Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1475004
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 31 JULY 2022 8 INTERVIEW There cannot be 'us versus them', There are, as they say, two sides to every story: and the one about your dismissal, as headmaster of St Albert The Great College, is no excep- tion. You yourself argue that the issue centred on a number of 'community initiatives' you undertook: for instance, an in- clusivity programme that en- couraged 'interfaith dialogue' among students. But the Curia's statement suggests that it was prompted by your own refusal to cooperate with the College's board of directors (and espe- cially the new rector, Fr Aaron Zahra). So let's start with this: how much truth is there, to the claim that you were 'insubordi- nate'? Basically, I would say that what happened all boils down to cer- tain changes in the way the Col- lege was administered, over the past two or so years. Until my dismissal last week, I had been headmaster at St Albert The Great College for around 14 years. Throughout that time, the way things were organised was that there was a non-executive rector, who would come to the College for meetings twice a week; and I used to inform him about everything that was going on. Now, the former rector – Fr Francis Micallef – used to give us a lot of elbow-room. Basically, there was a lot of trust; and this obviously gave us the possibility to develop… and the opportu- nity to 'dream', as it were. But I always kept him informed; and the rector always knew that was happening… Sorry to interrupt, but part of the whole 'insubordination' charge is precisely that – unlike the case with Fr Francis Micallef – you didn't keep the new rec- tor abreast of all the on-goings at the College (so much so, that Fr Zahra claimed to have been 'unaware' of certain pro- grammes at his own school)… Yes, that's what I was coming to. After the change of rector- ship two years ago, things start- ed functioning… differently. The new rector felt that he should have a board [of directors] to back him up; and this board was instituted over the past year or so. The first thing they did was send us a statute – and by 'us', I mean the leadership team: com- posed of myself, and all the dep- uty heads – for feedback. And we gave our feedback: which included our concern that this board should be more 'repre- sentative'; that it should include representatives of members of staff... if not the parents, as well. But none of it was taken on board. Not even a comma, of what we had suggested, was ac- cepted… It has already been pointed out (during yesterday's MUT protest, among others) that Fr Zahra himself doesn't have a teacher's warrant. Now, you're telling me that the board that he set up does not represent any teachers, either. Do any of its members have any other kind of educational experience? Not really, no. And to be fair: as rector, Fr Zahra would only need a warrant if, for instance, he de- cided to assume the headship himself; or some other executive position, within the school. But to answer your question: no, the board was composed by the rector himself… basically, out of 'people he knew'. And to date – almost a year later – we still do not have any real idea, of what this board should be doing; or what I should be doing; or even what he [Fr Zahra] should be doing, as rector. It's all very much up in the air… If I'm understanding correctly: the purpose of this board was so that the new rector could firmly establish his own con- trol, over proceedings… am I right so far? Yes, I'd say you got that right… So if you don't mind me asking: doesn't that make it simply a power-struggle, between you – the [former] headmaster – and Fr Aaron Zahra, the new rector? And if so: was there some kind of personal animosity going on, behind the scenes? No; or at least, I don't think so. As for myself, I have full re- spect for Fr Aaron Zahra; and I do acknowledge the fact he is – or rather, was – my senior… my boss, basically. And I didn't have a problem with that, at all… What did you have a problem with, then? Basically, our approaches were different. I come to this from my experience of 14 years of al- ways working in a certain way – which gave us a lot of leeway, and elbow-room. But Fr Zahra thought that things should be administered in a much more 'top-down' fashion. And in practice, it was more or less like having 'an elephant in a Chi- na-shop', all of a sudden… Nonetheless, there were many instances where we did work well together. There were al- so a number of hiccups: which, I think, boil down mainly to the fact that we were not given enough time to adjust to the new administration. But ultimately, I think it was a more a question of differences in the way we see things; and in the way we thought things should be run. This brings us to those 'in- clusivity' programmes. News headlines such as our own – 'School head who championed inclusivity fired by Dominicans' – suggest that it was actually your belief in 'interfaith dia- logue', that ruffled feathers within the Dominican Order. In other words, that 'insubordi- nation' was just the official ex- cuse, to put a stop to a Church school being used to host meet- ings between Christians and Muslims, for instance. Is that your own interpretation, too? First of all: what we are talking about here is a particular curric- ular programme, which is home- grown, called 'MEET'. The idea was that, because we have stu- Former headmaster MARIO MALLIA argues that his recent dismissal has less to do with accusations of 'insubordination', than with an ongoing power struggle within the organisational structures of Church schools Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt