A populist rant backfires

Last September, opposition leader Joseph Muscat wrote a heart-warming comment piece in The Sunday Times after a fireworks factory explosion in Gozo virtually wiped out an entire family.

In the article, which called for tighter regulations in relation to fireworks, he took a few risks.

A personal one, since his father is involved in the industry which may have led to conflict of interest accusations, and a political one, since the subject is ultra-sensitive and, much like hunting, politicians who are in the business of getting votes talk about the subject at their peril.

However, the point is he did it. No doubt because above all other concerns that may have crossed his mind, being proactive in an effort to save lives in future made the risks worthwhile.

Though cynics may argue that by speaking out in this way he may also have had some political motivation – what actions by a politician do not? – it was laudable all the same. Politicians do good things when what suits them suits the rest of us.

Precisely the opposite can be said of the Labour leader’s reprehensible comments on irregular immigration last week.

Using the now tired and outdated tagline of ‘Malta first and foremost’, which is frankly laughable in an age when a tiny country like this has precious little leverage, unlike in Dom Mintoff’s heyday, Dr Muscat launched a rant about how Malta should take a leaf out of Italy’s book.

This when the Italian government’s approach to the issue has been utterly condemnable. It was the Italians who negotiated a push-back agreement with Libya that rode roughshod over innocent human beings’ rights, and it was the Italians who played politics while hundreds of potentially saveable lives were being lost at sea.

Is this what Malta, with all the values it has espoused for decades, should be seeking to emulate? Yes, if Dr Muscat has his way it seems. For now at least, he does not have that prerogative, and the Prime Minister’s mindset is, thankfully, diametrically opposed.

Accusations have been hurled that the Labour leader is trying to be populist, sacrificing any notion of principle for the sake of votes. These are not without foundation, since there is no other reason anyone could advocate such a course.

However, it may not make as much political sense as Dr Muscat seems to think. If Labour wants to win the next election, it must attract the young electorate and those who think before they vote. These are precisely the groups that will be dismayed by his comments.

They will be put off too by the Labour leader’s inconsistency. Promoting regulation to save lives on one hand, and rather callously disregarding those of ‘foreigners’ on the other – just because a large number of Maltese lack sympathy when it comes to the plight of irregular migrants.

Pulled together, these factors prompt legitimate questions about Dr Muscat’s judgment; in relation to making such gung-ho statements and in failing to realise that the more middle-of-the-road voters will be repulsed by them.

It could be that Dr Muscat’s best approach to winning the next election, particularly in light of recent evidence, is to say nothing. However, the Maltese would be fools if they vote for someone on such a premise.

Only those who put principles above convenience and who make concrete proposals that are both humane as well as viable should be entrusted with the privilege of leading this country.