Malta’s grid, with an expected future output of 0.8TWH of clean electricity. What are the costs associated with this heroic project?

The official tender places the contract value at €1.007 billion for a 300 MW floating wind farm. This is made up of circa €550 million for turbines and floating platforms apart from the cost of €250 million for an offshore substation and cables. Installation and other logistics will add another €250 million. Naturally there will be further costs of licences, permits and similar contingencies amounting to €50 million.

The entire operation is expected to incur annual running costs of approximately €30 million. Over the next two years, the process will involve the selection of the final design, further environmental impact assessments, and the formal launch of the project. It is expected to take three more years for the fabrication of floating platforms and latest design turbines and work on the offshore station. By 2033, it is planned to start the tow out, installation and final commissioning with a realistic earliest operational date by 2034. A potential drawback is the anticipated opposition from local agents representing shipowners who currently use Hurd’s Bank for lucrative bunkering operations; consequently, the rezoning process will need to be redesigned. Naturally, Malta’s own grid needs a majority retrofit to be able to absorb high voltage reaching a 132 KV infrastructure and the successful completion of an EIA.

Off the eastern tip of Malta lies Hurd’s Bank, a stretch of open sea known as a bunkering area where cargo ships anchor to refuel and resupply. Over the years, it has become a hotspot for a wide array of maritime activity – both legal and illicit. The history of Hurd’s Bank has its own melodrama. Quoting Marica Micallef, she writes that by December 2016, it was hailed as the only free offshore anchorage in Europe. That same year, reports emerged of the area being used to profit from Libya’s ongoing civil conflict, facilitating the sale of subsidised Libyan fuel obtained from the Port of Zwara.

The following years saw Hurd’s Bank acquire a shadowy reputation. In 2017, a Libyan government minister accused the so-called “Maltese mafia” of using the waters to smuggle Libyan fuel. By 2018, journalists described Hurd’s Bank as a “paradise for traffickers”. Further controversy is likely to emerge, as the area featured on international headlines due to Russian ship-to-ship oil transfers bound for Venezuela, which was under sanctions.

Observers reported that light petroleum distillates, such as naphtha, were mixed with heavy crude oil in complex operations involving at least 13 tankers. Again, more recently in 2020, the area drew attention for human smuggling, as Xinhuanet reported a vessel using Hurd’s Bank while Malta’s ports were closed due to Covid-19 restrictions. In May 2022, Finance Minister Clyde Caruana announced plans to incorporate 900 square kilometres of the area into Malta’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), opening the door for projects ranging from renewable energy to hydrogen storage, fish farms, and even artificial islands. In 2023, the European Commission adopted the EU Wind Power Package.

This includes a European Wind Power Action Plan (COM(2023)669) aimed at accelerating the deployment of wind projects and a Communication on achieving the EU’s offshore wind ambitions (COM(2023)668). The Communication builds on the 2020 Offshore Renewable Energy Strategy and proposes infrastructural, permitting, financing, innovation, skill, and supply chain measures with the aim of reaching the EU’s targets through 12 GW of offshore wind installations per year. In parallel, pursuant to Article 14(1) of the TEN-E Regulation (EU) 2022/869, the December 2024 initiative reaffirms Malta’s commitment to clean energy generation, identifying offshore renewable energy as a key driver in reducing the country’s dependence on fossil fuels.

In summary, having secured our acreage in the sea due to EEZ, one hopes that after the national election, we secure foreign investment to erect massive PV floating panels in Hurd’s Bank to generate renewable energy, thereby reducing our carbon footprint.

George M. Mangion is senior partner at PKF Malta

The post A dream of making honest use of Hurd’s Bank first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

I understand that it is not easy to re enter politics once you exit. I thought it was going to be a short lived experience, given that I ruled it out back in 2024, right after the MEP elections. However, when the PL presented the manifesto, I realised that it would have been a shame to be left out of what I have been campaigning for – inter alia, affordable housing and aid for those in need. The idea of a 25% interest free loan to cover accommodation is indeed commendable. Certainly, the policies that the PL is currently proposing are designed to address some of the anomalies, as well as those pockets that are not reaping the benefits of economic growth.

When people ask me whether these proposals are sustainable and whether they will add to the country’s debt, the answer must be given in relative terms. This means that if the economy keeps growing, and we address these pockets to improve the quality of life of many, then it is sustainable. We always speak of additional economic growth, but we fall short in asking what it comes at the expense of. Seeing the PL’s manifesto addressing these lacunas and pockets is indeed commendable. True, after the MEP elections, I wasn’t keen on re entering politics. However, my passion to aid people and serve the country, as I did in previous posts before joining the private sector, made me reconsider. Surely, what I campaigned for was simply to stand shoulder to shoulder with families, especially those less advantaged. I am not here promoting laziness. I am promoting what we must do as a state to provide the tools to elevate people. I can express this because I grew up in a deprived environment. Material well being wasn’t the norm. We struggled to make it in life, especially in Bormla and Cottonera. The stigma was certainly untoward and unfair to us. However, when given the right opportunities, we exploited them and moved forward.

My vision is wider, and I want to see the PL’s manifesto executed if the electorate gives Prime Minister Robert Abela another chance. Many observers argue that Dr Abela has demonstrated leadership, keeping Malta afloat through economic storms and geopolitical shocks over the past few years. Surely, having a manifesto that offers a well being index tied to all the policies presented is unprecedented. Commentators note that no other political party has ever achieved such a milestone. This aligns with what I have campaigned for in the private industry, in banking and finance. So, I think it is important to keep pushing these ideas against the backdrop of Malta Vision 2050. One of the proposals I pushed for over the past two years was proper remote working, as well as flexi time. I tied this to improving efficiency in terms of time and reducing emissions. The proposal can help alleviate some of the traffic problems. It is also in line with the EU’s direction on decarbonising the continent.

The PL presented several proposals that aim to help families. When you consider these policies in light of what is happening abroad, one might question their feasibility. However, when seen in isolation and relative to economic growth and public finance management, one realises that it is indeed possible to implement the policies presented so far. What we need to ensure is that the PL clearly explains the policies to the public, as they are doing. My role is to aid the PL in promoting such policies. As you all know, I have never had any problem criticising government policies when needed, and I have been quite blunt and explicit. We need to ensure that whatever is promised to the electorate is executable and well thought out.

What is being proposed on the other side is a different story. I have not been convinced by the energy proposal, which many analysts consider crucial for stability. The solar panel proposal seems half-baked. The refuelling hub proposal is to consider LNG, which is seen as a source of clean energy in transition by 2035. Thereafter, we would need to rethink how to do business. An investment that will take years to realise and become outdated before it is even realised in terms of EU policy direction. Some experts would have considered other energy sources in line with EU policy.

To conclude, what I said this week on TV is that if Dom Mintoff were still alive, he would be shoulder to shoulder with us, campaigning for this manifesto. It is a manifesto that promotes socialist leaning policies. And for this, I must thank the Prime Minister and the PL for listening to us, and to the public, when designing it. Thank you. I am happy to be part of the PL’s formidable team. Let’s do this.

The post Re-entering politics first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.