The passage of time inevitably brings change with it and the outgoing year certainly did that. In political terms, it brought an upheaval barely seen in Malta before. The Labour Party, under the young leadership of Joseph Muscat for less than five years swept the Nationalist Party out of office.
If anticipated, the extent of the victory was not expected. It was a landslide of breathtaking proportions and brought to an end Lawrence Gonzi’s career as a politician. He went the only way open to him after his crushing defeat, announcing he would not be participating any further in the political fray once the PN had chosen a new leader.
He went off into a quiet retirement, part of which, it has now become known, he spent being interviewed for a book regarding the Libyan experience in the tortuous drive to end of the despised Gaddafi regime.
That was Gonzi’s highest point in office. Despite his cosy relationship with Gaddafi up to just before the uprising started, he took the right decisions against him notwithstanding the dangers involved in doing so at that uncertain time.
The Nationalist Prime Minister benefitted from the positive support given to him by Muscat, then Leader of the Opposition, who did not take any opportunity to exploit the situation.
His role and stance have not been acknowledged as much as they should have done.
The Labour victory brought to fruition Muscat’s dream of becoming Prime Minister. It brought about inevitable change. Labour began putting its own appointees in place, as every new government does, even when there isn’t a change of government. The changes had to be extensive and attracted fierce criticism.
Much of that criticism was not justified, whether in itself or in comparison to the Gonzi era.
The Nationalists had won the 2008 election by the skin of their teeth on a platform which included a promise to subject public appointments to calls for application.
Never has a promise been broken so rudely and comprehensively. Gonzi hardly identified a single Labourite worthy of public appointment in five years of office. He stuffed every opening with Nationalists or fellow travellers with cavalier disregard to his pre-election commit-ment, meritocracy and the need for efficiency. Some political appointments, like ministers’ private secretariats, inherently necessitate that. But the partisan role was extended to practically every single public appointment.
Labour followed the example less closely than anti-government spin had it. Nevertheless, some changes were unnecessarily ham-fisted. Put that to lack of experience – it was still wrong and avoidable.
It [the passport scheme] was ill-conceived, badly rushed through the House of Representatives, growing into a bigger mess with each step of the way
The Labour team appeared to find some unease in settling in to the rigours and demands of governing and especially doing so above the grasping tentacles of the political fray. The older members came to grips soonest with the demands made on them. Other appointees who were tasting office for the first time have been adjusting quite visibly and move to the end of the year more comfortable in the office chairs than they were for the first few months.
The Nationalists found less difficulty in settling into Opposition. They quickly came to terms with the departure of Gonzi.
The election of Simon Busuttil in his place was a foregone conclusion, given the way the leadership contest was settled within the inner ranks of the official Nationalist Party, a restriction which will change.
Busuttil did not start brilliantly, but found a working formula of leadership soon enough – oppose everything the government does or says, and do so as negatively as can be.
Surprisingly, the style of extreme opposition was gifted several gaffes by some Labour ministers, enabling the Nationalists to start a psychological drive to make people forget the extent to which they had sunk in mismanagement and worse when in government.
Even more surprisingly, the greatest gift of all was given to the Nationalists by the Labour Prime Minister himself in the form of the passport-for-sale scheme. It was ill-conceived, badly rushed through the House of Representatives, growing into a bigger mess with each step of the way. Muscat realised that and wisely changed tack.
The scheme is now more digestible. Anonymity is gone. The price is more decent. The conditions are tighter. A major difference not emphasised enough by the government is that the Malta Financial Services Authority will now have the final say in the essential, due diligence process. The Nationalists continue to oppose the scheme, which now is closer to being an individual investment programme, but less credibly so.
Another bigger change rumbled throughout the year in the form of Arriva, the public transport arrangement announced by the Nationalist government with so much fanfare. The scheme, though heavily subsidised by the government, saw Arriva incurring unsustainable losses, eventually deciding to pull out.
While it is clear that the Nationalists should hide their face in shame, it is still unclear what will happen moving ahead.
I fear that in the months the new scheme will be run by the government, losses will mount. If they are for the public account, that will be the thorniest wreath of the legacy bequeathed by the old Nationalist government to the new Labour government.
A happy New Year to my readers, the editor and staff. May peace, serenity and good health be theirs far beyond the festivities.