Not our Waterloo

There is no doubt we lost last weekend's local elections as much as it is certain that the only victor is the Labour Party. We were expecting to lose but not so heavily. Personally, I was expecting a loss in the region of three percentile points. Probably I underestimated the situation because I had the feeling of the Naxxar electorate where the council did relatively better than most.

Perhaps this paper and its sister on Sunday had the most succinct titles: PN Suffers Heavy Defeat and Labour Wins Absolute Majority On 66% Turnout. Labour won due to the low turnout. A competent analysis of the result has to take account of those who stayed at home. They have voted as much as those who cast their vote. But it is still difficult to interpret their choice.

First they cannot be put in the same basket. It is neither fair nor correct to make comparisons with the high 88 per cent turnout of 2003. The concomitant referendum then made sure that people who normally do not vote in local elections chose that, once they were in the polling booth, they might as well choose their local councillors. Even then the voters for the local elections were four percentage points lower than those who, on the same day, at the same time and in the same place voted in the referendum. A clearer statement could not be made. It is not that they couldn't be bothered but that they were positively against local councils, though a few might have been put off by the local administration.The correct comparison should be made with the 2000 round. Those who voted last weekend were five per cent fewer. It is true that, as the Leader of the Opposition stated, the sudden storm during the last two hours of voting might have put off some. In Naxxar we usually have heavy voting just before and after the evening Mass. This time round the late spurt did not occur. But I think this nowhere explains the low turnout.

The truth is that more and more people are getting disenchanted with the councils. And most of these are electors who usually vote PN in general elections. In the first years it was Labour voters who stayed away due to the equivocal position of the Labour Party. As Labour started to contest officially, more and more Labour voters turned out to vote, while there was a growing inverse tendency on the part of our traditional electorate.

Then there were many who this time did not vote due to national policies, local or personal issues. Some even changed their usual voting patterns and went over straight to Labour. On the national level the water and electricity surcharge has a lot to do with it. The bills have begun to bite and the announcement right in the middle of the campaign that the surcharge was to be raised further must have been the final straw. The seriousness and honesty will bear fruit in the future but spread uncertainty where all this will stop.

For many it is neither here nor there that they would have had to pay the same bills had Alfred Sant been in office. In fact, Dr Sant had raised bills sky-high when the price of oil was a mere $12 a barrel. The fact is that people had grown accustomed to having their water and electricity consumption subsidised by the taxpayers and used the money thus saved frequently on non-essentials. They are now finding it hard to adapt. The government was right to subsidise less and invest the saved resources on education and other enhancing measures for the economy. In the long run this policy will reap benefits. But in the short term we should not be surprised at the backlash.

There are other national issues of lesser import. The pension reform is certainly one. The scroungers who moonshined and received social benefits were not amused when they were caught. Nor were the successful professionals and businessmen when the tax compliance unit caught up with them. Some of these who usually voted PN did not consider half measures. They went over straight to Labour and some boasted about it. I only give minor importance to the warden system. It exists in all Labour-led councils but one and they were apparently not punished for it; though again this could be the result of more stringent control and enforcement by the wardens in PN-led councils.

If the unmitigated losses everywhere points to national reasons for our debacle, the different severity of the losses points to local issues, local management and local personalities. Gharb readily comes to mind. If the general pattern was reversed it must have been due to local conditions. Mgarr and Naxxar with four and three percentile point losses respectively also prove my point. The Sliema and, especially, the Marsascala results is the obverse side to the same argument. Probably when the contentious projects in these two localities materialise the people will realise they were not the monsters they were made out to be.

The Prime Minister has said that the party will learn the necessary lessons. But he also reiterated there is no way that the needed reforms will be stalled. We believe they are in Malta's and the people's interest. To change course when we are in midstream or nearly on the opposite bank would be deadly. Perhaps the pace may be too quick and some measures require a culture change. But I hope no one is expecting us not to pursue a policy of seriousness. Fiscal rectitude is not for sale. Nor will we reverse our policy that social benefits are only there for the deserving.

At the local level, the councils must not only work for their communities but must work with them. The devolution from the centre to the localities must filter to the various zones within our towns and villages.

We are not being complacent but this is not our Waterloo nor is Lawrence Gonzi on his way to St Helena. His honesty and his capacity for hard and focused work is there for all to see. His successful efforts at reigning in the deficit and putting government finances on a sound basis are already bearing fruit in that the government has regained its freedom to manoeuvre. The envisaged taxation restructuring aimed to encourage and reward effort, diligence and industriousness and castigate sloth and indolence should not be aimed solely at increasing our competitiveness but should start benefiting those who have up to now borne the necessary sacrifices.

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health.