The Times reports that Easyjet have had confidential talks with Alfred Sant regarding the underserved routes that will be offered to low-cost airlines. The definition of "underserved" is a governmental one.
For the government "underserved" means that there are not enough, or normally no, airlines serving a particular destination. The route in question will be one where the sans pareils of economic efficiency such as Air Malta choose not to fly. Like Mulhouse for example. Luxembourg does not count because under the governmental definition commuters to Luxembourg are well served by the service provided by Luxair (that other sans pareil) once a week at around Euro 500 p.p.
For the citizen "underserved" would also have meant currently economically inefficient routes. It would mean that if Ryanair were allowed to fly to Malta from Frankfurt-Hahn at Ryanair prices the consumer would choose to get to Luxembourg via Frankfurt-Hahn. Same goes for Stansted, Charleroi, Carcassone etc. The consumer does not give two hoots whether the new routes create direct competion to the services already in existence (such as Air Malta an Luxair). Actually the consumer would love to have such competition for he can already hazard a guess at who woul benefit from such competition.
I wonder whether Alfred Sant had anything prosy to say about possible competition under Labour government. My guess is that he limited himself to guaranteeing that he will not nullify any agreements made with the PN government (not that he usually does anything of the sort).
Which means that the consumer will probably go on facing a middle finger from the establishment come what may.... unless of course a third party offering an alternative solution were to announce its intention to insist on full acces for low-cost carriers.