Labour's travail

There is no doubt that the Labour Party has monopolised all attention in the media since the election. This is only natural since the vast majority, of whatever political hue, expected the party to reform itself after a debacle of such proportions.

In my view, the Labour leadership was too bitter after the 1998 election to read the signs of the times. It went openly into negative mode. In fact, recently the leader of the opposition underlined a change in tactics, thus tacitly admitting this fundamental error of judgement at the very beginning of the last legislature. An error that persisted for nearly five years! A wasted five years!

It is never too late to learn. In this sense the election defeat was salutary for Labour and if the reforming elements gain the upper hand definitely and decisively, then truly spring is with us. Malta can only gain from a less politically charged climate.

Two main dilemmas persist. First what is the true message of the leadership settlement? Was the contest for the leader too close to the election for a considered, calm appraisal? With the wound still bleeding, with the propaganda machine firmly in Alfred Sant's hands, with the real potential future Labour leaders biding their time, the result could not be different. The subsequent result of the deputy leaders' contest points to a victory for change.

Dr Sant's cronies were utterly routed. There is no doubt that Dr Sant is a wounded leader and his earlier apparent triumph may well prove to be a Pyrrhic victory. Overall, the result implies that for the next two years doubts will linger as to whether there will be further changes at the very top. This uncertainty may be a severe handicap for the party.

The second nettle is more crucial. All Labour spokesmen have finally admitted that the people are sovereign. But there are different interpretations of how this principle should be translated in fact and practice. It is already heartening that the Labour leadership have publicly stated they will not pull Malta out of Europe. It is further reassuring that Labour's views regarding the future of Europe is so close to ours that a real possibility exists for convergence on foreign policy. This would help the country tremendously in European Union fora and goes a long way towards burying our provincial politics.

The issue has to be faced when parliament will soon decide on the ratification of the Accession Treaty. Unfortunately, many Labour spokesmen have already compromised their position by stating publicly that they are duty- bound to vote against. They justify their decision on the basis that 134,000 people have voted against European membership. Though the premise has some justification, by the same logic they should decide to continue their opposition to Malta's membership. A wrong decision may well prove to be the millstone around Labour's neck come the next election. Once again it would be a misreading of the signs of the times.

One can understand Labour's travail. The blunder Dr Sant made five years ago haunts his decisions today. But since gangrene has set in, operating now is crucial and irrevocable. Persistence in error may well mean yet another last minute U-turn before the next election.

What is the perceived Labour mandate based on? It is true that a minority of those who embraced Labour's arguments, including a sprinkle of traditional Nationalist voters, are genuinely anti-European out of principle or apparent personal or sectorial interest. Some of these are likely to change their views in five years' time. Then there are the bulk of voters, who exist in both camps, who blindly follow party policy. In the case of Labour voters they came to see Europe as the devil incarnate because they were so brainwashed by the Labour media. They may become Labour's most ardent supporters of Europe. The rout of Labour's erstwhile anti-Europe media guru speaks for itself.

Labour will probably fail to convince those who in Europe are dubbed the lunatic fringe and the old dinosaurs, those who may be encouraged to continue the struggle on constitutional pretexts.

It is this motley rump that will plague the country and Labour for the next few years. But only if the Labour parliamentary group will provide them with the ammunition by voting against ratification of the treaty!

One would be justified to question the motives of a Nationalist minister when advising the Labour Party. In fact, it would suit us as a party if Labour persists in blundering and looking more conservative and inward looking. Is this what the young generation expects of the political class? What profit will Malta make?

Labour should respond to the recent statesmanlike and magnanimous pronouncements of the prime minister. A leader is elected to lead, not to follow.

Dr Deguara is minister of health.