Some lessons from the language issue

When Malta joins the European Union, the Maltese language will take its rightful place among the official languages of the Union. Many Maltese were no doubt surprised by the news, given the constant barrage of misinformation that they have been exposed to, namely that membership will sound the death knell of the Maltese language.

It is worth discussing the implications of this positive development. Firstly, once again the "No" camp has been proved completely wrong on a major pillar of its campaign, as happened in the case of the free movement of workers, the right to purchase property in Malta and a host of other issues.

The discerning public must surely be worried by this. If the "No camp, which has also arrogated for itself the ability to dictate with certainty the future shape of EU-Malta relations, keeps getting it wrong on every issue, on what issue can one really give them credence?

If they got it wrong on the place of the Maltese language in the EU, the right of foreign workers to find employment in Malta and the right of foreigners to purchase property and many other issues, can one really believe them when they speak with equal certainty on the future of Malta should it refuse to join the EU?

We need hardly bother to answer this question. However, we have a lot of lessons to learn from the issue. Begin first with the readiness with which some professional politicians and opinion leaders are prepared to say just anything without second thoughts as to whether what they say today will eventually be borne out by events or not.

It is in our opinion an irresponsibility of the first order. Our political system is regularly undermined by frivolous statements based on nothing. Political and opinion leaders need to be extra careful in what they say in public - unless of course their agenda is simply to work up disgruntlement and discontent.

The public is tired of one-sided and extremist pronouncements that close the door to dialogue and hunger for a new sense of moderation and responsibility - from all quarters.

There is another lesson to be learned. From this page we have regularly urged the need of dialogue instead of confrontation on the membership issue. Obviously, this appeal, coming from a small organisation of volunteers such as ours, has often been cynically treated with a strong pinch of arrogance as well for good measure.

This unacceptable behaviour has led to a situation in which the "No" camp is being hoisted by its own petard. For every time one of their "solemn" predictions is reduced to ashes not only is their credibility diminished but level-minded people begin to query what it was all about! We have a right to ask, are they acting responsibly?

The country would have been better served had the "No" camp concentrated its energies on membership issues where indeed a hard, critical look gives a valid contribution to the country.

EU membership is not a one-way traffic of good things flowing Malta`s way. We believe that membership offers greater opportunities then its alternatives. Nevertheless there is no denying that there are adjustment costs.

Those in our community who believe that membership is not the way forward for Malta have a responsibility as great as that of those who support membership to show through their analysis where the problems lie.

And if they demand of the "Yes" camp a quantification of the beneficial effects, they must be prepared with equal dexterity to show the drawbacks clearly without reling on platitudes or slogans.

We believe that the "No" camp has committed a number of fundamental mistakes over the past five years. First of all it has been unable to provide a credible alternative to membership.

The majority of Maltese citizens are no fools. They recognise that the "alternative" of a Switzerland or Morocco or Tunisia or Turkey or Israel in the Mediterranean (all these countries have been mentioned at one point or another by leading spokesmen in the "No" camp are not real alternatives but the proverbial clutching at straws.

Of course Malta can always go for such a model, but would this be more or less beneficial than membership? We think it will not be, given that these countries would gladly join the EU given the opportunity to do so.

We also think that the "No" camp have allowed their prejudices to rule them. One gets the impression that they did not bring themselves to understand in detail the changing reality which is the EU.

Failing to understand, their criticism could not but be completely off the mark. An athlete who cannot discipline himself to keep to a proper dietary and training schedule cannot expect to be in the leading edge of his sport.

It reminds us of the good old days when time and again individuals would pour vitriol on the writings of Marx or candidly speak against Voltaire and the philosophers of the Enlightenment without having read their works, simply because the Church disapproved of them.

What is worse is that a lot of time that could have been put to better use for the good of the nation has simply been wasted. In addition, the Maltese people are more divided and prejudices run deeper.

When we tot up the costs and benefits that have resulted from this behaviour we are led to believe that in political maturity terms we are worse off today than we were before the debate started.

Referendum

For many years the opponents of EU membership have complained that the government could not claim a proper mandate to take Malta in the EU on the strength of a promise to do so inserted in the electoral manifesto, which is a pot-pourri of political promises. Fine!

In the 1998 election, the Nationalist Party decided to call their bluff, promising that it will hold a referendum on EU membership once the negotiations have been completed.

The idea behind this is to give citizens across party lines a clear choice. The MLP has come out against the referendum.

The European Movement (Malta) has stated time and again that it favours a referendum. We are not 100 per cent sure what the result will be. We sincerely believe that it can go either way. But we respect the people`s right to voice their opinion finally, one way or the other.

We believe the referendum to be the best approach available. Let us give ordinary citizens a clear say for once and let us have absolute trust in them. Let us respect their will. Let us stop being paternalistic and professional politicians and agitators should step back a little. They have proved their point. Now stop screaming - we know you are here!

The European Movement (Malta) believes in direct democracy. We do not think that an election every five years to choose a new government is sufficient and people should be given the opportunity to express their will freely on key issues through the organisation of more, not fewer, referenda.

In the electronic age it has also become possible to consult the people directly on a number of issues. We need to explore these avenues. Let`s introduce citizens back to the heart of politics. Why do some politicians shy away from this possibility and opportunity?

The debate on whether to organise the referendum or not has reached farcical proportions. We are flabbergasted by those who want to transform Malta into a "Switzerland of the Mediterranean" but dislike referenda.

Switzerland`s political system is hooked on referenda. And that is certainly one of the many aspects we admire about that country. We also admire Switzerland for the way in which French, German and Italian-speaking communities belonging to many religious denominations living in about 26 cantons have managed to set up a federal system that achieves unity while preserving their diversity.

It appears that a section of the local political class has elicited only one lesson from the Swiss model: how to stay apart from the others!

But we are worried about other things as well. Some opinion leaders in the "No" camp who up to a few months ago were ready to shed their blood for the right to have a referendum have now begun to change their tune.

They are in favour of a referendum if it is "fair", leaving it to the fertile imagination of whoever listens to them to try to decipher what they mean by "fair". The ground has thus been laid for the day when they will openly recant and toe the party line.

The rumour mill has it that one of the options available to the "No" camp is to boycott the referendum. This is not new in Maltese history and it led to deep-seated divisions that have not healed completely.

Often we have claimed from this page that we do not believe that history repeats itself. But this does not exclude the fact that some people seem not to have learnt from the lessons of history and are bent on making it repeat itself for us.

The European Movement (Malta) believes that the referendum should be held even if a section of the Maltese political class decides to play the obstructionist game and to drag us more down the way of parochialism.

Democracy in this country needs to be protected and nurtured. It is under attack, do not be complacent. We may disagree with those who disagree with us on the membership issue. But we will never stoop to the point of denying them their say. Let the people have their say.