Despite the long string of claims over corruption, sleaze, maladministration and rampant cronyism, Labour still leads in the polls. Although cynics may hold that the situation is not as bad as it is made out to be by the government’s opponents or, even, that, contrary to the claims, the government is squeaky clean and that much of what is said against it is figment of the imagination, it is hard to disregard, or play down, the concern that has been building up over the claims.
Objective Labour sympathisers – not to mention also some in the heart of the centre of power – are known to share such concern.
Of course, one may decide to ignore what the polls say, more so in the wake of the outcome of the Brexit referendum and the American presidential election, both of which produced surprises. However, others may argue differently, giving local polls a wider credibility margin considering the small size of the country, the high turnout and other relevant factors. Which, if this is correct, makes it all the more interesting that, despite all the concern over the corruption claims, Labour still leads at the polls.
Does this mean that Labour has, in such a short time, managed to manipulate the people’s thinking to such an extent that many may have become immune to unprincipled behaviour? Or that, once the economy is doing well, it is all right to accept corruption, sleaze and maladministration as an inevitable cost of an administration that is focused on bringing about greater economic growth?
Can a government work for good results without sacrificing basic, acceptable governing standards? Of course it can but the problem is that the government does not seem to believe – or does not want to – that principles are being sacrificed.
Joseph Muscat speaks of his government as one that is continuously seeking to change things. He was quoted saying recently: “People expect politicians not to be engulfed by the system; they want politicians who drive change and this is why I am determined not to become part of the establishment that wants to retain the status quo.”
Dr Muscat is obviously thinking of things his government had done for the better and for which it deserves approval. But he does not speak of the many things that have been causing deep concern. He is an expert in avoiding, or smoothing over, matters that have not gone his government’s way, or, worse, that his government finds difficult to face up to.
Quite often, Dr Muscat wriggles out of difficult situations by simply saying that they could have done this or that better or that, as it also often happens here and in other democracies, the government attempts to ease concern by ordering an investigation. This, of course, helps but it does not solve the root cause of the problem, which is that this administration has allowed governing standards to fall, at times dramatically, precisely in areas that it said it wanted to change before it got elected.
Keeping a Cabinet minister and a top aide in their posts after these opened companies in a tax haven and acting as if this is normal practice is perhaps the ultimate mark of the government’s steepest descent in governing standards. Other cases have been equally disturbing.
Yet, going by the polls, it would seem that all this does not really matter much when it comes to choosing one party for another. Or, maybe, the polls will be proven wrong when the crunch comes.