Leave it to the Labour Party to transform the certainty of a better future into the widespread feeling of a nation standing at the edge of the precipice. The wrong step would cost Malta its future.

Alfred Sant is dead-set on defying the pro-EU majority and doing a "no-show" in Athens this week. After that, there would be no turning back. Malta would be trapped out of the European Union. Old Labour would be back with more wacky decisions and sledgehammer policies, along with the consequences of remaining out of the EU.

The March referendum results showed majority support for EU membership. If Labour respected the people's will, the referendum would have sealed Malta's place in the EU. Instead, an early election had to be called. Dr Sant was given the opportunity to align his party's position to that of the pro-EU popular majority. He refused.

He had vowed to ignore the referendum, though within minutes of the results he turned them upside down, declaring his 'partnership' the winner. Soon after, Dr Sant issued another hallmark proclamation. He promised he will eventually call a referendum that offers a choice between membership and partnership. This is double lunacy.

Labour's folly is bottomless. If Dr Sant was so sure that his 'partnership' won the 2003 referendum, how come voters need to decide once more on the same issue in another referendum? Should not the following election decide this issue, in line with Dr Sant's repeated pronouncements to this effect?

If Sant were able to cook up a partnership deal, it would be a very different animal from the all-gain-no-pain partnership that he has been promising. Just as his all-gain-no-pain promise was out of line with what he signed up for with the EU in 1998. Another referendum makes sense as far as his partnership goes. But that referendum can never offer the choice for membership.

Not all of us are relieved by Dr Sant's hunch that his partnership option could become a done deal perhaps in as little as an hour. A number of things spring to mind that took shape in an hour, like the door tax and astronomical utility rates, but they were largely solo decisions by Dr Sant. Certainly, they did not involve Malta's trade relations with the world's largest economic bloc.

Labour media had to claim that the proposal for another referendum was widely welcomed. Yet rebuttal was broad, quick and to the point. The Federation of Industry, the Chamber of Commerce, the Association of General Retailers and Traders, the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association and the Malta Employers' Association were among those that shot down Dr Sant's referendum.

Other U-turns

Constant reminders of previous U-turns must have made Dr Sant feel threatened. He had to inject apparent substance into his current handful of promises with a contract-signing event. His contract with the nation is more like a contract on the nation. Notwithstanding all the ceremony, the consequences to Dr Sant and company of not fulfilling their promises will not amount to such.

It was not that long ago that Dr Sant made a solemn promise on VAT. He did eliminate VAT but only to replace it with the dreaded CET. Lately, Dr Sant decided to stay with VAT. His VAT promise was worthless and his vacillation was expensive.

There was the U-turn on water and electricity prices that Dr Sant promised he would not touch. There was his letter telling students that he was in favour of the stipend system, but then these were turned into loans. The somersault list is long, with consequences for most of us from shipyard workers to Gozitans.

Technical limitations

Labour promotes itself as the party with the technical expertise. They wanted us to believe that a vote for Labour is a vote for the technocrats who know how to steer the country. Instead, this electoral campaign was the showpiece of Labour's technical deficit.

Few economists will dispute that the effect of a two-month tax cut will be negligible. A temporary tax holiday is certainly no substitute for the permanent tax reforms and rate reductions that are this government's policies. The futility of temporary tax cuts, particularly one that will last for as little as two months, is widely documented in the literature.

The effectiveness of fiscal measures depends on expectations. People will not spend the extra money in their pockets if they know that they will have to dish it back out later in higher taxes. Especially if they believe Dr Sant's 'independent' auditor's results and Labour's portrayal of Malta's financial position, and especially given that Prime Minister Sant will throw the EU's Lm90 million out of the window. Of course one can equally expect cuts in government expenditure. Those will surely kick-start the economy!

There were other exhibitions of Labour's technical virtuosity, especially the ones quickly swept under the rug. There was the famous study of the impact of EU membership on prices. It contained the entertaining comparison of local pastizzi prices with their counterparts in EU supermarkets. Another piece of work had to do with the impact of the euro.

Divisive

The campaign saw Labour's attacks on those who prefer to remain outside the political arena. Who can forget the many companies which in the Leader of the Opposition's erroneous estimation were endangered by the EU? These companies had to counteract allegations that served only to damage relations with employees and creditors.

If Dr Sant really believed in his partnership plan, he went about it the wrong way. He launched bitter attacks on EU officials, calling them terrible names, from salesmen to Taliban. His relationship with these officials does not augur well for his partnership. Then there was the promise of trouble with HSBC. At the same time, Dr Sant sees himself as the martyr, under personal attack from all sides.

Unrepentant

Lou Bondì asked Dr Sant how he felt as Labour Party president in the Eighties. He was quick to answer that the economy had been doing fine; that until the Nationalist Party caused social unrest, Labour's polls showed that it had a majority backing.

Is it amnesia? Government bulk buying and import-license restrictions excluded consumer choice and depressed living standards. The wage freeze kept you from a pay raise, even if you fully deserved it. There was the battle with Church schools. You could not freely express your political beliefs in a mass meeting.

Yet in Dr Sant's estimation, none of these considerations contributed to the malaise. To this day, the voice of unrepentant Labour blames it on the Nationalists.

The common good

Not everything has been divisive. The highlight of this campaign was undoubtedly when many put aside party allegiance, for a concerted pursuit of EU membership. Even non-political organisations joined together to declare that EU membership was of benefit to industry, workers, women, students and many more.

These organisations did so not for political advantage but because they were involved in the process of negotiation and they knew that the package negotiated with the EU promised the best for the future. Such unity serves as the model of how to pursue the common good.

I am convinced that the majority of the electorate has recognised Dr Sant's policies and somersaults as the antitheses of what is required for a stable future with Malta anchored firmly in the EU. There seems to be widespread recognition of Dr Sant's unstable policies, many of which are mere gimmicks.

Today, as the counting process proceeds, I believe that Labour will get the message, it will dawn on them that they need to reconsider their approach and on the need to find a more suitable leader who does not keep on insisting on fighting imaginary windmills!

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.