Party politics and a greater Europe

It is now only a few weeks away from elections for the European parliament, which is supposed to be a supranational body representing the views of the half-billion electorate which constitute the EU happy family. And, yet, in our Maltese way of doing things, we have managed to turn this momentous event into a petty party-political propaganda exercise.

How many of us voters have actually heard their would-be representatives, or the spokesmen of the party supporting them, speak about the issues involved in the European parliament? How many of us will be voting on these issues and not merely on local party-political lines?

On one hand, we find the Labour Party, fresh from their Pauline conversion and ready, albeit reluctantly, to accept their responsibilities in the European parliament. For this we should be thankful.

On the other, we find the Nationalists prodding and pricking and doing their utmost to score points by emphasising that they were there first and, therefore, only they have a right to be elected to the EU parliament, whereas the opposition have lost their credentials.

In politics, it is always a healthy thing to have a feisty opposition which challenges proposed actions and proffers new alternatives. This would be valid both at national and at European parliament level. It is on the other hand deplorable that the only grounds on which the opposing parties seem to disagree on, and to discuss widely, are over past history relating to the referendum.

In the meantime, in ignorance, we march towards June 12, having absolutely no idea about what we are voting for and who would be in the best position to represent those views at an international level.

We have just witnessed a glaring example of pettiness and narrow-mindedness in the recent Cyprus referendum. The selfish decision on the part of the Greek Cypriots to keep the other half of Cyprus outside the EU is indeed to be deplored.

It is a case where local issues rear their ugly heads and voters forget the larger issues that affect the nation as a whole. One would say that such a situation would be unthinkable in Malta. Or would it?

Is our determination to keep alive differences between us more important than working together to achieve the best result for our nation as a whole? While idealism has no place in politics, local or international, such gross divisive tactics as shown in Cyprus, and possibly in Malta, only serve to show us up as an immature nation not worthy to join our European neighbours.

It is time for both major parties to forget the recent events that led to the decision of the Maltese electorate to vote for joining the EU and concentrate instead on the future, where Malta will have responsibilities as well as rights.

It is time that the ground for fighting out who should represent the Maltese voter in Europe be shifted so that it reflects what is going on in Europe at the moment. Voters have the right to know what their representatives will be voting for and how they stand on these issues. Or is it a case of the blind leading the blind?