• email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

Labour delegates voting on motion to extend voting rights

Labour party delegates have started voting on a motion to amend the party statute to enable paid up members to vote in the election to elect a successor to Alfred Sant.

The motion was presented by new Labour MP Marlene Pullicino at the opening of an extraordinary general conference, the first since the MLP suffered a narrow defeat at the March 8 general election.

To date only the delegates to the general conference, numbering almost 1,000, have a right to vote in the leadership election.

The idea to extend the right to vote was first mentioned by George Abela, one of the five contenders in the leadership contest.

Dr Pullicino said at the opening of an hour-long debate before the vote was taken that a vote in favour of the motion would make the MLP more democratic and more inclusive. It would also mean it would have a leader with stronger authority.

The debate was divided into half an hour for speakers who were in favour and half for those against.

Among those who spoke against were Mayors Michael Cohen (Kalkara) and Paul Farrugia (Tarxien). Mr Cohen expressed his regret that two months after the election, the MLP was still discussing how to elect its leader, when it should be holding the government to account. He argued that it would be logistically impossible to hold an election among 19,000 members in 27 days. Furthermore, while he had every respect for the members, one had to acknowledge the role which the delegates played within the party.

Mr Farrugia was given a standing ovation when he introduced his address by thanking Alfred Sant for his service. He argued that it should be the delegates who should vote for the leader because they were, after all, the delegates of the members to the general conference, in the same way as the people elected their representatives to Parliament.

MPs took decisions in Parliament on behalf of the people, and the delegates would take decisions at the general conference on behalf of the party membership, he said.

One of the delegates who spoke in favour of the motion said he could not understand why it should be so difficult to hold an election among all the members in 27 days when the party had said it had been ready for a general election.

Winding up Dr Pullicino urged the delegates not to fear change, which, she said, would benefit the party.

The speeches was characterized by murmuring by many delegates as those in favour of the motion made their comments, giving observers the impression that the motion will be defeated.

All the leadership contenders were present for the debate.

Voting will take place over three hours and vote counting is expected to start at around 11.30 p.m.

Picture: The MLP conference in progress. Leadership contenders are in the front row.

  • Google Bookmarks Del.icio.us Facebook Blogger YahooMyWeb Digg Reddit Stumbleupon
  • email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

Comments

saviour cachia (1 week ago)
Dr. Lawrence Gonzi you can call the general elections any time, we are ready. This was a solemn declaration made by the Malta Labour Party prior to the General Elections of March 8, fully confident that the Reds will be in Castille by March 10.
I pitied myself for being such a gullible member of the MLP through out my life, on reading the way some omnipotence reasoned against the motion brought forward to give us paid up members the right along with the delegates to elect the new leader of the MLP.
I shed a tear or two, commiserating with those against the motion pleading that it was a task beyond the MLP to organise an election with the participation of 19,000 paid up members in a misery of 27 days.
The much boasted about MLP party well prepared to step up into power, deemed it was beyond its means to give a chance to 19,000 paid up members to have their say in a mere 27 days. Certainly there is too much food for thought in such an outright declaration.
So coming 2013, all those who have been supporting the reds for so many years, have nothing to do, but delegate the 920 privileged delegates to win the power back for the MLP, who in a period of 25 years would have been in power only for 22 months,maybe with the full role and power that many of the delegates who voted yesterday enjoyed during this period.
Well done, comrades delegates, certainly you are the beginning and end of the MLP. Nobody can call me a bad loser, three consecutive defeats in the general elections does not leave any room to feel bad. Perhaps pity, yes.
R. L. Pace (1 week ago)
Micheal Cohen: " He argued that it would be logistically impossible to hold an election among 19,000 members in 27 days.". Dear Mr. Cohen, may I remind you that for the last GENERAL election, there were more than 300,000 ppl eligible to vote. The preparation for the voting day begun only 6 weeks before. The process was smooth and well-perared. So, do you think that it is impossible to hold an election within a relitively small number (19,000 compared to 300,000) in 27 days?!!! come on... stop saying 'no' to anything that comes around.
J. Azzopardi (1 week ago)
Mr. Cassar we are talking about 141000 electors but 19000 members. Aren't we? I am not against the vote by the members per se, but about the principle. Delegates are there chosen by the party members during the annual general meeting of their local party club and if this is wrong, then let's change the whole system and adopt another reason why delegates are elected and what for. And no, Mr Cassar, i stand by the will of the delegates if they agree to give the members - including me a voting right - and it has nothing to do with Dr Abela or some else. It is a question of principle. I am sure that with or without the party members exercising the voting right to elect the new leader, the same person who i have in mind will be elected. I stand to reserve the right to keep my vote - if i get entitled to it - to myself.
C.R. Taliana (1 week ago)
I think that a lot of paid members of the MLP will not renew their membership if this motion doesn't pass.
martin portelli (1 week ago)
@J.Azzoppardi
NB you must have been suffering from a severe blocked nose these past 3 elections.
Congratulations on regaining your acute sense of smell! Maybe you can smell a pyrrhic victory.
anton cassar (1 week ago)
Mr Azzopardi yes what you are smelling is probably right.If paid up members had a say in electing their Leader most probably it would be George Abela.Would it be a problem if the will of thousands of Labour supporters will finally be heeded after all these years of gloom in our once glorious party ?Do you think the delegates have a right over 141,888 supporters in imposing who should lead Labour in the coming years ?
anton cassar (1 week ago)
I cannot understand the reasoning of Mr G Sammut.If a proposal is good it should be adopted straight away.What does Mr Sammut want ? Another defeat at the polls to implement such a democratic move ?As for Mr Azzopardi yes most paid up members and other Labour sympathizers have no great confidence in certain delegates.One only has to see how they were wooed by the party machine to re-elect Dr Sant back in 2003 leader election. Anton Cassar, M'Scala
martin portelli (1 week ago)
The issue of trust may turn out to be a thorny one, I am glad that it is a loyal member like you who broaches the subject. What are delegates delegated for? Indeed that is the question to ask! Given that they have been delegated by the loyal (OFTEN VERY MUCH TAKEN FOR GRANTED) hard-core tesserati, to make sure that the party comes up with a winning strategy, where were they these past 10 years? Can delegates honestly say that they did their best to represent the spectrum of views of those that put them on the red seats? Or are they too sorry to admit that they were immediately sucked into the culture of factions and nodding genuflecting aye men/women?
There are new realities that have to be heeded. Please don't succumb to the ostrich syndrome in order to assuage a false sense of righteous pride.Whoever becomes leader of the party had better live up to his/her promises of inclusion and openness and not perpetuate what needs debunking.
G. Sammut (1 week ago)
It is true that the MLP should not fear change but neither should it bring about change so abruptly without the necessary discussion and study such a radical reformation in party workings merits. This is a good proposal but it is not the proper time for it. One should consider all the possible avenues available ranging from the USA style Primary Elections to the British One Member, One Vote (OMOV) system which I hear gauges the votes in a ratio of delegates:members (e.g. 50% of the vote from delegates and 50% of the vote from members). In the USA they have the concept of Super-Delegates which seems to act as a check and balance on the ordinary voter of the primaries.
J.Azzopardi (1 week ago)
I am one of the few LIFE MEMBERS of the Party and have been for over 33 years in the past been involved in the Party mechanism. I agree with my friends Michael Cohen and Paul Farrugia that the representatives of the paid up members are the delegates. SO what are they delegated for? I would also like to vote myself to elect the Leader, but this would mean i have no trust in the persons whom i have delegated to represent me. Shall we in future, the citizens vote ourselves before a law is passed by parliament? HOPE that the delegates will refuse the proposal as i smell that the idea behind it is more than what has been said so far.

Poll

Who would you like to win the MLP leadership election?

  • George Abela
  • Evarist Bartolo
  • Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca
  • Michael Falzon
  • Joseph Muscat


View results

Fun Stuff


Play Sudoku