Wrong conclusions

I have known Roderick Pace for a good number of years and although we have differing political opinions I have always held him in high esteem. This said, however, I cannot but react to his opinion piece. Entitled "Two bold decisions" (May 22).

According to Dr Pace, "the Labour Party must be quick in tacking two bold decisions... unless it wants to turn itself into a serial bungler". These so-called bold decisions, according to Dr Pace, are that the MLP should "rejoin the mainstream European Socialist fold as quickly as possible and to overcome the itch to vote against the accession treaty when it comes up for ratification in the House of Representatives". On both counts, Dr Pace has got it wrong!

Indeed, unless I have been living on another planet during the past years, I am not aware that the MLP has ever departed from the mainstream European Socialist fold as Dr Pace implies. As far as I am aware, the MLP has always held dear its social democratic, left of centre, political roots. It is a member of the Socialist International and has observer status within the Party of European Socialists. Indeed, George Vella and John Attard Montalto, the two members of parliament nominated by the MLP to act as observers in the European parliament, are already sitting alongside their fellow European Socialists within such institution. The same goes for the Labour representatives on the Committee of the Regions.

Certainly Dr Pace is intelligent enough to be able to make a simple distinction between being within a "fold", as he put it, and being in complete agreement on all issues. The fact that the MLP has had its divergences with its counterparts in Europe on some issues does not imply that the MLP has departed from the mainstream European Socialist fold, does it? Indeed, if this were to be the case then perhaps Dr Pace would be kind enough to enlighten us as to whom exactly he is referring to by the term "mainstream European Socialist fold" since it is a well known reality that all major European Socialist-leaning parties (indeed the case is exactly the same within the Conservative grouping) have, at one stage or another, held differing opinions on a number of important issues.

From his contribution I cannot but get the impression that Dr Pace seems to be writing under the delusion that all political parties within the different political groupings in Europe are of one mind and speak with one voice on all issues. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth!

The second observation made by Dr Pace in his article is that the MLP should be bold enough to vote in favour of the ratification of the European Union accession treaty in parliament. He suggests that this is the only credible way forward for the MLP if it is to be believed that it will respect and honour the decision taken by the majority of the Maltese population at last month's general election.

In saying so Dr Pace is really missing the wood for the trees. The MLP has, long before the election was held, declared that the question of whether Malta should join the European Union or not was a matter that should be conclusively decided in a general election. Both prior and since the April general election the MLP has clearly committed itself not only to respect the sovereign will of the people but also to honour it to the full. This, in very simple terms, implies that the MLP accepts that there exists a majority in Malta in favour of Malta's membership of the European Union. This issue for the MLP is closed.

A completely different issue is that concerning the so-called package which the Nationalist government negotiated in view of such membership. It seems that Dr Pace is under the mistaken view that one issue equates to the other, when in reality they are completely and markedly distinct since one can very well be in favour of Malta joining the European bloc but, at the same time, be completely unhappy with the terms of membership as negotiated.

It is precisely for this reason that the MLP would be acting in complete consistency if it were to opt to vote against the ratification of a treaty that it considers not to be in the best interests of Malta, while at the same time respecting and honouring the sovereign will of the people as expressed in the April general election.

Moreover, Dr Pace seems to be missing a very important point in all this debate. About 134,092 citizens of Malta and Gozo voted for the MLP in the last general election. This significant minority of people has rights too, does it not? One such right is to expect that those persons elected to represent it - incidentally that is why parliament is formally called a House of Representatives - maintain the pledges made to them before the election. On the part of the MLP, one such pledge was that of preferring an alternative foreign policy to membership of the the European Union. If the Labour members of parliament were to heed Dr Pace's advice, they would be betraying the very same people who have elected them in the first place!