Emmanuel Micallef has broken the taboo on the impact which Alfred Sant's operation may have on his remaining leader of the Labour Party. He concludes that, for diametrically opposite reasons, the strategists of both parties would prefer Dr Sant to lead the MLP at the general election.
Mr Micallef's article made interesting reading. However, in reality, the leadership question is of interest much more to MLP supporters than to the country at large. The question would have had electoral relevance only if there were different political positions within the MLP on the EU or the euro.
Dr Sant's cold approach on the EU and his negative evaluation of the euro are today only too well known as was proven by Dr Sant's article last week describing the entire exercise as a "prestigious gamble." Sentiments fully shared by the entire leadership of his party.
Otherwise, why wasn't Dr Sant changed as leader in the aftermath of the defeat at the referendum and the 2003 general election, when the electorate rejected both MLP's policies of "no" to the EU, and of the Partnership option advocated so fervently by Dr Sant.
Not only.
The MLP decided to keep the same leadership all through these past four years. In no document or speech by any of the leaders has there been a positive, convinced acceptance of the EU or of our membership. Much less has there been of the euro. The accent by all MLP speakers is to make political capital of possible side effects of prices increasing or the social price to be paid by its introduction.
Four years on, the MLP is in exactly the same position it was after the 2003 general election, namely still dreaming of the Partnership option but not wanting to irritate the growing majority within the country in favour of membership. Their plan is to give away as very little of their plans where the EU is concerned and then work out their policies if elected. This happened exactly in 1996 with the consequent freezing of the EU application!
So unless a change in leadership would signify a more pro-active approach in favour of the EU, Dr Sant is safe in his leadership and the PN need not worry that a more pro-EU, pro-euro MLP leader would emerge at the eleventh hour to try and counter the undoubted achievements of the Nationalist government in giving Malta a greater say within the EU.
The MLP did not do it after the EU referendum, when the acceptance of the people's verdict at the referendum might have won back the MLP supporters who had voted yes. The doctrinaire approach had won the day and Labour lost the election.
Labour's contradictory situation is fully reflected in the policy document published by the MLP in July of last year - Pjan Għal Bidu Ġdid. The document proclaims: "And once more, the Labour Party has to work within new historical circumstances which were not chosen by it, did not wish them, but which it will not escape from their challenges" (page 19).
It is a clear sign that the MLP has not yet made the EU agenda its own!
Not only.
The policy document spells out, black on white, that the MLP's vision regarding EU membership remains that it "imposes rules drafted for larger countries and realities totally different from those of small islands in the middle of the Mediterranean, such as Malta and Gozo".
Partnership for Labour remains still the better option, the policy document declares, because Malta would not have to carry so many burdens caused by membership.
A principal aim, it is stated, is for the MLP to "see that the introduction of the euro does not have any effects or repercussions on the quality of life of our country on the social level".
The MLP leadership is caught in the neither hot nor cold attitude as a compromise meeting point of those who still favour partnership and those who are only interested in gaining back political power.
The coming general election will be the first of Malta within the EU. The choice before the electors therefore goes far beyond the health of one person. The choice involves an assessment of the policies of a whole MLP leadership and whether they are convincing enough in guaranteeing that we don't vote EU and get Partnership instead.