Labour's unsolved issues

If proof were needed that the Labour Party still has a number of unsolved internal problems, one does not need to rely upon the often leaked information about party machinations which appear regularly in the Nationalist press. One can find sufficient evidence on the online media.

We all heard about the changes that the newly elected MLP administration is aiming at. One of these trumpeted changes is that the party must become more inclusive. The party attempted to manipulate Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici's stand of Alfred Sant's U-turn on the issue of Malta's EU membership as a proof of such inclusion. But not everyone is that convinced.

On November 22, Silvan Mifsud published an article on www.di-ve.com which minced no words about the subject. Even if he echoed faithfully Alfred Mifsud's own public stances, Mr S. Mifsud's contribution must be considered as a dent in Labour's purported policy of becoming an inclusive party.

He directly referred to Labour's deputy leader for party affairs, Michael Falzon, "harping on the need of building an inclusive Labour. If I remember well, he harped on this point twice in a day, both on radio and television". Then came the killer blow. Mr S. Mifsud concluded: "Well, Dr Falzon as much as I admire you, I would like to point out that your words contrast sharply with the abusive actions that were recently carried out by the letter dispatching department within Labour's disciplinary committee. Statements harping on inclusiveness, which are not supported by facts are harmful. Very harmful".

The reference is blatantly obvious. Mr S. Mifsud is referring to the letter sent by Labour's vigilance board to Mr A. Mifsud threatening him with exclusion from the party unless he stops writing critical articles about Labour's leadership.

It is not insignificant that Mr S. Mifsud did not publish his article in any of Labour's papers, considering that in the recent past he has been a regular contributor. But then anyone who read his contribution on dive-com almost empathised with the hurt expressed by the young writer. Here we have a young man, full of ideals, so much so that he represented his party in the Youth Convention of the European Union in Brussels, who feels that his party is still struggling, not very successfully, to become an inclusive party.

Another article which shows Labour's continuous internal turmoil and possible battles to come is Richard Matrenza's latest piece in Labour's online paper, issue No. 668. Starting by granting that the government had probably won the propaganda war previous to the budget by "alienating and sedating the people", one cannot but reach the conclusion that he was criticising the opposition for losing that battle. A message which is hardly complementary to the new Labour administration.

Then follows an old clichè from Dr Sant's pre-referendum collection, that by joining the EU Malta will return to the status of a colony. Now, for someone who reached the heights of occupying the post of Malta's High Commissioner to the UK to claim such nonsense is not just pathetic but also worrying for Labour's future strategy relating to Malta's position in the EU. If a future Labour government adopts the position held by Mr Matrenza in its dealing with the EU, Malta will certainly be the loser, as a colony by its very nature can never claim equality status with its coloniser.

What follows next in Mr Matrenza's article is an apocalyptic scenario. Referring to the budget speech, he proclaims with certainty: "The full performance, the real nature of Malta's tragedy after joining the new political union of 25 members, will begin to pinch and hurt come next Budget Day and thereafter". His solution?

That future elected European parliament members in the name of the MLP should "do battle to try and minimise as much as possible the blustering winds and buffetings of the coming storm". The fact that there are still people of influence in the MLP who are prepared to use bellicose language at every opportunity is still a worrying aspect which scares voters from trusting Labour. The "do battle" implies a "them and us" mentality - a duality which harmed this country and prevented it from reaching its full potential.

Why is it that so many Maltese, not exclusively in politics, must always have a perceived enemy to fight or at least to compete against?

If we are going to enter our new period of history, as members of the European Union taking with us unwanted baggage, then we will only make problems for ourselves. Mr Matrenza's position shows that Labour still has a long way to convince its own that its new policy on the EU is the right one.

And that is because genuine conversions are to be based on conviction and not convenience.