The foundations of a democratic institution

Lino Spiteri is a respected person. Not only by the public but also within the ranks of the General Workers' Union. At times, he was deeply involved in GWU affairs; at other times, not at all. We acknowledge the fact that Mr Spiteri speaks very positively of our practice in industrial relations. He knows us extremely well, both internally and externally and has a profound knowledge of how we operate. We can also acknowledge his exceptional advice in many circumstances, advice we are proud of having followed to the minute detail. The fact that he remains a personal friend of George Abela probably explains why he chose to address certain topical issues affecting the union today.

In his Talking Point (August 14) he stated that these are sad times for the GWU and to prove his point he highlighted the differences between the GWU on one side and Josephine Attard Sultana and his dear friend Dr Abela on the other.

He suggested that "the wiser course would have been to take into account queries that arose about the petition by a number of section delegates to remove her (Mrs Attard Sultana), enable delegates who wanted her out to sign a fresh, clear petition, and if there were enough of them, let a meeting of the section's delegates decide the issue".

At this stage it is important to note that, to date, the GWU's administration has a clear signed petition of 37 delegates. This amounts to more than 40 per cent of the section's delegates. Clause 46 of the union's statute lays down that a 40 per cent quota is required to call an extraordinary general conference. None of those who originally signed the petition approached the union's administration (to whom the petition was addressed) to withdraw their signature. By a very wide majority, the union's national council decreed that the section's administration and the central administration should meet to determine the date of the conference.

This meeting was never held due to a number of excuses brought up by certain section officials. Neither the central administration nor the council was asked to investigate the petition. Certain section officials did that of their own volition, possibly in order to delay or prevent the calling of the conference. We have received reports that some delegates were put under great pressure to withdraw their signature.

In view of the much publicised but very cautious court decree, the union decided to call off the extraordinary general conference and hold an informal meeting of delegates instead.

This meeting was attended by almost all those who had originally signed the petition as well as other delegates. Those who signed and were not present phoned to say they could not make it. We also received reports that other delegates had received phone calls from persons advising them not to attend the meeting. These delegates were not signatories to the petition.

None of those present for the meeting, at any time, asked to withdraw their signature. Instead, in the presence of Ms Attard Sultana herself and the section's administration there were vociferous accusations levelled at her by section delegates and a general plea for her to step down.

The number of signatures received was more than 40 per cent as demanded by the GWU statute. The statute provides that 50 per cent plus one of the delegates is needed in order to forfeit an elected position. This begs a very obvious question: Why did Ms Attard Sultana refuse to face the section extraordinary general meeting if she was convinced she had the support of more than 60 per cent of the delegates? The logical answer is that she and her friends knew that the number of those opposing her was bigger.

I agree with Mr Spiteri that we could have used her experience elsewhere but both circumstances as well as the delegates' demands left the national council no other option. Ms Attard Sultana's refusal to reconcile personal ambition with her delegates' demands led to her own downfall at the hands of the council.

I now come to Mr Spiteri's defence of Dr Abela. It is not true that Dr Abela's "immediate correction was ignored by the union's administration". We were fully aware of Dr Abela's remarks as reported by the PN media and we must confess to being amazed by what was reported.

Our reply to this report was immediately prepared, however, we prudently waited for more than 24 hours before issuing our statement. The intention was to allow Dr Abela ample time for reacting. Not surprisingly, his denial was published only after our statement was released. In fact, Dr Abela only reacted to the Nationalist media reports after he "was handed our press release" and he clearly did nothing the previous day to stop the PN media from repeating ad nauseam his "unsaid" words. We had no other choice but to answer.

Dr Abela was heard voice-on-tape attacking the GWU's administration later that same week. We had never previously seen lawyers giving interviews and gratuitously attacking persons in the way he did. His actions went beyond representing the interests of his client. He made history and we sincerely hope he is proud of it. The fact that Dr Abela was, for a good number of years, privy to the internal workings of the union (by advising the GWU in his professional capacity) made his verbal aggression all the more appalling.

The union's retort was mild in comparison to Dr Abela's open hostility. Its statement merely highlighted the fact that Dr Abela and the Nationalist government are certainly not enemies. Given his extensive positive coverage in all PN media over the past months, one may be excused for speculating about the special relationship between Dr Abela the politician and the PN.

There is much more one can say but I think we should take Mr Spiteri's advice and refrain from airing our dirty linen in public. One final comment is, however, in order.

The central administration has done its best to minimise damage in the circumstances. We counselled dialogue but our advice fell on deaf ears. One has to understand that our delegates are the foundations of our democratic institution. They directly represent our members and determine our progress. We are accountable primarily to them. This is, and will continue to be, our "strategy".

Mr Vella is the GWU's media and information executive.