Normally general elections are fought between the two parties on a whole variety of issues, like the economy, employment, health, security and traffic. Voters do look at the big picture but also focus on proposals that directly concern them. Voters tune themselves to what the parties are saying and the rhetoric of a normal campaign, but also want to know how they will improve their situation and that of their family in the coming five years.

This is not a normal election. It has shaped itself to resemble more of a referendum, where the choice is very clear. Shall this country be run by a corrupt system or shall it be run with a system that will combat corruption?

The electoral programme, although a very important document that should be read and analysed by all, to my mind is secondary to the issue of corruption.

Corruption is the single most important deciding factor in this election. Let’s be clear that what has taken place in these last four years is more than suspicion. They are no longer conspiracy theories, they constitute undeniable facts. The circumstantial evidence points to one single direction.

Therefore, a number one vote to any Labour candidate will in effect mean that it was fine for the government to hand over €4 million in the Café Premiere dealings, that the machinations connected to the Gaffarena purchase and sale of property in Valletta is of no concern, and the fact that a government minister and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff incorporate corporate vehicles in shady jurisdictions is fine and above approach.

Not only this, but a number one vote to any Labour candidate will legitimise all of the above and much more, and also open the doors to further dubious dealings. In other words, it will make the current Prime Minister and government untouchable.

Can we ever then criticise any minister holding offshore companies or accounts? What goes in and out these types of companies and accounts cannot be audited, because they are shrouded by confidentiality and the Maltese electorate can only hope for another leak to find out what is going on.

The truth is that both Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri were unfortunate to be hit by a leak. Were it not for this leak, we would not have this political storm and not have a snap election. These two gentlemen would have been able to transfer large amounts of money unchecked.

Voting PL means that the institutions set up to monitor the establishment’s activities may not work for us anymore. As a practising lawyer, I know that the police and the Attorney General’s Office are quick to investigate anybody who is slightly suspected of any wrongdoing. My criticism at times is that people are investigated and pass through the drudgery of criminal proceedings needlessly.

However, from what I read in connection to the FIAU report, there is a totally different attitude to suspicions directed to top government levels. The police and the attorney general use a totally different attitude toward these people. There is clearly a distinction between us mortals and the powers that be.

On the other hand, voting for the PN will be a vote to show that what took place during these last four years is unacceptable. Let’s be also clear here. It is unacceptable, including for the Nationalist Party, if in government.

A PN electoral victory would be a strong message to all political parties if in just four years, the people withdraw the massive support they gave in 2013 due to lack of good governance.

Simon Busuttil and his government will also be put on guard, since as the electorate withdrew its support for the Labour Party having a 36,000 majority, it could also do the same to him in the following elections.

Changing the government on June 3 will in effect mean that it is not endorsing bad governance and giving a notice to all politicians of whatever political creed that this country deserves more and that the electorate is in fact supreme.

The other electoral promises would have to be carried out without further suspicions of favouritism or cronyism. Let us have new roads, but without corruption, let us have child care centres, but without corruption, lets us have a strong economy but with a pristine reputation locally and internationally.

It is therefore, within our own individual interest that Malta will be clean and hold on to a system that combats corruption.

 

 

Normally general elections are fought between the two parties on a whole variety of issues, like the economy, employment, health, security and traffic. Voters do look at the big picture but also focus on proposals that directly concern them. Voters tune themselves to what the parties are saying and the rhetoric of a normal campaign, but also want to know how they will improve their situation and that of their family in the coming five years.

This is not a normal election. It has shaped itself to resemble more of a referendum, where the choice is very clear. Shall this country be run by a corrupt system or shall it be run with a system that will combat corruption?

The electoral programme, although a very important document that should be read and analysed by all, to my mind is secondary to the issue of corruption.

Corruption is the single most important deciding factor in this election. Let’s be clear that what has taken place in these last four years is more than suspicion. They are no longer conspiracy theories, they constitute undeniable facts. The circumstantial evidence points to one single direction.

Therefore, a number one vote to any Labour candidate will in effect mean that it was fine for the government to hand over €4 million in the Café Premiere dealings, that the machinations connected to the Gaffarena purchase and sale of property in Valletta is of no concern, and the fact that a government minister and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff incorporate corporate vehicles in shady jurisdictions is fine and above approach.

Not only this, but a number one vote to any Labour candidate will legitimise all of the above and much more, and also open the doors to further dubious dealings. In other words, it will make the current Prime Minister and government untouchable.

Can we ever then criticise any minister holding offshore companies or accounts? What goes in and out these types of companies and accounts cannot be audited, because they are shrouded by confidentiality and the Maltese electorate can only hope for another leak to find out what is going on.

The truth is that both Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri were unfortunate to be hit by a leak. Were it not for this leak, we would not have this political storm and not have a snap election. These two gentlemen would have been able to transfer large amounts of money unchecked.

Voting PL means that the institutions set up to monitor the establishment’s activities may not work for us anymore. As a practising lawyer, I know that the police and the Attorney General’s Office are quick to investigate anybody who is slightly suspected of any wrongdoing. My criticism at times is that people are investigated and pass through the drudgery of criminal proceedings needlessly.

However, from what I read in connection to the FIAU report, there is a totally different attitude to suspicions directed to top government levels. The police and the attorney general use a totally different attitude toward these people. There is clearly a distinction between us mortals and the powers that be.

On the other hand, voting for the PN will be a vote to show that what took place during these last four years is unacceptable. Let’s be also clear here. It is unacceptable, including for the Nationalist Party, if in government.

A PN electoral victory would be a strong message to all political parties if in just four years, the people withdraw the massive support they gave in 2013 due to lack of good governance.

Simon Busuttil and his government will also be put on guard, since as the electorate withdrew its support for the Labour Party having a 36,000 majority, it could also do the same to him in the following elections.

Changing the government on June 3 will in effect mean that it is not endorsing bad governance and giving a notice to all politicians of whatever political creed that this country deserves more and that the electorate is in fact supreme.

The other electoral promises would have to be carried out without further suspicions of favouritism or cronyism. Let us have new roads, but without corruption, let us have child care centres, but without corruption, lets us have a strong economy but with a pristine reputation locally and internationally.

It is therefore, within our own individual interest that Malta will be clean and hold on to a system that combats corruption.

 

Dr Malcolm Mifsud is a former PN candidate and former mayor.