It always ends like this. Not with justice, not with answers, but with a government press conference insisting that what is, whichever way you cut it, a major scandal is somehow proof of competent leadership. Last week’s arbitration ruling wasn’t even cold before ministers were grinning as though they’d just pulled off a diplomatic masterstroke. Malta, they said, was €63 million “better off.”Of course, that number collapsed the moment anyone asked the most basic question: better off compared to what? The tribunal itself rejected the comparison. So did the government’s own expert witness. But it didn’t matter. The point wasn’t accuracy, it was momentum. It was the moment the government had been waiting for: the shift from defence to attack.And in Malta, attack always begins the same way — by declaring the story finished. Finished not because all the questions have been answered, because responsibility has been shouldered, or because lessons have been learned. No, the story has arrived at the end because the International Chamber of Commerce said Steward wasn’t owed damages.Except the ICC wasn’t ruling on legality, corruption, or whether the concession was rotten from birth. It ruled on compensation — on whether the company deserved a payout for losing the deal. It’s a reputable forum, yes. But claiming vindication from its ruling is a bit like boasting you passed an exam because the school receptionist said your handwriting is nice.If you want actual authority, you look at the Auditor General and the courts. And they’ve been rather direct. The NAO said the process was staged and deceitful. The civil court called the deal fraudulent. A magisterial inquiry recommended criminal charges against a small crowd of officials.Now, whether those charges lead anywhere is another question entirely. One can never really tell whether a case collapses because of incompetence or intention — but whatever the reason, the investigation shows the same symptoms we’ve seen in every major scandal: timelines mangled, evidence trails fading, basic steps taken far too late. This isn’t to say every accusation we’ve heard is true, whether or not it is proven. But it has unquestionably been a shit show, and one I can’t imagine any sane PR person advising should be spun as a triumph.Yet such is the audacity of our political class.And it’s not just the government. The PN has also played its role in this mess. The government is desperately trying to wear its best victory face, while the PN has continued with its theatrical fury, all while the public watches on, exhausted.Instead of sticking to what was already damning — rigged tendering, fraudulent contracts, collusion spelled out by the courts — the PN has consistently reached for the headline-friendly exaggeration: €400 million stolen. Never mind that most of the money went to salaries and operations, which the state would have had to pay had the concession not been granted to third parties.The PN’s reasoning seems to be that a big number will land better than a complex truth, banking on the public’s general ignorance of how the healthcare system is funded and how expensive it actually is.To be clear, the inquiry did find that some money was missing, but it wasn’t €400 million. Insisting on such a high figure only serves to undermine your argument, especially when the reality is just as damning.The government, meanwhile, clings to the technically correct but morally vacant line: “Nothing was stolen.” Debatable. But even if we assume for a second that this is true, the money flowed through a corrupt ecosystem — one that turned essential public services into private leverage and political opportunity.Two concessionaires took the wheel. Both failed. Steward even ended up declaring bankruptcy in the US.Two failures. One country left holding a very expensive bag.And beyond the financial wreckage, think about what else evaporated.We lost years that could have been spent rebuilding crumbling hospitals. Gozo was promised a medical hub, a state-of-the-art facility, an economic niche in medical tourism. Labour campaigned on it relentlessly, criticising the old hospital as unfit for modern healthcare.Yes, some minor improvements were made. And yes, the hospitals were run professionally — but largely because the existing staff kept them functioning. What we didn’t get were the things that mattered: the promised investment, the new infrastructure, the modernisation, the medical tourism sector that was supposed to anchor Gozo’s economic future.And what did Gozo actually get? New renderings. New slogans. New excuses.When the government now claims we “lost nothing,” it’s rewriting history. We lost time. We lost potential. We lost an entire decade in which Malta could have built the kind of healthcare system it keeps promising every election cycle.The ICC ruling doesn’t touch any of that. It simply says Steward wasn’t entitled to extra damages. It doesn’t say the concession was wise, or honest, or beneficial. It doesn’t say the public got value for money. It doesn’t rescue the decisions that led us here.Now, with a fragile criminal case trudging forward, the government has decided the moment for self-congratulation has finally arrived. Nothing was stolen, they say. Everything is accounted for. This is all ancient history.It’s deliberate. It’s calculated. And it’s breathtakingly brazen.What happened wasn’t a cinematic heist. Nobody sprinted out of the Finance Ministry with bags of cash. What happened was slower, subtler, and far more corrosive. Public money was funnelled into private incompetence, protected by political favour, wrapped in PR, and permitted by institutions that should have pulled the plug years earlier.This is corruption — not the dramatic type, but the structural kind. The kind that doesn’t need to break the law blatantly because the system obligingly bends around it.So maybe nothing was stolen. But everything that mattered — trust, opportunity, and the future of Maltese healthcare — was squandered.This wasn’t a partnership. It was a failure we’re still paying for. And pretending it’s a victory doesn’t make it any less absurd.•