Austin Bencini
Malta’s new ‘coalition’ government
Finally, answers are starting to come out from our political system. The opposition does not have the numbers in the House of Representatives to force an election in that only 34 members out of the 69 MPs who successfully contested the last election voted in favour of the motion of no-confidence in the Gonzi government.
The motion would have only been carried had Nationalist MP Franco Debono voted with the opposition and supported the motion. Dr Debono’s abstention, to boot, triggered, for good measure, the Speaker’s casting vote in favour of the continuation of the present government.
The government, therefore, is without doubt constitutionally allowed to continue in office for the rest of its five-year term and the Prime Minister is the only person the Constitution empowers to call for an election and which, since he has not been defeated by a vote of no confidence, the President would be bound to follow.
The economic, political, financial and institutional stability of the country demands that the season of motions of no confidence now comes to an end. Labour were more than justified in presenting the motion of no confidence in view of the unfavourable declarations made by Dr Debono in regard to the Prime Minister.
In fact, arguably, Labour were institutionally bound to test the stability of the government because, according to the Constitution, the Prime Minister “is the person who has the confidence of the House of Representatives”. And a vote of no confidence is precisely intended to prove conclusively the lack of confidence of the House in the Prime Minister. This has manifestly not taken place.
Labour, however, must now resist the temptation to delegitimate the government any further. The Constitution does not impose that a government be supported by a majority from one party. It requires that as Prime Minister there be a person who is a member of Parliament and who is supported by the majority of its members.
By virtue of yesterday’s vote, Malta has evolved in a unique “coalition” mode of government in that there are 34 MPs who have very clearly stated and voted strictly in line with the government’s Whip. These are supported by one other member who is declaredly outside the influence of the Nationalist Party’s Whip but who is prepared to keep the government in office from the “outside”.
This is very similar to the situation obtaining in the United Kingdom where the government is sustained by a coalition of two parties that have very little in common other than the need to provide stability to the country. There is often open dissent and criticism voiced in public between the two parties but when it comes to sustaining the continuation of the government against efforts by the opposition to bring it down they join up again.
We all remember when, recently, the Europhile leader of the Lib-Dems publicly distanced himself from the Conservative Prime Minister’s position that had isolated Britain by blocking the measures which all the other EU members wished to take to sustain the euro.
The government, therefore, has a majority in the House and is in its full powers. Yet, the ensuring of stability leaves the country open to a number of vital questions for the future. Will there be more goodwill on the part of Dr Debono to act as a “coalition” partner with the government, which he has consistently refused to drop from power?
The country may not have wished an election to be so rudely sprung upon it. Equally, however, the constituted bodies and the economy as a whole were far from comfortable with Dr Debono’s open defiance of the Nationalist government’s Whip and the uncertainty it generated within the political system.
Yesterday’s vote may mean that we should not panic every time the PN and Dr Debono quarrel openly in public, on condition, that is, that the government’s programme, approved by the majority of the electorate, continues to be carried out by the government and that the Budget which has already been approved by Parliament be allowed to be implemented without any further hiccups.
If ever there was need to prove that “politics is the art of the possible” then the constitutional and political events of the past months have more than amply done so.
19 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Charles P Cilia
Jan 29th, 08:54
The last paragraph but one amply and succinctly mirrors the present political situation. Dr. Muscat please note.
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Jan 28th, 00:22
There are several choices open to both parties. The PL may elect not to move a motion of no confidence and the PN may elect to call a general election. The task of an Opposition is to hold a government to account, and to obstruct when It and only IT deems neceessary.
pat muscat
Jan 27th, 19:24
Vera taf iggebidhom l-argumenti; ghal GonziPN tieghek l-akbar lastkuwa!
j brincat
Jan 27th, 14:16
@Carmel Grima
"Tkun mossa mhux ghaqlija jekk wiehed jitlob elezzjoni wara ftit granet li jkun sar il-budget"
You are missing the wood for the trees.
If the PN has lost the majority what do you expect the PL to do? Play ball with the PN. Then, we we really have a PNPL as the AD loves to say.
(jb)
victor bonello
Jan 27th, 13:22
The Pn does no longer have the full consent of voters, if they are as they say, not thirsty for power, they should give up and call an election..
Bernard J Schranz
Jan 27th, 15:42
Let's see it from a different angle Victor, and I have tried to see it from JM's side for a long time but I am failing to see the light....
for the PL to force and election or even considering having a right to state that it has the power to do so, it would have needed to win yesterday's vote, i.e. garner 35 votes out of the 69 available. That it has failed to do so is clear and undisputed (except by JM and the entire PL themselves). This means that they have no legitimate right to call for an early election, more so to state that the government does not have a majority. It is constitutionally correct and applicable for the speaker to cast his vote when there is a tie and this is what happened yesterday, resulting in a situation where despite the outcome of the vote taken, the result is made clear that the party in government has a right to continue to govern.
Hard as I have tried to see it different, unfortunately I have failed.
I think that JM would do himself and the country alot of benefit if he admits that he has no right to clamour for an election and recognise the fact that the PN does. It is as clear as crystal to everyone but the PL, unfortunately.
Willie Grech
Jan 27th, 16:42
@Bernard J Schranz
It is very obvious that when trying to view the point made by both JM and the PL you have a very thick blindfold. Who is trying to 'force' an election? The PL is merely stating what in reality is very obvious. Yesterday's vote left the parliament equally divided. We no longer have a 35-34 majority in parliament but 34-34 and 1 going anywhere. If for you this is good, it doesn't mean it is healthy.
It seems that the only persons that are not seeing this crystal fact are the blue eyed boys that stand to benefit from a PN government or are still waiting for their turn to benefit.
Otherwise, YES, THE ONLY WAY FORWARD AFTER YESTERDAY'S VOTE IS AN ELECTION TO ELECT A NEW GOVERNMENT WITH A SOUND MAJORITY!!!!!
Saviour M Garzia
Jan 27th, 13:20
There were serious allegations of corruption made against the Government and some Ministers by Dr F.Debono,how come nobody denied these in or outside Parliament? This non denial cast shadows that the allegations have a truth basis.
Alfred Galea
Jan 27th, 13:06
either gonzi calls the election or make a coalition with Labour and have Joseph Muscat as deputy Prime Minister
Carmel Grima
Jan 27th, 12:43
Tkun mossa mhux ghaqlija jekk wiehed jitlob elezzjoni wara ftit granet li jkun sar il-budget. Ghalhekk l-ghagla tal-PL biex issir elezzjoni ma kienitx gustifikata. Infatti, kif naraha jien shab il-leader tal-PL inqatghu mid-decizzjoni li kien se jiehu meta ivvutaw il-fiducja taghahom fil-leader u ghabbewh bir-responsabilita li jaghamel dak li jidhirlu li hu l- ahjar; pero jien zgur li Dr. Gonzi hu ghaqli bizzejjed biex jaghamel elezzjoni qabel il-budget li jmiss, coe' F'Ottubru 2012, ghax wara fil-budget li jmiss ghalxejn iwieghdu, se jkollu jsir budget ta' awsterita' u se jintmessu hafna affarijiet sagri li hadnijhom for granted, bl-ordni ta' Brussels.
Willie Grech
Jan 27th, 14:04
Ghaggla mill-PL? donnok trid tghid li kien il-PL li gab din l-instabilita? Mela diga nsejt li kien membru tal-partit fil-gvern li kien ilu sa mill-2009 jitkellem fuq tmexxija hazina u fl-ahhar qal, "Issa daqshekk?" Anzi nemmen li l-PL kien kawt hafna fuq dak li ghamel. Tinsiex li l-PL, meta ra li Franco Debono ma kellux aktar fiducja fit-tmexxija ta' Lawrence Gonzi, tkellem. Joseph Muscat talab lill-PM jiehu l-azzjonijiet xierqa biex jizgura li din l-instabilita titnehha. Kien biss meta l-PM baqa ma ghamel xejn, li iccaqlaq il-PL.
Issa ghandna parlament fejn ghandek 34 MP fuq kull naha u wiehed fin-nofs, ma tafx fejn ser ixaqleb. Jekk int, ghax forsi hu l-partit tieghek fil-gvern, komdu, mhux bil-fors il-kumplament tal-pajjiz hu bhalek.
Victor Zammit
Jan 27th, 11:51
In a way this article ties up with today’s editorial (Parliament proposes, the electorate disposes) and its other (One seat should be enough) of January 22. This point of ‘coalition’ couples with sustaining a government in the national interest where a one-seat majority precipitates a situation that is not a crisis of national proportions. Now both parties in parliament acknowledge such sustenance. In fact they are willing to discuss giving a bonus majority to the party with a one seat majority. But, perhaps correctly, this paper has described that bonus as “a perversion of representative democracy”. So rather than patching up the Constitution and democracy, parties in parliament can give concreteness to their acknowledgement of sustenace in the national interest in a situation where, like the one current, lack of confidence emanates from a one-seat majority that is not critical to governance, and from one member who would not resign. Because, after all, what sovereign electorate can guarantee that it will not propose a one-seat majority at any election?
Alfred Galea
Jan 27th, 11:36
either gonzi calls the election or make a coalition with Labour and have Joseph Muscat as deputy Prime Minister
j brincat
Jan 27th, 11:22
Coalition?
34 PN MPs + 1 Speaker = Coalition???
What kind of coalition is this?
Is this some new found thesis?
Quote: "This is very similar to the situation obtaining in the United Kingdom where the government is sustained by a coalition of two parties that have very little in common other than the need to provide stability to the country"
Where is the similarity? Do you consider Mr Speaker as a 'party'.
Begs more questions than it attempts to answer!
(jb)
Mr ALBERT LEONE GANADO
Jan 27th, 11:17
Austin I do agree with you that the PN government can hobble on, even as FD refuses the party whip so long as he does not vote against in some crucial bill which triggers constitutional remedies. The "coalition" paridgm is however stretching the situation a bit too far for in the case of the present UK coalition there was a formal agreement between two long established political parties.
What I think should not be exaggerated is the presumed national instability which this situation brings about. Indeed in a perverse way it is salutary in the sense that it forces more consultation and consensus in decisions and hopefully unhinges us from a governance model based on too much unchecked power at the centre. Parliament must be restored to playing a central role .and thus become once more the focal point in reflecting the wishes of the electorate. It must become the placed where committed and dedicated MP's loyally propose or criticize government decisions or opposition stances freely without fear of being sidelined or abused.
Let us admit it that now the major decisions which cause true national instability especially the economic ones are in the hands of Brussels Most of the rules and regulations which now condition our daily life are enshrined in the Lisbon treaty. Having a hobbled government or a non-existing one as is the case in Belgium in the short term hardly affects our future. Perhaps a paridgm I would push is that now our national government looks much more like a local council in Europe .As long as our financial institutions and civil service function we need not worry too much and should go on normally with our lifes as we leave our fossilized political parties to play their wornout traditional power seeking training sessions in anticipation of the general election. What we should worry is how this national 10 day charade grabbed and destabilized our partisan senses and pushed aside to the sidelines mush more serious matters of national concern.
Willie Grech
Jan 27th, 10:51
By virtue of yesterday’s vote, Malta has evolved in a unique “coalition” mode of government in that there are 34 MPs who have very clearly stated and voted strictly in line with the government’s Whip. These are supported by one other member who is declaredly outside the influence of the Nationalist Party’s Whip but who is prepared to keep the government in office from the “outside”.
Dr. Austin Bencini seems happy to play with words. Certainly he didn't say this last Monday in his article. But now, like all the PN MPs, ministers, including the PM he is happy that Dr. Debono, at least, didn't vote against. A simple question arises: What kind of coalition government is this if there is no majority, neither for or agianst? If anything, yesterday's vote increased the instability because there is no majority on either side.
It is clear that the no confidence vote did not go through. But it is equally clear that the government has no majority anymore in parliament.
Mr Andrew Camilleri
Jan 27th, 10:30
It's fascinating how a legal mind can manage to twist and turn things to create such incredible illusions. We now have a coalition! Great way of putting it when in reality we now have a limp Govt that will depend on either Mr. Speaker (who represents nobody, although we have the legal fiction that he is a member of the House) or on how Dr. Debono wakes up on the particular day. Nondoy voted for this coalition. Dr. Gonzi's three conditions of last Sunday have suddenly been forgotten - he now has to beg Dr. Debono to support him each time the PM needs to pass laws. Of course, having seen Dr. Gonzi' presedential style of governing, he may well try to keep on going without having to resort to parliament. It is his choice now how capricious he wants to be, governing without a majority of the elected members of parliament. But he will go down in history as the PN PM who governed without popular backing - for at the end, Dr. Debono's withdrawal of support is exactly that. No playing around with legalities - just as Labour did in the 80s - will change the truth.
Joe Calleja
Jan 27th, 12:06
"... although we have the legal fiction that he is a member of the House"
The Constitution a LEGAL FICTION ??? Now we heard it all !!
B ut allow me to, once more en lighten you, Mr. Camilleri, and others who mlght 'reason' like you, as to what the Constitution says:
Article 52
(2) If any person who is not a member of the House of Representatives is elected to be Speaker of the House he shall, by virtue of holding the office of Speaker, BE A MEMBER of the House IN ADDITION to the other members:
Article 71.
(1) Save as otherwise provided in this Constitution, all questions proposed for decision in the House of Representatives shall be determined by a majority of the votes of the members thereof present and voting.
(2) The Speaker shall not vote unless on any question the votes are equally divided, in which case he shall have and exercise a casting vote.
(3) Any other person shall, when presiding in the House of Representatives, retain his original vote as a member and, if upon any question, the votes are equally divided, shall also have and exercise a casting vote.
Now, Article 76 runs like this:
Article 76 (a) if the House of Representatives passes a resolution, supported by the votes of a majority of ALL the members thereof, that it has no confidence in the Government, and the Prime Minister does not within three days either resign from his office or advise a dissolution, the President may dissolve Parliament;
SO: presently there are actually 69 members of Parliament INCLUDING the Speaker.
Therefore any Non-Confidence motion requires 35 votes in favour to pass. Now that Dr. Debono chose to abstain (and NOT vote in favour of the Opposition's motion), the result was a tie 34-34.
The Speaker, then, as was his Constitutional right, and as a MEMBER of the House (Article 52a) also voted AGAINST the motion. This is simple mathematics: 35 AGAINST and only 34 in favour.
Motion not carried, and so PM Gonzi STILL enjoys the majority of seats in Parliament.
And, finally: until new elections are held, PN STILL has the majority of Maltese electors behind it. This is a FACT and not playing with legalities. It was the MLP which governed for FIVE AND A HALF YEARS against the expressed wish of the overwhelming majority of the voters. THAT surely has gone down in history!
Mr Andrew Camilleri
Jan 27th, 16:20
Mr. Calleja: I did not say that the Constitution is a legal fiction; I said that the Speaker being a member of the House is a legal fiction. By this I mean that is you look at the qualifications to become a member of the House, the Speaker has none of them. Therefore in order to make him a member of the House, the law has to resort to the fiction that deems him a member of the House, eve though he does not have these qualifications. In fact, as you yourself quote, he only has a casting vote.
As for the figures, as far as I know there are 69 elected members - and the Constitution itself says that there has to be an odd number of members. But this does not iinclude the Speaker. To include the Speaker, you would have to say that there are 70 members. Therefore, agreed that Dr. Gonzi needs 35 votes to support him in Parliament.
In any case, my point is that Dr. Gonzi cannot rely anymore on all the elected members of the House but has now to rely on either the casting vote of the Speaker (for that is all it is - a casting vote) or on the whims of Dr. Debono. If I were PM, I would find this humiliating. Also, is it democracy that the PM continues to depend on the vote of a non-elected member? As Dr. Gonzi himself has accued Dr. Muscat, he (Dr Gonzi) is now riding on the back of someone else's vote, in this case the casting vote of the Speaker or the rebel MP.
Finally, how can you say that Dr. Gonzi has the majority of Maltese electors behind him when Dr. Debono who represents at least more than 1500 votes in Parliament, has withdrawn his support? The only way to establish whether in fact Dr. Gonzi does have this support is by going for an election.