Blurred vision

Labour continuously tries to depict this government as jaded with neither ideas nor creativity. The daily chorus makes you think that, on the other hand, their vivid vision will provide solutions to all present and future challenges. Fortunately, the present lot have been tried and found grossly wanting. It's one thing pompously perorating from an opposition armchair, it's totally different when it comes to delivering. The numerous policy reports and the numerous frenetic meetings with civil society leave the impression it is after all a political game. Prior to 1996, Alfred Sant played the same game and made numerous promises which he unblinkingly broke once he gained power. But it seems the Labour Party is feeling it is being so well received they believe they are already as good as occupying Castille.

This over-confidence is frequently leading to prominent members of the MLP, including the leader himself, to slip, baring their true colours. Not so long ago a Labour front bencher wrote in one of the much maligned English language papers wondering why such a hullabaloo was raised when Dr Sant had proposed the depreciation of the lira by 10 per cent. Perhaps because he was rapped on the knuckles for not letting sleeping dogs lie, he recanted, going overboard stating he had never been in favour of depreciation.

More recently, a still more prominent member of the shadow cabinet praised military discipline and wrote with nostalgia of the various labour corps created by Labour in the 1970s and 1980s. For those too young to remember when the MLP (Old Labour in today's Labourspeak) came to power in 1971 on the slogan Malta Marida, Medicina Mintoff (Mintoff, the Medicine for a Sick Malta), they quickly "realised" what they had known all along, that, after all, governing was not so easy as it is made to look when in opposition. They found out that it was not at all that simple to keep their promise to find employment for all within three months, as they were wont to boast.

So they set up the Pioneers Corps as a temporary measure, until, that is, foreign investors started queuing to open up their establishments in Malta. I would say initially we were all taken in. Thousands joined despite the very poor conditions offered. They hoped they would eventually end up as permanent government employees. The pre-election snarling GWU had already metamorphosed in a docile lap dog, baring its teeth only at the sight of the enemies of the people. The snag was that this temporary measure became permanent.

One labour corps with increasingly exotic names followed another. I remember among others Bahhar u Sewwi and Izra u Rabbi. They were all supposed to make men out of boys, to instil new skills, to set in a sense of discipline and orderliness.

Nothing probably proved the total failure of these objectives then our jokingly calling them Ifrex u Orqod (Lay the sheets and sleep). So much for the benefits of military discipline as practised by the then Labour government! It developed into a system of cheap labour. The scheme rather nurtured a culture of dependency and helped to bloat the number of government employees from 21,000 in 1971, which from the opposition benches Dom Mintoff had called scandalous, to some 45,000 by 1981.

But this was Old Labour, violent and corrupt Labour, the Labour that had let all infrastructure go to the dogs, that saw every computer as the deadly enemy of the worker. So why should one of the architects of the so-called New Labour look with nostalgia at the various labour corps? Has the frame of mind that they are as good as in government made him look at the likely problems but has looked for solutions from the past? Or is it that regimentation is part and parcel of the Labour mentality? After all New Labour, that mercifully chucked the thugs from its midst, did not dissolve the Brigata Laburista, the local equivalent of the Balilla, composed of very young children. Or is this after all the acclaimed Labour vision? Indeed a blurred vision from the past. Contrast this vision with ours in various spheres. Would a New Labour government intent on mopping up idle hands in the old fashioned ways ever dream of Smartcity? Would it have achieved the ICT revolution taking root since the people chose the Nationalist Party to lead them and now flourishing and accelerating at such a pace that we have moved in just one year from 16th to second place insofar as e-government strategy goes? Would all this have been possible if we had listened to the Labour opposition and made do with Stowger? Would we have achieved so much if we were daunted by Dr Sant's criticism that we were building technological cemeteries?

Would Labour have had the vision to invest so heavily in the computerisation of our educational system when the return is rather medium to long term? Was it not New Labour that castigated us a few years back for closing down the so- called technical schools that were nothing but blind alleys for slow and late developers? Had New Labour ever thought of resurrecting MCAST which Old Labour had closed down with so much damage to the link between our educational system and industry? And then they have the cheek to lambaste us because we are at the bottom of the European league table when it comes to the number of over 17-year-olds still studying! And what do these paragons of vision propose? Add another year between kindergarten and primary schooling?

Or take the health sector. First they changed the scope of the hospital as originally envisaged and now they whine about the capital costs. Which corners would they have cut? Would Labour have invested so heavily in the communication system in the new hospital were they still in power? Would they have spent less on medical equipment? Now that they have realised that Mater Dei will be open on time and people will in a year's time start enjoying a huge change for the better, they have started moaning about the recurrent costs of the new hospital! What are they suggesting to reduce recurrent costs? It's one thing meeting and sympathising with health professionals and other stake holders; it will be totally different if they are so intent on slashing costs.

We could go on and on matching our vision with theirs in every sector. We want the affordable best and our aims are set high. Theirs is a blurred vision warped by a forma mentis of make do.

What chance does Malta have in a globalised world with such a bunch at the helm?

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health.