The real choice: Gonzi or Sant

The March 8 election will either confirm Lawrence Gonzi as Prime Minister for a second term or propel Alfred Sant to head his second stint in government. Amid the many arguments and side-issues that dominate any electoral campaign, this is the real and simple choice we have before us. Who shall it be?

Putting it succinctly, the first Gonzi administration has achieved results that not even Labour is arguing with. We have now the highest full-time employment ever at more than 142,000, with private sector creating employment surpassing the 100,000 mark for the first time in Maltese employment history. Lawrence Gonzi has managed to rein in the deficit to just 1.6 per cent, while our economy is growing at 4.3 per cent.

Recently we have had one of the smoothest changeovers to the euro and the best year ever in tourism in 2007 at 1.25 million tourists. Malta saw a billion euros in foreign investment last year, including the beginning of the physical realisation of Smart City apart from other investment in the pharmaceutical industry, financial services and specialised manufacturing where thousands of new jobs are being created.

On the education and training front, MCAST has certainly been the jewel in the crown. From lost generations in trade schools, young men and women now enjoy new opportunities in technical training. Investment in state primary and secondary schools has seen many new schools built and others refurbished and the college system should put state education on a sounder footing. The stipends system has been extended to students in private higher education institutions.

Gonzi has also had the courage to change decisions that could have led to more environmental pain than economic gain. At the same time, Magħtab was closed and rehabilitated, 60 kilometres of new roads were laid, and the Government has introduced a whole array of practical initiatives for energy-saving products.

Mater Dei Hospital has been opened after a very smooth transfer from St Luke's. Gonzi's first government gave full cost of living increases to pensioners who can now keep working, extended children's allowances for all irrespective of family income, and has launched a number of incentives meant to increase female participation in the working force.

The list of achievements of the first Gonzi government could go on and on.

Comparing this track record with what happened during the 22 months in 1996-98, when Malta had its first Sant government, is a foregone conclusion. It was a government that brought uncertainty, regressive taxes, jacked up utility bills at a time when oil was at a (now) unbelievable $12 a barrel, increased unemployment, made record deficits, increased the inflation rate and ended up infighting its way to an early demise.

The discerning voter looking at the macro picture cannot but conclude that the choice that matters has to be a vote for Gonzi.

The democratic game, however, is not that simplistic. As in all other democracies, political parties enjoy or suffer from swings. Efforts at persuading voters to swing from one party, very naturally bring about a reaction from that party that then attempts to reduce the swing. There is nothing wrong with that. This is democracy at work.

The individual voter remains responsible for the effects of his or her vote. Absenteeism and strategic or tactical voting are not unheard of in elections worldwide. In the latter case, a voter opts to ensure that a particular party does not win as a result of votes against it being spread between other parties. A good example of this is a Conservative supporter in the UK voting Liberal in a constituency where the Conservative vote is too limited but where the Liberals have a better chance of beating the Labour candidate.

The PN in Malta has every right to explain how and why the net effect of absenteeism and a vote for any of the small parties will indirectly put Sant in government. Voters have every right to know what the choice that matters is and how this choice is affected by the way our electoral system works. Our system works in a way that gives victory to whoever garners the majority of votes. Any notions of our system producing a coalition government are nigh-to-impossible pipe dreams.

The reason for this is simple really. If there are three parties in parliament, it is the seat result that counts. The only exception to this is if one party obtains more than 50 per cent plus of valid first count votes. This is next to impossible if a small party wins enough votes to be represented in Parliament.

Since the electoral boundaries have been drawn up in Labour's favour, it will have a majority of seats (33 or more) irrespective of the percentage of first preference votes it garners. In this context the only possible 'coalition' is one on the Opposition benches.

The real choice that the electorate has is therefore between a government headed by Gonzi or a government headed by Sant.

The fact that this is the result of injudicious meddling with the election district boundaries and that the changes in the Constitution were not more courageous - as I would have wished - does not alter the situation one iota.

Now, let the people decide.

micfal@maltanet.net