A sad <i>mise-en-scene</i>

The confirmation of Dr Alfred Sant as leader of the Malta Labour Party constitutes a very sad event not only in the party's recent history, but also in the history of democracy of our country.

Dr Sant's re-election represents the conclusion of a most incredible and impudent act of mise-en-scene, the prologue of which started immediately after the first electoral projections indicated that Labour had again suffered a resounding defeat. Shortly after, Dr Sant had no option but to concede defeat.

He then made a declaration that took nobody by surprise, namely that he was no longer interested in again seeking the party leadership.

This is not the introduction of a play by Luigi Pirandello, where the game of falsehood and pretence often reigns supreme. Readers might be tempted to ask: what kind of correlation is there between Pirandello and Sant? The answer is simpler than one might think!

For now it is all too evident that Dr Sant proved how unreliable he has always been since both during the referendum and electoral campaign he had lost his credibility, and afterwards he merely pretended not to be interested in leading his party any longer.

In the latter case, Dr Sant produced nothing more than a clever plan to stab in the back all those who thought they had the necessary credentials to substitute him as MLP leader. Indeed, what a sheer act of hypocrisy to imply, intially, that one would resign, and then declare, brazenly, to have had second thoughts and, at the same time, exhort all those who honestly wish to contest the party leadership to submit their candidacy! This seems to me a kind of plot somewhat more intricate and intriguing than that of Pirandello's famous plays!

Dr Sant's re-election as MLP leader was the climax of an unprecedented farce, highlighted by articifial acts of jubilation by his clique. I fail to understand how anybody could justify such ridiculous exultation. As a matter of fact, how can Dr Sant and his entourage rejoice if his leadership, since 1998, has been marked by so many failures?

Is it fact or fiction that Dr Sant has received six consecutive devastating blows? May I exhort all those who, despite such defeats, still dare consider him a formid-able leader, to meditate on the following undisputable realities:

1. June 1998. Dr Sant's government loses its parliamentary majority and is induced to ask the electorate to pronounce itself in a premature general election.

2. September 1998. As MLP leader, Dr Sant suffers a terrible electoral defeat marked by a majority of over 13,000 votes for the rival Nationalist Party.

3. March 8, 2003. The Labour Party, always under Dr Sant, receives two serious blows. In fact, both the national referendum on EU membership as well as the local council elections are characterised by a humiliating debacle.

4. April 12, 2003. After refusing to recognise the legitimacy of the EU referendum, Dr Sant declares that the decisive test is the general election, which he loses for the second time!

5. May 15, 2003. Following the stunning electoral defeat, the MLP holds an extraordinary general conference to elect its 'new' leader. Dr Sant is confirmed as leader, but, compared to 1998, he loses about a third of the support of the MLP delegates. Such a result, far from being a personal success, should logically be considered as another blow for the Labour leader - the sixth blow in a row!

If these facts are not sufficiently illuminating, can anyone of Dr Sant's closest allies explain the reason why Dr Sant, in spite of a record number of defeats in five years, decided to contest the party leadership when he was being challanged by two prominent Labour MPs? As far as I know, such facts have not been experienced in any other democratic country.

Undoubtedly, the saddest aspect is not that the Labour camp has registered so many defeats, but rather that the MLP is still in a worrying state of disarray and, as Dr Angelo Farrugia has put it, "in a mess"! Instead of carrying out a responsible and careful post-mortem of a worrying electoral defeat, the MLP has simply resorted to pretexts to justify its shocking situation. Such an attitude can neither help Labour come to grips with the bitter reality nor pave the way for any tangible solution to come out of its present terrifying labyrinth!

If anybody in full possession of his mental abilities used to follow the MLP media before the general election, he must have experienced, like me, a most dreadful, disgusting and depressing sensation! Is it not incredible that today, six weeks after the election, the situation has not really changed?

I have followed a recent edition of a scarcely edifying programme on Super One TV, Robin Hood, which, once more, proved to be an astonishing means of untruths and misconceptions. First and foremost, it is a blatant untruth to state that the Nationalist Party won the general election merely thanks to the EU issue, or that the PN refused to put on its electoral agenda the most important social and economic aspects of the country so as to give absolute priority to EU membership.

Whoever makes such assertions is not only prejudiced against the Nationalist government, but also demonstrates a poor and unreliable analysis of the significant messages which the PN has been communicating to the electorate. Moreover, certain accusations levelled against the PN prove, without any doubt, an unsatisfactory acquaintance with the political manifesto of the ruling party.

The truth is that the PN has taken great pains to face the country's current problems and to propose adequate and effective solutions, but, as it has always underlined in its policy, such problems can be best tackled through EU membership!

Hence it is not true that the electorate chose to ignore its problems because it was hypnotised by a magical dream called EU! On the contrary, by voting for EU membership, the electorate understood that only through such membership could the country be steadily and firmly on the right track to make the best possible economic breakthrough!

Therefore, let us call a spade a spade! The EU was a dream for its founding nations some 50 years ago, but today it has become an undeniably important reality that has contributed to improve both the stability as well as the quality of life of its member states.

At some point, during Robin Hood, both Dr George Vella and Fr Noel Grima dared to express the not-so-convincing idea that what saved the PN from electoral defeat was the EU issue.

I am sure that Dr Vella and Fr Grima are fully aware that the PN faced the electoral test with an excellent track record, and that in the country, the general perception has been and still is that only the PN in government can really guarantee a better standard of living and a better quality of life.

And it is also true that the population knows that the PN has never been a threat to democracy; on the contrary, it is still the only party that can proudly present itself as the best safeguard and promoter of democracy in all its aspects!

For all these reasons, along with the evident advantages of the EU issue, the PN has been confirmed in power. Whoever is unable, or rather, unwilling to admit such an obvious reality, is not doing justice to the remarkable merits of the Nationalist administration and to the intelligence of the Maltese people.

Finally, let us say the truth about the assertion that the PN won the election thanks, exclusively, to excellent marketing. It is true that the Nationalist Party can dispose of a formidable team of professional journalists and media personalities, but it is equally true that the MLP, like the PN, has a TV and radio station as well as a couple of newspapers.

So what is the point of accusing the Nationalist Party of being merely a propaganda machine? Or is the Labour camp particularly envious of the PN's success in delivering efficaciously and convincingly its various messages?

As a graduate in Communications, I have to admit that marketing plays a very important role also in politics, but I am not convinced that to win a general election all you need is superb marketing.

I strongly believe that the MLP failed to win not only because the quality of its media leaves much to be desired, but especially because it has repeatedly lost its credibility. Would the Nationalists have won the election merely through formidable marketing and the EU issue, but without credibility? Surely not!

Since Dr Sant has chosen to 'hijack' his own party, there seems to be little hope to see, in the near future, a truly renewed Labour Party. However, it would be a pity both for genuine MLP supporters as well as for our country, should Dr Sant continue to fail to take full cognizance of reality, and not to realise the urgent need of proper self-criticism within the MLP.

It is evident that Labour desperately needs to regain credibility, otherwise it can never hope to return to power. And it would be useless to talk about the import-ance of alternation of power unless the MLP continues to refuse to become a serious, reliable, democratic and, most of all, a credible alternative to the party in government.