While doing home visits last week I came across two friends of mine who are members of the local Labour Party committee. Like me they were visiting constituents; however they were knocking on doors to collect money to present to the Labour leader during the annual fundraising activity which the PL, like the PN, organises every December.

These fundraising activities have become very important events for the parties. Generally organised around Republic Day, they serve to relieve some of the parties’ financial headaches. The truth is that the amounts collected in these activities fall short of what is required to run the party machinery. It appears that both the PN and the PL are in dire straits and struggling to keep up with their daily financial commitments. That is probably why the issue of state funding for parties, when and if it materialises, will be welcomed by both sides, but will it suffice to improve their balance sheets? I don’t think so.

The major financial burden on the two parties is their respective TV station and its upkeep. To my knowledge the PL and the PN are the only two political parties in Europe that own a TV station. How can they afford to finance them? I don’t think they can. So instead of waiting for legislation that will allow for the state to fund them, the two main parties ought to sort out their respective financial haemorrhage by closing down the TV stations. One TV and Net TV are not the only burden on parties but they remain the most significant commercial activities that are draining their coffers. Can parties do without their TV stations? I think they can.

The issue here is whether public broadcasting enjoys the parties’ trust. It does not appear to do so. On more than one occasion I have heard Evarist Bartolo pointing out that in Malta we have state broadcasting and not public broadcasting. Mr Bartolo implies that PBS has always (even in Labour administrations) served to prop up the government of the day. I assume that the PL shares Mr Bartolo’s views. Is he right in his assessment? Do I agree with his judgment? My answer is no to both questions. However, so long as the party in opposition retains that the public broadcasting is not impartial it will remain difficult for the PL to shut down One TV. The PN, on the other hand, is unlikely to take the lead unless their opponents agree to follow. So we are back to square one.

Is there a solution? I think there is. We have a number of bodies in Malta which have acquired the trust of both parties. The Auditor General, the Ombudsman and the Electoral Commission come to mind. PBS is another important entity which requires the support of all parties if we expect it to enjoy the same esteem as the other institutions, and the parties can do something about it. If Labour returns to the discussion table in the parliamentary committee that was discussing the strengthening of our democracy, matters such as the management of PBS can find their way onto the agenda.

The parties ought to seriously consider ways to reduce their financial commitments before looking at the state to fund their activities. The closure of their TV stations is a good starting point.

We are in the middle of a legislature, two and a half years away from the general election. The parties should be able to afford a period of, say, six months without their TV stations and since the infrastructure will remain in their possession they can always re-open the stations in time for the next electoral appointment if they are not satisfied with the arrangement.

It is worth giving it a shot. There is a good probability that the parties’ popular support will be unaffected with or without a TV station. After all the quality of some of the programmes aired on their stations does not arouse the public interest and does not do them any favours. So before the state considers funding them, parties should find ways to alleviate their financial burdens. Closing down their TV stations is definitely a step in the right direction.