Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1399957
9 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 8 AUGUST 2021 INTERVIEW made a sacrificial lamb' want to organize an event in two months' time, you need to know certain things from now. You need to contact the musicians; organize rehearsals; decide on the repertoire programming; market the event; sell the event… get all the suppliers, and everyone else on board… and that all takes time… It needs to be also mentioned that, considering emerging var- iants, we were hoping that herd immunity and vaccine would benefit us to the full, and help get our lives back. But why is so much importance given to stand-up events, any- way? Given the circumstances, can't the industry adapt to a new reality: for instance, seated only for the foreseeable future? Let me put it this way: it would be very selfish of me [to accept that], because I myself, and others, can easily work with just seated events. But not everyone else can. It is ul- timately a genre-related issue: of course, you can have a seated au- dience for a Classical orchestra. In fact, it probably wouldn't even work any other way. But by the same reasoning: you can't have a heavy rock con- cert – or, even less, an electronic dance-music, or Hip-Hop event – with a seated audience. It just doesn't work… Is it wise to allow such events at all, however? This week, for in- stance, a planned summer party – which has now had to be can- celled – was sold out within liter- ally minutes of being announced. Clearly, then, there is a very high demand for such activities, among the public at large… But with caution. Sorry, I had to stop you there… because, whilst you are absolutely right, that events of a certain number – ba- sically, less than 1,000: because anything more than that, for me, is a 'mass event' – would 'sell out fast'… it doesn't mean that things are simply going to go back to how they were before. To use myself as an example: if, in 2019, Earth Garden had at- tracted crowds of up to 24,000 people… there is simply no hope of returning to those numbers to- day. Forget it. It's not as though the demand is so high, that people would just flock to mass-events like they used to. There is now an element of uncertainty… even the restric- tions themselves don't make it easy. People are potentially a bit scared; but they have also changed their lifestyle habits, over the past two years… includ- ing, for instance, how they spend their money. So while I agree with you, that the demand for smaller events is very high… when it comes to mass events, however, it's a whole different ballgame today. And we certainly don't expect to just snap our fingers, and suddenly return to way things were before. It's just not going to happen… All the same, people might be justifiably concerned that – by opening up to stand-up events today – we might end up with Covid cases once again sky-rock- eting… That is why I earlier mentioned the vaccine, as such an important pillar of the re-opening strategy. Another of our proposals was, in fact, to make a distinction be- tween vaccinated, and non-vacci- nated audiences. To explain it in a nutshell: if government wants to encourage events, as much as possible, for vaccinated audiences… then it has to also give organisers an incen- tive. So if someone wants to oper- ate as he wishes – in total freedom – without a vaccinated audience… let that be, for example, capped at a maximum of 150 people, at an occupancy of 1: 4 [100 people for every 400 sq m]. Those who, on the other hand, would like to take the option of organizing events for vaccinated audiences only… we suggested giving them 1:2, at a higher cap- ping: so they can have 500 people, for example, spaced out at 200 per 400 sq m. In the case of seated events, on the other hand: what we're expe- riencing is quite an over-cautious approach. Let me explain: a res- taurant's patrons are not required to be vaccinated; they can sit at a table - which can be 90cm square - face to face, without masks, for three hours. But then, a seated event has to have its audience vaccinated, spaced out with 2 metres on either side, face to back of the other per- son, and all wearing masks. I mean: surely, everyone can see how our industry has been the sacrificial lamb of pretty much all other industries… Earlier, you mentioned 'unfair competition' from illegal activi- ties: which is not, in itself, a Cov- id-related issue. This is also a re- minder that your industry faces challenges, even at the best of times. What would you say is the biggest, non-Covid problem fac- ing the arts and entertainment sectors right now? As I said before: ours is a com- petitive industry. But not all the 'unfair competition' comes from amateurs, or illegal events. Our major problem - that a lot of people may not be aware of – is that ours is also the only private industry which has to compete directly with the government. If you look, for instance, at tour- ism: the government does not have 'hotels' of its own. It doesn't own and operate its own restau- rants. No; there's the private sec- tor, which government 'enables' to operate. It gives them the tools to work with; they can apply for certain government incentives… but that's as far as it goes. In our industry, on the other hand: 60% of the public events, held in Malta every year, are both fully subsidised, and produced, by the State itself: not too differ- ently from state-controlled coun- tries, in fact… I mean, don't get me wrong: it's perfectly OK to have, say, 20% of annual events held under the auspices of the State. But 60%? That's not OK at all. And it is cer- tainly not OK – very far from it, in fact - for the government to be producing those events itself. What the government should be doing is 'enabling' our industry, in the same way as it does with oth- ers. If, for example, the govern- ment feels we should have a 'Folk Festival'… then it should set aside a sum of money; draw up its pro- posals; send out a public call, so that the professionals involved in the sector can apply, and deliver the goods… that is how it should really work, in practice. But for government to actu- ally create these things on their own, and have total control over them… that is clearly not right. And it also gives rise to oth- er problems. There's also this mentality, going on here, that if someone does well in the pri- vate sector… but someone else doesn't feel ready to take the same risks; or, for some other reason, can't really compete with that person… they simply knock on government's door, to have those kind of events 'created' for them… so that, eventually, that same fully-subsidised event, will compete against their main com- petitor in the private sector. This happens so many times. It's sad, really… because, instead of 'enabling the achievers' – which is what we really should be doing – we are only enabling those players in the industry, who might not be ready to go all the way. And to be perfectly honest: it's not the way to go to further improve quality. That said, the government has also helped sub- stantially. We just need to tweak the mindset and approach; just as much as we need to have better efficiency in terms of response…