To mark Malta’s Independence, the Nationalist Party held a number of events that included taħt it-tinda gatherings (held under a tent), reaching their high point with a very impressive mass meeting. Lawrence Gonzi was rather calm in his delivery while Joseph Muscat shouted and, at times, sounded panicked. Maybe the Labour leader did not expect such a huge crowd at the Granaries and was startled.
In a move to counter the PN’s independence celebrations, the Labour Party held a similar taħt it-tinda event, their so-called much-awaited congress.
Organised in a very crude manner, the congress was meant to, among other things, formulate a political manifesto and an electoral programme based on the suggestions made by the attending public.
Both parties gathered their faithful in huge numbers, showing off their core voter base. However, it is the undecided, the informed and the ‘stay-at-home’ voter that decides an election.
While watching the PL’s congress on TV, I was shocked to learn that Labour will be basing their line of thought and modus operandi in the next five years on what is solely said at such gatherings.
A political manifesto is a well-studied document, written with a clear vision and driven and is certainly not done hastily taħt it-tinda.
Yet, Labour resort to pass childish resolutions and approve them with a show of hands by whoever happens to be present.
Their much-awaited congress clearly shows that their proposals were not backed by studies on the impact on, say, human resources or finance. Nor did it take into consideration logistical issues.
Another point that struck me was that when discussing finances or hospitals (or most other topics), many a time the PL’s official stand was to follow current policies. Thus, it is only logical to deduce that if one is planning to keep the same policies in place today, then the PN must be implementing correct, viable and sensible policies.
So why decide to vote Labour if the PL is simply going to follow the policies the PN came up with?
The electorate should vote for a change for the better, otherwise the status quo will prevail.
If the PL, projecting itself as an alternative government, is promising heaven on earth and we are supposedly living in hell, then change is necessary. Yet, facts show us that we are living a rather good life.
Just cross over to Italy and you will immediately realise that, in Malta, we are living more than a comfortable life. So, again, why change a party when this is a sure bet? Why risk going into a dark room where you do not have a clue where the electricity switch is or whether the light bulb works?
Sure, the Nationalist government has made its own mistakes, probably more because of the quick changes in the world economy. However, on the whole, it has been a success. On personal matters, the Government could have done much better.
Another recurrent statement is that the PN has been in power for too long and needs a change.
I went through the 2003 and 2008 election data just to see how the Nationalist Parliamentary Group has changed over the past two legislatures. I noticed that the PN group changed about 30 per cent of its MPs at each election. It will probably do the same in the next election. There are a number of sitting and former Cabinet ministers who will not be contesting. Notwithstanding decades of PN government, there has been change and how! Change did not only happen in terms of faces in Parliament, already a very healthy situation, but also in the very essence of the party and in its continual modernisation in line with society’s changing mentality.
The PN has done all this when in government and while keeping an eye on the world economy amid the worst modern day crisis.
There is no big issue in the upcoming election because all issues have already been tackled by this Government. It is only a question of riding in a good car along a one-way road or else put thatvehicle in reverse mode.
A look at Labour’s Parliamentary Group gives you an X-ray of what ‘New Labour’ really is: old hands on a new-named deck.
The ideas do not change simply because the party is suddenly called a movement nor because the red attire is discarded. Neither do they change because the dark red colours have changed to pastel to please the eye. Just like the red flags at the PL’s mass meeting had to be changed to the white ones, the same people are, once again, presenting themselves to the electorate claiming their secure seat in government and sure of a ministerial post.
Next election is crucial to Malta and to you. Changing course this time is a huge risk even if you do not care about the bigger picture.
For your own personal peace of mind and the future of your family, remaining on this road is still the best option.
Dom Mintoff’s funeral awakened his spectre again. The areas where his coffin was taken, as his life ‘achievements’, were restricted only to the inner harbour region, totally ignoring any other part of Malta and the vast majority. The Labour leader’s final kiss on the coffin only means that the Mintoff era will continue and that his ideals will live on despite his death as we have seen in the debates held.
It is clear that Labour will go for the “MintoffEkonomija” once again. Instead, let us change together and keep a solid footing with the PN.
Mr Arrigo is a Nationalist member of Parliament.