Editorial

It is not the first time, and it will not be the last either, that the two main political parties get themselves in a muddle over issues that at best leave most people amused at the politicians' antics and, at worst, frustrated at the way they dare expect the electorate to believe everything they say.

When the Opposition Leader recovers and re-enters the political fray and when the political campaigning starts in full swing, Labour's election proposals to halve the surcharge on fuel and to exempt overtime earnings from income tax will surely top the political agenda again.

Voters are well accustomed to seeing political parties dish out political gimmicks at election time. The parties do this with a kind of fervency that often leaves many breathless or in awe, as many retailers felt in the 1996 general election campaign when they were given the impression that they would need no cash registers if Labour were to get elected. Many were taken in by this promise, only to find that Labour in power was different to Labour at the hustings.

The time has come again for the political parties to try and outbid one another when it comes to making electoral promises, something which all parties in all democratic countries do. As is its wont, Labour usually excels in electoral gimmicks. Some time ago, for example, the party came out with a proposal that if it is elected it would allow the chairman of the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development to attend Cabinet meetings when matters falling under its terms of reference are being discussed.

Labour's proposal, were it to be implemented, would put into question the usefulness of having a government minister taking part in MCESD meetings, as is the case today. Is not the minister in the council meant to convey the government's thinking on particular subjects of direct interest to the members? According to Labour's proposal, the council chairman would only take part in Cabinet meetings when matters of interest to the council are discussed, in the same way the General Workers' Union took part in Cabinet meetings in the times of the Socialist Administration of Dom Mintoff. Few matters are of no interest to the council.

Labour's proposals on the fuel surcharge and overtime are equally deserving of close scrutiny. The Nationalists have not been strong enough in challenging Labour to say how a Labour Administration would be able to halve the fuel surcharge, and, on its part, Labour is not being clear on the mechanics, as it were, involved in the implementation of its proposal. Yes, it is easy to say that the money would come through greater operating efficiency at Enemalta but does the party really think the electorate is going to believe it can do this with the same dexterity it plans to halve the surcharge?

The government is already forking out about Lm20 million to fund part of the surcharge. Halving the surcharge would mean having to fork out an additional Lm12.5 million. How, exactly, is Labour going to tackle the problem, especially if the price of oil continues to soar? It exceeded $100 a barrel last Thursday. Labour is far, very far from being convincing on this point, and it knows it. As it also knows that the public is confused over its other proposal to exempt overtime earnings from income tax. So many different figures are being bandied about that few can now follow the arguments. It is, therefore, becoming increasingly difficult to assess the two parties' stands on the issue.

Who is going to clear the air?