These are dangerous times. Why? Because there is very little that divides us. Will democracy, characterised by the essential exchange of views and harsh differences, survive? With the departure of Alfred Sant and his strange policies, and what with the Labour Party leadership and deputy leadership elections being contested by a host of largely "reasonable" guys (or, indeed, girl), is there anything important to fight about?
The Nationalist Party itself is going through a change of the guard. Supremo Joe Saliba is off, although I still see no worthy successor. Gordon Pisani has been roped in by the Prime Minister. I understand that Angelito Sciberras has disappeared. So where do we go from here?
This country actually risks becoming boring. But why not? We need to get ourselves on the right track and give an example to the world that (without a dictatorship) we will give an example of national unity in true democracy, efficiency and results in the new era of technology.
The government's proposal to give Mr Speaker to the opposition is an affront. It is obviously aimed at increasing the government's majority. But did the Prime Minister really think it would be bought by the opposition? The scope is obviously to solve the pairing issue.
For those of you who may not know what "pairing" is, it means that a member of the opposition abstains from voting when a government MP is not able to be present in the House of Representatives, normally due to government or parliamentary business abroad. In this way, the House can carry on with its business. The other alternative would be for Parliament not to meet on such occasions; which is wrong, although its traditional schedule has already been changed to deal with the situation.
The opposition, ably managed de facto by Charles Mangion, although the other guy is still hanging around de jure, is quite rightly waiting for its leadership election before laying its cards on the table vis-a-vis parliamentary arrangements, such as "pairing".
It is really going to be interesting within the MLP. There are many contestants for the leadership seat. I do not wish to formally back any (at least for the time being - although, after all, as a Maltese citizen, I have the right to express my opinion on who I wish to see leading half of my country) but I will say that I am particularly fond of George Abela and Michael Falzon. The former is an old friend from university days some 35 years ago and the latter a relatively-recent acquaintance - but I think he has the right stuff to make it.
As for the deputy leadership, there is an interesting mix. I like Gavin Gulia and Chris Cardona, and Carmelo Abela, for that matter, whom I all consider to be reliable guys.
But what interesting times. It is such a pleasure to see the MLP, now 87 years old, really getting a grip on itself. It would be interesting to see the winning contestants work. It will be a party that, from the declarations I have been reading in the media, is embracing Europe in the fullest possible way and will strive to make the best of membership. As I have written so many times, I say again "Labour, get a life!"
On the government side now, there are two points I would like to make.
PBS, now under the stewardship of Dolores Cristina (and I hope it remains just stewardship, rather than imposition) has a newly-constituted editorial board. I cannot judge the members but I fully agree with the qualifications and good judgment of the chairman. I just hope that that the board of directors of our national channel is largely replaced come June.
I find that this board has proved (as a whole, because I should not generalise) that it lacks ideas of journalistic and media content. If necessary, PBS should lose money (yes lose!) to provide a service to the nation.
The second point that I am not too happy about (although I fully agree with the substance), is Austin Gatt's public directives to the Malta Transport Authority. That the minister issues strict directives is his way and it is right - and we all know his forthright and no nonsense manner - but should this be public?
Does this not give an impression of "direct rule"? Should such directives be publicised? Do we need authorities, boards and other "independent" entities if the minister is going to impose any way? Why can't he deal with everything directly in the first place?
Perhaps it is the only way things will get done! But then, again, why have a board?