'Man in the mirror time' for the PM

For years, former British Prime Minister John Major was lampooned as the little grey man of Westminster, the politician who tucked his shirt into his underpants, the man who presided over the disastrous 'Back to Basics' anti-sleaze campaign.

He was also routinely accused of dithering in times of financial crisis and contributing to the boom and bust cycles which rocked the British economy. It was Gordon Brown - then still on the opposition benches - who roared that he would bring an end to "Tory boom and bust".

His failure in this regard is now attracting comment and criticism from political observers, who point out that former Chancellor of the Exchequer's fiscal policies are largely to blame for the dire financial predicament of the country.

Major must have felt vindicated, seeing his one-time critic having to face the music for his decisions. In fact, he wrote a scathing article about Brown's many mistakes and told him to look in the mirror to find out who's to blame for the financial mess that Britain is in.

Having a long, hard look in the mirror is what Lawrence Gonzi should be doing at the moment, instead of blaming everything and everybody for his widely unpopular fiscal measures. During his reply to Joseph Muscat's speech about the budget, the Prime Minister told us that its main thrust was directed towards creating a culture change. Then, to stop us from nodding off as we spotted the avalanche of clichés coming our way, ("culture change", "facing up to our responsibilities" "courage to face up to challenges") he decided to take the suspense level up a notch. The "culture change", the Prime Minister warned in grave tone, was necessary to thwart those people whose mentality was anachronistic and dangerous. Action was necessary, Mr Speaker, immediate action.

Well, who needs James Bond fighting against shadowy international organisations seeking world domination, when we can have Gonzi doing battle against those who refuse to cut down on their energy consumption? Shouldn't we support him in his endeavours to stop them from leeching off the state, expecting hand-outs and energy subsidies from the cradle to the grave?

Shouldn't we applaud Gonzi when he waves his "culture change" sword to smite down those people who use a tumble dryer to dry their G-strings? Isn't it time that we introduced a mentality of responsibility and accountability for our actions? After all, resources aren't infinite you know. Electricity and water cost money and that money doesn't grow on trees. That was the gist of Gonzi's speech in parliament.

And it's all quite true. We do need to put an end to this culture of waste, excessive energy use, and irresponsible consumption. But what Gonzi has conveniently omitted to mention, is the way that the Nationalist Party has obstructed attempts to curb excessive use of water and electricity or to cut down on abusive use of state services.

When the Labour government raised the water and electricity rates back in 1997, the Nationalists cried foul. They said it was a vile attempt to refill up the national coffers by performing an inverse Robin Hood - stealing from the poor and giving it to the spendthrift and clueless government of the day.

Then opposition leader Eddie Fenech Adami "criticised the budget as one which does not take into account the suffering of lower class families who will be hit the hardest by its measures". He went on to describe the Labour government as one which was "denuded of principles and social conscience".

The introduction of a nominal fee of 50 cents for people retrieving medicines from health centres, was also greeted with howls of outrage by the Nationalist Party. This, we were told, was the beginning of the end of free health services for all. Even the ill and the old had not been spared from the fiscal Dracula of the Labour government.

Except that it wasn't quite so bad. Paying slightly more than a euro for the provision of an otherwise entirely free health service was not going to break the bank. It served as a deterrent for people who would pop down to the nearest health centre to stock up on anything from cotton wool to Panadol.

Attributing a value - however small - to a service, meant that people who made use of that service would appreciate it and not consider it as just another freebie that they could siphon off the state.

And yet, the Nationalist Party found fault with the 50 cents measure. Back then, taxing water and electricity consumption was cruel, not courageous. Wrestling with the deficit and hiking up utility rates was sadistic, not sustainable. Why the change of heart and the panicky leap to action now?

Yes, the energy realities were different, and oil was much cheaper than it is now, but even then there were warning tremors about the long-term sustainability of fossil fuels. It made no sense to foster a mentality of dependence on unrealistically low utility rates as the Nationalist Party did. The effect of the populist posturing of a decade ago is still being felt today.

Instead of a gradual increase in energy bills coupled by intensive investment in alternative energy systems, we are faced with a huge jolt to the system and practically no alternative energy possibilities.

Instead of photovoltaic cells on every roof, we are offered five energy-saving lamps by a Prime Minister who doesn't seem to know how much electricity your average washing machine consumes. This is one scenario which he can't blame on the opposition or his critics. It's time to hold up that mirror.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt