Opposition leader Alfred Sant yesterday warned that democracy in Malta was facing a new threat, claiming that a clique which was not at the forefront of the political scene had the power to take decisions in their own interest.
He warned that these people would try to take over the Labour Party and colonise it. But he believed in the internal strength of the MLP and that it would bear witness to its commitment to real democracy and would never play servant to just a few interests.
Dr Sant was speaking in Parliament on the motion presented by Franco Debono, the youngest MP on the government side, thanking the President for his speech on Saturday highlighting the government's administrative programme.
Describing the government's programme as "vague, weak and confused", he said the government should not take the opposition for granted.
Dr Sant said that he knew he would be accused of mud-slinging and of being fictional, but his aim had always been to have zero tolerance to corruption and full commitment to good governance.
He explained that his role as leader of the opposition was temporary, until the party elected a new leader in a few weeks. He could not understand why the government had taken so long to open Parliament. He and Labour acting leader Charles Mangion had met Dr Gonzi on April 24 when a meeting was requested to discuss the government's proposals, including the appointment of the Speaker and the pairing system.
The government was presented with the opposition parliamentary group's reaction that same day. The group also made its position public in the media.
The government said that the opposition had requested confidentiality but what the opposition had said was that it hoped that the proposals would not be in the media on the weekend, even before their meeting.
He pointed out that while he and Dr Mangion were at the meeting in Castille, a Labour MP was being called by a representative of the independent media and asked if he would accept the government's nomination for him to be appointed Speaker. The government, Dr Sant said, could not take the opposition for granted.
Highlighting Labour's arguments regarding the proposals, Dr Sant pointed out that Labour had given their detailed and genuine reaction to the government's proposals in a letter, which he also put on the Table of the House.
The group was very sceptical of the government proposals, presented as a major step forward in democracy. Reality showed otherwise and soon after the election, the government joined the Partnership for Peace, a controversial issue in the country if there was one. This had not been included in the party's electoral manifesto. The government acted in this manner and expected the opposition to smile when it came to discuss pairing.
The government, Dr Sant said, had to be judged on its actions when it came to three paramount decisions: The economic and financial policy; measures aimed at curbing the rising cost of living and safeguarding the people's purchasing power; and social matters especially education, health and the environment.
The government's programme was weak in these areas, presenting very few new ideas. These initiatives had been mentioned for years on end but never implemented.
It was positive that the government's administrative programme was in line with proposals and initiatives being launched by the EU but the national government was still expected to give its own direction. However, no meaningful proposals were made on how the economic and social management would be meeting the challenges the country was facing.
While the government said over and over again that it wanted a balanced budget by 2010, it was also saying that it wanted to reduce the highest income tax rate from 35 to 25 per cent. This would cost the country between Lm20m and Lm25m. Would the government not keep its promise or would it increase VAT?
Dr Sant said that Labour's pre-election proposals to reduce the water and electricity surcharge by half would have cost between Lm10 million and Lm12 million a year. This would have given priority to real economic growth. Labour also believed in utilising dormant assets with regional projects in which the private sector was encouraged to invest.
Labour's policy was based on improving competitiveness, reducing bureaucracy and incentivising investment. It believed that the country could aim for an economic growth of four to six per cent.
Dr Sant said that when it came to rising costs, he believed that the government was being overly pessimistic regarding the international situation. Was this in preparation for a big U-turn on its electoral promises? If the government showed courage and vision, it would be able to embark on real and sustainable economic growth.
He pointed out that the gross income of Maltese workers was among the lowest in Europe in the past years. When calculated with the cost of living this had dropped rather than increased in the past years. One reason for this was that many of the jobs being created were precarious or part-time. Even the government, he said, was employing low paid employees as self-employed.
The government, Dr Sant said, cited the exchange rate with a weak dollar and strong euro as one of the reasons for weakening competitiveness. But it was the government which had decided to join the Eurozone and not the workers. Labour's advice to the government had been that it was moving too fast.
He pointed out that the cost of living in Malta was going up at a higher rate than in other EU countries. Why had the cost of food, clothes, medicines and educational services increased twice as much as they had done in other countries? What was the government doing about this problem? He said that Malta still had to see how the euro was affecting the cost of living.
The government's proposals to combat the rise in the cost of living were weak and the government could not continue blaming the international situation. It had to see how local factors were contributing to the situation.
The European Commission's quarterly report on the euro area, he said, spoke on how the food market in Malta was dominated by a small number of importers who were hindering competition. The government had completely ignored this report.
The Nationalist government had also ridiculed Labour's proposal to reduce the water and electricity surcharge by half when this would have provided families with much-needed oxygen to improve their purchasing power and stimulate purchases. What would the government be doing to make up for the cost of living, Dr Sant asked.
In the social sector, the government was using a lot of sweet words, ignoring the real priorities. Its policy on education was complacent and not aimed at a real reform, and the President's speech registered a dangerous void regarding such a policy.
Labour had proposed improvements at primary school level, it had wanted to encourage sciences at all levels, and improve post-secondary and tertiary education.
On primary care, Dr Sant said that there was congestion at the general hospital. The government wanted to entice foreign patients to Malta but Mater Dei had a lower capacity than St Luke's, with patients not spending as much time in hospital as necessary and waiting lists growing.
When it came to the environment, the Prime Minister was saying he wanted to reform the Malta Environment and Planning Authority. But the abusive decisions which had been taken before the election would remain there forever.
Although the government was insisting on the importance of transparency, efficiency and accountability, these three values were downtrodden in everyday decisions.
According to GonziPN, Dr Sant said, the Maltese favoured corruption because they benefited from it. He said it was irresponsible to give strength to the sentiment that anything could do.
Dr Sant said that the company that had taken over Maltacom (now Go) had promised that it would invest in the company. But this new investment was being made with the money accrued by Maltacom, and not with fresh funds. The company had also been given, on a silver platter, a parcel of land worth millions of liri in Qawra. Nobody had since made any statement to explain what was going on.
The PN was now insisting that Labour should apologise to the electorate. What hypocrisy! That was why there was a crisis in the country.
The government, Dr Sant said, was living a lie. While it was true that history was written by winners, this government had only a relative majority.
Going into the details of the Mistra scandal involving Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, Dr Sant said this was not made up and not an isolated case. The government had defended Dr Pullicino Orlando and PN secretary general Joe Saliba said he would do so again.
There were also abuses by Development Control Commissions which, between February 1 and the first week of March, had considered and approved 1,502 applications, compared to 793 in the same period last year. Although some deserved to be issued, a good number of them were abusive.
Dr Sant criticised the government on the appointment of Gordon Pisani as communications coordinator at Castille.
Dr Sant also accused the government of exceeding the acceptable limit in using its power of incumbency.
Other decisions taken which had been aimed at acquiring votes included pardoning 1,031 people from income tax dues amounting to €2.6 million, decisions regarding housing, use of land and government contracts.
He pointed out that in the past years, systems verifying the entry and exit of persons from the country had been dismantled and a number of people who had been away from the island for more than six months could vote because no verifications could be made.
Dr Sant said that the cheap air tickets made available by Air Malta for people to come to vote were used mainly by Nationalists, while Labourites were hindered from using it.
Turning to broadcasting, Dr Sant said that Natalino Fenech, who was known for his anti-Labour credentials, was appointed head of news at PBS and Where's Everybody served the government's electoral agenda. This was no different than what took place in the 1980s. The only thing was that it was now more dangerous and effective.
The appointment of Joe Pirotta to chair the PBS editorial board was another partisan decision. No other BA chairman appointed before or after Prof. Pirotta had been as partisan.
Starting off the debate on the motion, Dr Debono said the time had come for Malta to join most other European countries in legislating on the financing of political parties and the organisation and internal functioning of the political party as an association of constitutional relevance. The truth was that a political party was not simply a social political entity but an integral part of the constitutional structure.
Malta should also find convergence on the electoral law, especially insofar as changes to electoral districts were concerned. Such a solution should make it possible to guarantee proportionality between votes cast and seats won without having to resort to frequent, and sometimes radical, changes to electoral boundaries.
Dr Debono said the government was committed to listen before deciding, without giving the impression of abdicating its duty to govern.
The people were keen to make the required quantum leap in quality. In certain areas they were not content with keeping up with the rest of the world, but sought to pre-empt it in matters of health, education, manufacturing, services, information technology, tourism and the environment. Malta was not rich in resources, at least until exploration yielded results. But it had a wealth of inventive minds and hard-working hands.
Dr Debono said Malta must also exploit its geo-political position. It must reflect its own identity in its Mediterranean and European parameters. To do so it must not only implement EU decisions but be much more active in order to influence such decisions before they were taken.
The spectre of global warming was offering great challenges. Everybody needed to contribute for effective results. The government was committed to establishing a research fund in new technologies for alternative sources of energy. In this context, industry and the environment had changed from mutual enemies into travel partners.
All of this could not be achieved without an effective educational system. The alternative was wasted talent and discarded youth. If the system was going to be indifferent or insensitive towards children who, maybe because of family background, were showing difficult behaviour, the price of that indifference would be a burden on society and, ultimately, prison.
Part of the educational system was sport. Maltese youth should be enticed not only to participate in sport for the development of solid values, but even more to take up sports careers on professional levels.
Dr Debono said the government was duty-bound to protect the members of society. The possibility should be explored of setting up a DNA laboratory, among other measures. The time had also come to implement the promise of a parole system, following the positive experience of the community service concept.
Concluding, he said one should lay aside the mediocrity of amateurism and strive to distinguish oneself in the unbridled competition in the outside world. The alternative must be a professional mentality and specialisation. This was the only way to success.
New Labour MP Anthony Agius Decelis paid tribute to Dr Alfred Sant for the way he had rid Maltese politics of violence and bullying.
He wondered which path the government would really be following during this legislature: whether the inclusive brand laid out by President Fenech Adami or the divisive brand that the PN machinery had already started churning out. The people had grown used to hearing nice slogans, but that was not enough.
One of the greatest needs was a transparent policy on promotions. National information should be reflective of all parts of the population.
Mr Agius Decelis said he was proud to work in the health sector. The government should do everything possible to enrol leading professionals as its partners for the best possible results in the sector, to the people's benefit. This would eventually reflect on current waiting lists.
It was important for the government to keep its electoral promise of setting up a rehabilitation centre for people who undergo important surgery, and the sooner the better. In cardiology, for example, 20 per cent of patients die after surgery because of lack of rehabilitation and resultant low spirits.
More students were needed in nursing courses, but it would not happen while students felt they were doing cheap labour with the current rates of remuneration. Things should change as soon as possible, if necessary even with the help of the teaching staff themselves.
A partnership should be set up among hotels, private hospitals and the government to lure foreign patients for high-level medical care that present facilities could afford. This could be an important source of national revenue. Such a partnership could also involve the long waiting lists of Maltese patients, who should not be relegated to second priority in deference to the foreign, revenue-yielding patients.