The independent media plays a very important role in Maltese politics. The English language newspapers are read by thousands of Maltese citizens and so are in the forefront where the moulding of public opinion is concerned. The Times is the newspaper with the highest circulation in Malta and remains, for a huge chunk of Maltese society, the paper to read every morning. This reality places upon the editor of this long-established newspaper the heavy responsibility of ensuring that the product presented to the public is not biased but, instead, is an objective presentation and interpretation of the facts, particularly where matters of national interest are concerned. A case in point is politics and related matters and issues.

As the next general election is just round the corner, it is important that the editorial policy of The Times remains impartial and not aligned towards the Nationalist Party as I believe it has sometimes been in the past. It is refreshing to see that more space is being given to pro-Labour contributors. However, I have, during the course of this year, been rather disappointed by the slant of several editorials which, in my opinion, have been unfair to the Malta Labour Party.

Let me start with Labour leader, Alfred Sant. The Times continues to present this highly capable politician as a liability for the MLP. It casts doubts on his ability to lead the country if he were, once again, to become Prime Minister. Yet, what do the facts actually show? They show that Malta under his leadership prospered and that the lot of the ordinary citizen was much better than it is today under the Nationalists.

Even his great act of sacrifice in the national interest, calling an early general election in September 1998, is portrayed as a failure for him and his government. Now everybody knows what happened in 1998 and that those were circumstances beyond the control of the Prime Minister. A lesser man would have done his utmost to hold on to power. A statesman puts the national interest before narrow partisan interests.

Another case in point is that of presenting the MLP as not being a viable alternative to the Nationalist Party in government. One would be excused thinking that the present government is a model of administrative efficiency and respect for the rights of the citizen and that the MLP is a passive political party with nothing to offer! How many times have we been told that MLP policy documents on major aspects of administration are a rehash of what has already been presented and that they provide nothing new should Labour be elected to power?

Now anybody who reads these documents in detail will realise they break new ground in providing creative and viable solutions for many of the problems facing this country due to the incompetence of the Gonzi administration. Presenting the PN's stand on a sensitive issue to readers as the most sensible solution to a national problem is another aspect of The Times editorials that I find rather unfair. Take the pensions issue. Why is the MLP proposal dismissed out of hand, especially when the government has no mandate to act in the way it is proposing over this issue?

I sincerely hope that my constructive criticism of what I regard as a very high quality newspaper which does credit to the Maltese media will not be seen as a politically partisan attempt to discredit The Times. The opposite is my aim. Pro-Labour contributors are sometimes criticised by hardcore Labour supporters for the simple act of actually patronising, through their contributions, a newspaper that these same hardcore supporters regard as being anti-Labour. Being more balanced in the way the MLP and its leader are presented to its readers will go a long way towards modifying such opinions.