Labour's two souls

Nearly all journalists, columnists, commentators and opinion makers agree that we were given a hiding during the elections for the European Parliament. Some even proclaimed Labour and Alfred Sant the victors. Labour celebrated the "victory" but the rank and file showed by their subdued revelry that they do not believe there was a victory at all. It is significant that l-orizzont published a photograph of the speakers but not of the revelling Gozitan crowd. Those most close to the Labour leader rejoiced that after all Dr Sant could win elections. They found it convenient to forget that this was not the first time that Labour under Dr Sant won mid-term skirmishes to fail abysmally and repeatedly at the real contest.

Can Labourites celebrate whole-heartedly when the party garnered 20,000 fewer votes than the general election? Dr Sant himself whipped percentages to prove that had there been a normal turnout Labour would have increased its tally by 4,000 votes. Does anyone need to remind him of the apt Maltese retort Li kieku...? Though all would agree that the result boosted him that tiny bit and some claim the said result has given him a reprieve, the less superficial observers have wondered that if Labour could not win outright when everything is stacked against us, what will happen if, as is most likely, we would be riding the crest of the wave come 2007 or 2008.

We accepted defeat that bit more easily because we knew we were making a sacrifice in the national interest when we resolutely chose to carry on with the necessary reforms and, what's more, heralded more reforms notably in health and pensions. We did not expect the electorate to applaud us. Though we will allow no sense of complacency to set in and will have recourse to no Li kieku excuses, we trust that as the reforms start bearing fruit there will be a change in the people's mood. We are convinced that, though darker clouds still beckon on the horizon, we will come out in better shape once the storm is past.

But what really ails the Labour camp? It is definitely a question of leadership, but not only. It is more a split on policy and somewhat on tactics. Nearly everybody is convinced that most of the Labour Party has not embraced the grand European idea. Labour is utterly and hopelessly divided on the issue. That is the message behind the 20,000 Labour voters who have withheld their vote. Dr Sant had played with fire when he so vehemently opposed membership. He chose to sow the wind and now he has to face the whirlwind. Many Labour voters, even thousands who loyally cast their vote, are still not convinced.

Even those who, in the interest of unity and the cause, are shutting up or pay lip service to the conversion, show it. This is especially evident in General Workers' Union circles and one can read it between the lines in the self-styled independent l-orizzont and It-Torca. Others not only do not hide it but are making a crusade out of the European issue. Foremost is Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici.

On two consecutive days he has penned articles against the apparently official Labour policy. In his cold, if warped, logic he accuses the leadership of betraying the resolution taken at the party conference. In Sunday's article he again feverishly beat the neutrality drums castigating the Labour shadow minister for foreign affairs for celebrating on the visiting John F. Kennedy.

More than that he is urging "Labour deputies that they have the power besides the duty to block the ratification of the European Union constitution" since he claims that it needs a two-thirds majority to be ratified.

Perhaps emboldened by the massive absenteeism, he even went so far as to threaten them "that Labourites will not tolerate their representatives voting for the European Union constitution....Were this to happen Labour deputies would be betraying their oath of loyalty to our Constitution..." Perhaps he is already savouring victory over the Don Quixotic European windmills. If Malta will not ratify, the constitution will be dead and Europe will fall apart. Sweet dreams of revenge on our new colonisers!

In the second article he beats the old (and new) Labour protection drum. He blames the present difficult employment situation on the fact that we are subservient to European aversion to protectionism. He says there is only one road open to us. We should "dump European Union policy to protect thousands of jobs". Back to the 1980s when in the interest of protecting jobs, under the wise and single-minded logic of Dr Mifsud Bonnici, we bravely embarked on a policy of autarchy, in the process creating the mother of all unemployment situations, which he finally "solved" by employing 8,000 workers on the very eve of the 1987 election.

Most would conclude that these are the bayings of a harmless old man. But the 20,000 missing votes may indicate otherwise. He may not even be the tail that wags the dog. He may be just a nuisance. But as happened during the general conference, the leadership may deem it politic to compromise. The two souls within Labour, the pro Europeans and the Eurosceptics, are not easily reconciled. This spells trouble for the MLP but it may also prove destabilising for Malta.

Come next election what will Labour policy be? Working solidly, wholeheartedly and single-mindedly to make a success of membership or dithering at every minor and major difficulty? Remember Dr Sant retorting to Dr Mifsud Bonnici's siren calls that it would be damaging to Malta's interests to withdraw from Europe at the first opportunity. Does this mean that there can be an eventuality when Labour would deem it profitable to withdraw from Europe? Will that opportunity occur once Dr Sant becomes Prime Minister?

These are the doubts that are gnawing at Labour's credibility. These are the doubts that will keep pro-Europe erstwhile Labour voters from going back to the fold.

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health.