Lost shepherd seeks sheep

Much has already been said and written during the present election campaign but certain things bear emphasising because of the extraordinary nature of this election and its equally extraordinary importance.

Saturday's election will decide three things that should not have been interdependent but are: whether Malta will become a member of the European Union in May 2004; whether a fundamental democratic norm (the power of the collective vote), will continue to be respected in this country; and whether the way will be cleared for the type of Labour Party that democracy and this island truly deserve.

Pseudo-democratic norms

In ordinary circumstances this should not be the case. We should be making a choice between the party programmes to decide on the government that should be in power during the important first years of Malta's membership of the EU. Instead we have to deal with a situation wherein we are forced to ignore the MLP's existence as a contending party. Unless we do so we cannot ensure that the decision that Malta should become an EU member, reached as a result of the most democratic of consultative forms, a national referendum, is honoured. This unnatural situation is the sole responsibility of the MLP leadership, or perhaps more precisely, the MLP's leader.

After repeatedly proclaiming his disdain for the referendum exercise, he appeared on March 9 on television, flanked by his two visibly uncomfortable deputies, and proclaimed that the people had rejected EU membership. Then, in a totally irresponsible manner, he misled his own party followers into thinking that 'partnership' had won, and called them to a celebration at Marsa. It could not be otherwise.

He told one of the many put upon journalists who attend his regular travesty of a press conference, that indeed, the subject was closed. The message to the electorate was clear: "You've had your fun with trying to become EU citizens, now let's forget the silly business and talk about the issues I choose to talk about". For ego is Dr Sant's alpha and omega. Should we fail to get the message he proclaimed loudly and clearly that he had no intention of signing the treaty of accession in Athens on April 16 should an act of national schizophrenia make him Prime Minister.

Outwardly unfazed by the public derision caused in Malta and abroad by his peculiar arithmetic, he keeps repeatedly telling party supporters to "be cool" and "to relax". But he knew that his untenable stance would lead to a re-run of the referendum campaign, which he desperately needed to avoid.

Failed the Labour Party

That section of the electorate which thinks for itself knows quite well that Dr Sant has not only failed the nation, he has failed his own party. It is a pity for initially he appeared to possess so much promise, launching himself as the embodiment of New Labour, only to disappoint so badly. Many Labour supporters, like most Maltese, approved when he cleansed the MLP of its violent elements. From the Opposition benches he impressed by his calm, persuasive, managerial image. He appeared to personify ability and efficiency. Then he became Prime Minister.

Once in office he came face to face with its responsibilities. Faced by national problems that when tackled separate, in prime ministerial terms, the men from the boys, he rapidly fell to pieces. Unable to retreat from his unilateral promise to remove VAT, he lost his respected Finance Minister, Lino Spiteri, who was also the only Cabinet member with any experience.

Challenged by Mr Mintoff over the social consequences of his policy decisions, Dr Sant decided to turn him into a political leper. Off he went to Birgu, publicly decreed that Mr Mintoff was a traitor, and then became angry when Mr Mintoff did not tamely retreat with his tail between his legs.

Later, against Mr Mintoff's repeated advice not to turn the Cottonera project vote into one of confidence in the government, he persisted, stridently called for "War, war, war", and lost.

We all remember the efforts made by many MLP loyalists, led by Deputy Leader George Abela at the party's general conference, to avoid an early election. Dr Sant knew better, and Dr Abela, like Mr Mintoff before him, and Mr Spiteri later, had the MLP media unleashed upon them. The election was held and the MLP suffered its biggest election defeat since 1966. This series of episodes illustrated clearly that when the going got tough Dr Sant went, but only in a fashion. For he hung on to power in the party.

In the four years since then Dr Sant has consolidated his power base in the party, well-served by its subservient media. He has continued his penchant for unilaterally decreeing party policy when it suits him; lived up to his post-election promise of no consensus; and disregarding political realities he obsessively opposed EU membership believing correctly that if he defeated the government on this cardinal issue he would triumph politically. He failed but won't admit it.

Come unto me ye sinners

He now badly needs those Labour votes he has lost (for he knows he has lost), those described last Monday on Super One TV as darnel (sikrana). While the Prime Minister acknowledged that people had been inadvertently hurt and asked in his government's name for forgiveness, not so Dr Sant. He offered forgiveness instead of asking for it. He whose first utterance following his election defeat was that he had nothing to apologise for, that those who were not with him were against him, that those who wanted consensus should go over to the Nationalists, switched to telling estranged Labour voters that they would be welcomed back to the fold. All the prodigal sons (and presumably daughters), chief among whom, I suppose, is Mr Mintoff, would be forgiven. After all they were in the wrong, not Dr Sant. Perish the thought.

He cannot conceive that there are Labourites who are genuinely in favour of EU membership, for they ought to know that Malta is the only country for whom EU membership is not suitable. After all, he has said it again, and again and again. He had made clear to them that they either toe his line or leave the party.

Dr Sant cannot accept that there are Labourites who cannot accept his way of doing things; the way he has, with one or two exceptions, surrounded himself with political mediocrities; the way he has failed to turn the party into a serious government in waiting.

These Labourites, disenchanted with Dr Sant's policies and the sycophancy of his immediate coterie, realise that on this one occasion they have to vote for the party that guarantees Malta's EU membership, and that in so doing contribute directly to ending Dr Sant's stint as party leader. This will have the salutary effect of bringing about a regeneration of the MLP - something desirable for the party and above all for democracy in Malta.

Democratic deficit

Dr Sant, when in his habitual victim-mode, often complains of a democratic deficit in Malta. On March 9 he made sure that there would be one of his own creation. Any politician prepared to practise rather than merely preach democracy would have acknowledged the people's will and pledged himself to implement it. Not Dr Sant. He then proceeds to ladle insult on injury. He promises us that if elected, he will begin to negotiate his partnership which he may conclude in x number of years. The value of x varies according to Dr Sant's mood and audience. Upon conclusion, he will hold a referendum so that we may opt for either partnership or membership. This from the man who has claimed that we have already chosen partnership.

In the meantime he expects Malta to continue in the grip of uncertainty, lose the benefits of the 77 special arrangements already concluded with the EU and the cash injection of Lm81 million, so that he can pursue his obsession to the full. How stupid does Dr Sant think the majority of the Maltese really are?

It is, of course, also the mark of an increasingly self-cornered man. A man who realises that he has failed to convince the electorate that the April 12 election is not about EU membership after he made certain that it would be.

And there are two other clear examples. The first is the two-month tax holiday that he appears to have dreamt up for it is not included in the MLP's electoral programme. This, which smacks of the 1971 PN offer to do away with income tax and the 1976 plea of "Ejjew maghna", is a blatant attempt to buy votes. Dr Sant is prepared to throw away Lm25 million which we cannot afford to do. Readers can work out for themselves today's going rate for 30 pieces of silver. So, on becoming Prime Minister, he is prepared to throw away Lm25 million in tax money and another Lm81 million of EU money. No wonder he tells us that Labour in government under his leadership will make a difference. It certainly will.

Finally, we have the magnificent example of democracy in action set yet again by Dr Sant this week. He requests The Times to interview him at his party's headquarters. The much maligned paper obliges. The interview begins. The interviewer does not oblige with soft questions or meaningless answers. He presses his questions home. Demands answers.

Dr Sant loses his cool. He will only grant interviews, even if at his own request, if he can command every aspect of the operation. If the reporter will not tamely play ball and instead of truly informing the public simply pass on Dr Sant's propaganda, Dr Sant will throw a temper tantrum. And he does. "The interview", he royally declares, "is at an end", and stalks off.

And this man seriously expects us to once again place power in his hands. He expects us to crown him again after the bitter experience of the Short Reign of Alfred I, and all the grudge infected months that have followed.

Professor Pirotta is head of the Department of International Relations at the University of Malta.