Editorial

As expected, Dr Alfred Sant was re-elected leader of the Labour Party last Thursday; he obtained 68 per cent of the 900-odd party delegates' votes. The other two contenders - Dr Anglu Farrugia and Dr John Attard Montalto - won 24 per cent and eight per cent respectively.

Labour delegates, admittedly, had a difficult choice to make between loyalty to the party leader, who had successfully given the MLP a "new" image after he succeeded Dr Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici 11 years ago, and expressing the desire for change in the leadership which had taken the party to its second successive general election defeat.

The fact that the two other contenders for the leadership - despite a Sant-dominated party machinery and various pressures on delegates, including an orchestrated pro-Sant demonstration on May Day - managed to obtain almost a third of the votes between them, should signal to Dr Sant that a considerable number of delegates, and possibly a higher proportion of ordinary Labour supporters, genuinely desire change in the party, particularly in the light of the "new realities" arising out of the "double vote" in favour of Malta's membership of the European Union.

After all, Dr Attard Montalto had stuck his neck out when, within a few hours of the Labour defeat on April 12, he publicly stated that the leader and the two deputy leaders, whom he knew to be gentlemen, would resign, and that he himself would be seeking the leadership in the party's interest.

The fact that Dr Sant shortly after that said that he would not be seeking re-election as party leader, only to reverse himself on May Day, served to encourage Dr Attard Montalto in his quest for the party's renewal.

Dr Farrugia, who joined the leadership contest later, criticised the leadership even more forcefully, expressing the rank and file's widespread feeling that the party had become "unelectable" thanks to various mistakes and that it must be put on the winning track again.

Many Nationalists cynically maintain that Dr Sant's re-election as party leader was the best thing that could happen to the government, especially in view of Dr Sant's string of defeats and his reluctance to change, given his characteristic hard-headedness. But this is a very short-sighted and fallacious view to take, since it often happens that an election is for the government to lose, rather than for the Opposition to win.

Although the Nationalist Party itself is on the eve of changes, including the leadership (common wisdom has it that Dr Fenech Adami would step down once his long-standing dream of seeing Malta in the EU is fulfilled on May 1 next year), and the beneficial effects of EU membership should start making themselves felt by the next election in 2008, complacency and mistakes bred by overconfidence if not arrogance could work strongly against the PN.

Besides, Dr Sant would presumably be ready (at least one expects him to be) to learn from past mistakes and bank on the widespread feeling that, for the sake of Maltese democracy, too long a stay in power would do no party, and even less the nation, any good. For by 2008, the PN would have been in government for 21 years, bar a two-year interregnum in 1996-98.

The fact is that the Opposition should not only bank on the government's mistakes to regain power. It should also make a conscious effort to become credible again and to appeal to middle-of-the-road, "floating" voters who, in Maltese elections at least, hold the key to power.

In regaining credibility, Dr Sant and the Labour Party have an uphill task. To begin with, a lot depends on whom the delegates will choose on Thursday as party deputy leaders. Choosing persons too closely identified with the "old" (Sant) guard could send the wrong signal, while electing someone outside the "inner circle" could provide a counterweight and possibly stimulate the necessary change.

Then the party has to come to grips with the new realities posed by Malta's EU membership. To his credit, Dr Sant has already stated that he would accept them and that the MLP would seek to obtain the best possible advantages from membership while trying to minimise the disadvantages.

And, perhaps in response to the criticism made by his two contenders, Dr Sant has also promised more open party structures which would take dissenting opinions into greater consideration, and engage in internal dialogue at all levels, at the same time widening the party's appeal to voters.

The next few months will determine whether "new-old" Labour has become credible - and electable - again.