The selection of the slogan "a new beginning" by the Labour Party is a clear indication that the current Labour leadership has neither a vision nor a mission for Malta in the foreseeable future. Malta does not need any new beginnings. Malta needs to consolidate the successes achieved over the past 43 years. It needs to continue to build on the achievements of the past nine years since the Nationalist administration regained power.

What Malta has succeeded to do since independence is quite incredible given its size, population and scant resources. If there is anything that needs a new beginning in Malta it is the Labour Party itself.

The "old" Labour was the product of post-colonial times and Cold War ideology. It was certainly not perfect, and it committed a number of serious blunders, introduced some misguided policies, and implemented some of its good ideas in a flawed way. But it also had a few redeeming features.

The "old" style of management may not have been refined, but to request the former colonial power to provide enough assistance to enable the island to do without further support was no mean feat. The efforts to introduce or supplement a welfare state, particularly for the less privileged, were laudable. The attempt to create or bolster a national identity was similarly worthy of note.

Perhaps the most important legacy was the closure of the British military base in a peaceful way. We only need to look at the problems in Cyprus to realise how fortunate we are that our former political leaders were competent and mature.

In contrast, the current Labour leadership has nothing to show for its efforts. Having fooled a narrow majority to be trusted with government 11 years ago, the "new" Labour leadership failed miserably. Its incompetence, despite much vaunted management skills, became glaringly obvious in one simple project. Labour accuses the government and Cabinet with weakness and inefficiency. The latter are so incompetent that everybody has forgotten the completed Cottonera Waterfront project as a matter of routine.

No ideology

When the new Labour leadership threw ideology out of the window, it needed to invent issues to distinguish itself from the Nationalist government. Its electoral platform was basically built on two elements, neither of which was in the national interest of Malta. They simply revealed a mixture of arrogance and inferiority complex. As a domestic vision Labour promoted the abolition of VAT. Its mission was to maintain the isolation of Malta, while practically all the Central and East European countries and Cyprus were striving for EU accession.

Experience has taught us that a strategic Labour electoral campaign with the help of foreign adviser Phil Noble is one thing. But leading a government successfully is a totally different matter. When the new Labour leadership raised water and electricity rates abnormally, its own former leader accused it of losing its "social compass". Where were its own efficient and competent Cabinet ministers then? What guarantee do we have that the MLP has recovered its social bearings, if it has any? Why should we trust the failed Labour leadership again?

Several consultation meetings have been convened and various papers and studies have been produced by Labour. This is a step in the right direction. But are these not a reflection - 20 years on - of the successful "dialogue" meetings introduced by the Nationalist Party? What guarantees do we have that decisions will be based on such consultations?

I was once informed by a high-ranking Labour Cabinet minister that he was not involved in a particular decision taken by the leadership concerning his portfolio. When some time later I had a problem and consulted a prominent figure in the Labour Party - whom I knew at University - I was bluntly informed that the leadership had a mind of its own, and there was nothing he could do about it. Malta is a small country and everybody knows everybody else. It was then that I learned that for the Labour leadership some friends are more equal than others!

A ruse

Our Prime Minister has not been fooled by Labour's ploy to insist on a Cabinet reshuffle. We all remember that one of Labour's best ministers had to resign without any calls for a reshuffle. All Labour ministers eventually lost their job as a result of the leadership's mismanagement.

The current Cabinet is not infallible. However, we need to remember that Lawrence Gonzi inherited the most experienced Cabinet team supported by a few talented younger members. It would have been foolish for the new Prime Minister to burden his own leading role with a team of people learning on the job. There is no comparison between the collective wisdom, experience and results of the current Cabinet team and the outcome of the short-lived Cabinet led by Labour. The turn of younger members will come at the appropriate time.

Why does the Labour leadership insist on a reshuffle? To try and catch an inexperienced member off guard? After serious allegations based on information that proved to be false, the Labour leadership succeeded to obstruct one of the best Nationalist Cabinet ministers who could have continued to contribute to the current government's successes.

It is possible that the apparent obsession with a Cabinet reshuffle could be to increase the possibilities of other resignations, apart from slowing down the rate of progress at a time when past efforts are beginning to bear fruit. Dr Gonzi could easily see through the Labour leadership's ruse and wishful thinking.

Perhaps there is a more important reason for such insistence. Is it possible that the Labour leadership is using this ploy to distract its own party delegates from thinking about the need for a new beginning within its ranks? The Labour leadership is excellent in Opposition, a classic case of self-fulfilling prophecy. Nine years ago Labour was a failure in government. Is this what the Labour Party wants? To remain in Opposition for another five or 10 years?

Is it not time for the MLP to have a leader who could comfortably attend the Leaders Conference of the Party of European Socialists (PES) such as the one held on March 24 in Berlin? Why did Dr Sant fail to attend that meeting? Was a local seminar discussing the role of Labour councillors in local elections more important for the Labour leader than celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome in Berlin with other socialist leaders? Does the leadership have any ideology?

Given its past baggage, it is not surprising that the current Labour leadership is uncomfortable or ashamed to mix with other Socialist and Social Democrat leaders. It certainly has no credibility with the international leaders who remember its recent past. Ironically, in addition to celebrating the EU's 50th birthday, the political theme of the leaders' conference in Berlin was the "New Social Europe".

The current Labour leadership could not even join its own international colleagues. It is obvious where the Labour leadership "borrowed" its inspiration from for the title of its current campaign - a theme launched in Porto last December. The Party of European Socialists talks about new policies, not new beginnings, because unlike the local Labour leadership, the PES recognises the many successes of the European Union, and wants the EU to build on its 50-year experience!

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.