It takes a great deal of political courage to say what Labour leader Alfred Sant told his interviewer of The Sunday Times about Labour's stand on Malta and the European Union. Dr Sant was asked: Would you list your stand on the EU as one of your biggest mistakes? He replied: "I don't list that as one of the mistakes or the successes. It's something which the opposition put forward and people decided". When the interviewer asked if he had no regrets about that, Dr Sant's reply was: "No".
This must surely be one of Labour's greatest blunders so far, for how can the people now trust his party in government if it has no regrets for a policy that the people have rejected twice?
If Dr Sant does not consider their past EU policy as having been wrong, how can he expect the people to believe his repeated declaration that they have now accepted the people's decision and would try to make a success of EU membership?
Dr Sant's "no" indicates that he and the party he leads still feel that their alternative to membership, a partnership, was the right choice for Malta. Labour may not have any regrets about their past policy on the EU but the people do. They regret the fact that Labour has delayed Malta's membership process and, consequently, the progress the country has been able to make since accession. Who would blame the people now for branding the Labour Party eurosceptic?
Going by what the Labour leader has said, it is clear that, deep down, the party still feels that the people have made the wrong decision. Labour's policy has cost Malta dearly. Dr Sant's "no" also hurts the electorate's feelings, for the least they would expect now is Labour's recognition of their mistake. No wonder the Labour leader does not like referendums.
The irony, or, more accurately, absurdity, is that they now consider accusations that they are eurosceptics as unjust. One Labour columnist, eager to defend Labour's stance, says any talk of (Malta) withdrawing from the EU (if Labour is elected) is pure spin from the Nationalists' side.
That may very well be true but, for the electorate to totally accept the MLP's decision to go along with the people's choice, they have first to come absolutely clean. In other words, the party has to be absolutely politically honest about its conversion. It has to leave no room for doubt at all as to what it will do over EU membership if elected.
When the Labour leader says he has no regrets about their past EU stand, he is directly sowing doubts in the minds of the people about the kind of relations his party in government would keep with the EU Commission and, more importantly, to their reaction if they get a "no" to their requests for the re-opening of talks on the shipyards and agriculture.
The Times has already argued it would not be altogether unreasonable for Malta to see if it could somehow be allowed to extend the time given for the shipyard to break even taking into consideration the fact that, according to the former shipyard chairman, the enterprise is now close to reaching its target.
The problem is that, in the light of Labour's past position over EU membership, it is hard to fathom their reaction to any possible disagreement with the Commission in Brussels - and it has been made amply clear that re-opening talks would not be easy at all.
The Labour leader has fuelled uncertainty over a matter that has now become of fundamental importance to the well-being of the country and the people. Most people have still a nagging feeling that the MLP have something up their sleeve as regards Malta's relations with the EU.
Is it worth taking risks when the country is now settling in well in the EU and when so much progress has already been made since membership?