The lines for the first big political contest after the general election have been drawn. The election to select our six members of the European Parliament from 2014 may be almost a year away but it has already been targeted by Opposition leader Simon Busuttil as his first large objective.
At present, the balance of representation is in favour of the Labour Party by a margin of four to two. Busuttil wants his party to aim for and take the third seat away from Labour.
Towards that end he has set up what may be termed a sifting commission to go through the suitability of interested individuals, with final selection to be made by the Nationalist Party’s executive. A number of names have already been listed, mostly predictable but also reaching out to the fringes of political support hitherto known but undeclared.
The Labour Party too has begun its work in preparation for the coming campaign. The names mentioned so far do not include surprises, though they refer to one, a lawyer, who has expressed no interest in being part of that crowd.
Those names do not reflect the work probably being done behind the scenes by Labour to entice individuals not already on the public political stage.
No doubt, the final lists of candidates will be interesting and will include a number of social worthies.
That they may not have domestic political experience should not matter much.
The European Parliament is an altogether different scene compared to being a local MP. The EP is split in groups that much reflect the political model. But members are mobilised in committees representing the whole Parliament.
In the European approach they tend to include a number of politicians who are considered to be past their prime in domestic politics plus young candidates who start their career in the EP before turning their attention to domestic politics.
Malta stands out as an example in that regard. Both the Prime Minister and the Opposition leader are former MEPs, having served with distinction in the Euro forum.
The European Parliament has dual assessment. On the one hand, it is the only part of the EU project that is democratically elected.
True enough, it does not raise much domestic interest in the election of MEPs with turnout being on the low side.
But the democratic basis is there to be appreciated or ignored according to the whims of the voter.
On the other hand, for a long time the EP’s voice was the weakest of the three European Union institutions.
That has been changing with EP approval being a requirement in extensive cases.
Even so, it is still seen by many as the junior leg of the EU tripod.
Malta’s MEPs have all punched above their apparent weight and earned the respect of their colleagues.
One reason for that was because they concentrated on EP work and relationship building rather than carrying domestic disputes on to the EP stage, other than by the occasional written parliamentary question.
Recently, that tradition was somewhat dented.
One hopes that will not develop into a habit. We have our own political stage and there is more than ample room within it for politicians and citizens too to air their grievances.
Calling for attention by the European Parliament often serves simply to blacken Malta’s name rather than just that of the government of the day.
We should look at membership of the European Parliament as a way to step up our political content and style, not to drag that institution towards our suspect level.
One hopes the political parties finalise their list of candidates soon. The candidates will not be able to rest on the attraction of their names and standing.
They will have to canvass and work hard to become more widely known and respected for what they personally stand for, not just for the party they represent.
Old hat politics can benefit from an effort to shine in European politics.