The controversy raised by the film Dear Dom is rather worrying. Having a public debate about the Mintoff years is in itself something positive and worthwhile because a nation that objectively reflects on its political past will be in a position to consolidate its past achievements and avoid repeating the mistakes of years gone by. What preoccupies me, however, is the lack of objectivity in much of the ongoing debate and the way several commentators betray a lack of historical knowledge that clouds their every statement.

... after Labour came to power in 1971, the defenders became the attackers- Desmond Zammit Marmarà

Dom Mintoff was in power from 1955 to 1958 and from 1971 to 1984. In my opinion, he was Malta’s greatest Prime Minister because he brought progress to Malta and changed the mentality of the Maltese from one of colonial servility to one where the islanders started believing in themselves and their abilities.

It is an undeniable historical fact that the Mintoff years were a period when the standard of living of many Maltese rose to unprecedented heights. Through his work and that of the Labour governments he led, beggars disappeared from our streets, the emigration of a substantial number of Maltese came to an end, the welfare state was created, discrimination against women was eradicated, the economy was diversified and Malta’s independence was strengthened.

Of course, all this came at a cost. Mr Mintoff is mercilessly criticised by his denigrators because of the way he governed the country. When he set himself a goal to reach, he concentrated all his energies on doing so and would sweep aside all opposition to it, sometimes riding roughshod over the feelings, the aspirations, the rights and the sensibilities of several individuals and social groups.

The crucial questions to ask ourselves, with the benefit of hindsight, are: Would so much progress have been registered in Malta had Mr Mintoff not acted in this manner? Did the end justify the means? It is obvious that Mr Mintoff’s reforms were not welcomed by certain individuals and social groups who were going to lose their privileged position in society because of the Labour leader’s social-levelling measures. They did their utmost to stall progress in the country and Mr Mintoff unceremoniously swept them aside. However, we have to ask ourselves: Which radical and much-needed reforms do not come at a heavy cost?

Where, in my opinion, Mr Mintoff erred was in concentrating so much on his goals and the everyday herculean efforts necessary to sustain the drive towards progress, detaching himself from what was going on down the chain of command.

When violent incidents were becoming a regular feature of political life in Malta, he was too absorbed in his administrative duties to do something about it. By the early 1980s, things had got out of hand to such an extent that even a political giant like Mr Mintoff had lost control of the situation.

For the sake of historical accuracy, it is important to note that arguments about Mr Mintoff being a vindictive type of person and that violence was an intrinsic part of his policies have no historical basis.

The truth is that from the 1950s, certain violent individuals and, later on, even criminal elements, started associating themselves with the Labour Party. Because of the violence which Labour supporters were subjected to at the end of the 1950s and the whole of the 1960s, this violent faction was accepted as a part of daily life in the Labour Party. What was tragic was the fact that after Labour came to power in 1971, the defenders became the attackers.

Most of these violent elements associating themselves with Labour were left free to cow adversaries into submission. When criminals joined their ranks, the situation became alarming and democracy in Malta was threatened. Incidents such as the burning down of The Times building and the ransacking of the Opposition Leader’s residence in 1979 can never be defended and anybody who does so will be guilty of a disservice towards the Labour Party.

Where one can perhaps blame Mr Mintoff is in his handling of the police force in the 1970s and 1980s. The police did little to stop the violence going on all around them and sometimes even attacked demonstrators against the Labour government.

Even here, however, one must remember that attacks on unarmed crowds did not start after 1971. People who lived in the 1950s and 1960s will never forget the attacks of Vivien De Gray’s police, including the cavalry, on Labour supporters. Still, Mr Mintoff was Prime Minister and so must accept responsibility for the escalation of political violence due to the ineffectiveness of the police force.

I will conclude by stating that it is very unfair to judge Mr Mintoff on the basis of his inability to stop political violence in his days of power.

Judge him on what he achieved: bringing Malta into the age of modernity and raising the standard of living of so many Maltese.