Labour needs a Mr Stunt

The Labour councillors ought to be congratulated for their contributions to their localities, even if they were elected to do just that. If what Mr Joseph Cuschieri has stated in your sister paper (February 17) is correct, then the Labour councillors ought to be congratulated even more because they performed better than their own party leader!

Mr Cuschieri has reminded us in his opening statement that the Nationalist Party has been in government "for almost 20 years". Have he and his colleagues analysed who was responsible for the Labour Party presidency and leadership during the past 20 years? Have they assessed the performance of the Labour leadership between 1996 and 1998?

It is not known if the Labour Party cooks its own statistics about the performance of local councils. Perhaps Mr Cuschieri may care to explain to us what criteria were used to come to the conclusion that the Labour councillors delivered 85 per cent of their promises? Can he and his colleagues apply the same criteria to their party leadership between 1996 and 1998?

Assuming that the Labour Party had a five-year programme in 1996, one may assume that in the course of the short-lived Labour government, its leader delivered no more than 30 per cent of what the electorate was promised. It is known that the Labour leadership delivered even less as a result of the bickering between some of the best elements of the party. Some Labour statisticians might believe that their leader scored 100 per cent.

It is no excuse to blame "a one-man rebellion within Labour's parliamentary group" for the lack of progress or results between 1996 and 1998. There were other significant resignations during that period, both from the party and from the Cabinet. With the right kind of leadership all the internal disagreements should have been resolved amicably and satisfactorily. Thanks to the repercussions of the "one-man rebellion" Malta has been a member of the European Union for the past two years and 10 months!

The problem with the Labour Party is that its leadership, when in government, wasted a lot of energy in useless internal quarrels because of erroneous policies and measures. Ultimately, what the Labour Party in government succeeded to accomplish was not in the interests of the country, or of the Labour Party itself when one considers its own brain drain.

Perhaps Mr Cuschieri could let us know how many percentage points were assigned to his leader for freezing Malta's application to join the European Union, or for achieving the "partnership" he dreamt about with reference to the Switzerland of the Mediterranean.

In preparation for the hosting of the Euro-Med Conference in Malta in mid-April 1997, the Labour Party published a lavishly printed document called "Malta - the Switzerland of the Mediterranean". In that document it is stated clearly that the Labour Party leader "visualised a long-term contractual agreement between Malta and the EU, laying down the basis for political and security co-operation, for an industrial free zone and for co-operation in the economic, social, cultural and other spheres".

Using the same criteria used for Labour councillors, can Mr Cuschieri quantify the percentage points earned by his leader for delivering this contractual agreement and its various sections and spheres? What does the Labour Party have to show for its efforts?

Does Mr Cuschieri remember that one of the best and most experienced brains in the Labour Cabinet was left no option but to quit, and, as a result, deliver less than 30 per cent over the artificial VAT debacle so favourable to the leadership? How many percentage points does Mr Cuschieri assign his leader for the VAT replacement regime that the leader insisted on?

Similarly, how many percentage points does the Labour Party executive assign to its leader for the number of projects started and completed between 1996 and 1998 - including the Cottonera project?

Is the Labour Party executive happy that its own leadership was the cause that the whole Cabinet team delivered less than 30 per cent as a result of the ill-conceived no confidence vote, and the resulting loss of government?

It would be interesting to know if the Labour Party executive expects the electorate to use the same assessment criteria for its leader when it comes to an election at the national level? How many percentage points does Mr Cuschieri assign to his leader for the raising of the water and electricity bills in 1998?

If the Labour councillors are so successful - and there is no reason why they should not be - why did the Labour Party not introduce local councils when it was in power? Why were Labour councillors forced to contest the early local council elections as independent candidates, given their credentials?

I wish Labour councillors every success in the forthcoming elections as long as they genuinely intend to contribute to the improvement of their locality. Unfortunately, given the short time left until the next general election, the Labour Party needs to find a Mr Stunt as a new leader if it wishes to avoid using the same assessment criteria for its current leader. When the same criteria are used for the period 1996 to 1998, the percentage points do not add up to much - if at all.