The vote is the sole prerogative of the individual. Politicians can put forward arguments to try to persuade citizens to cast their vote in one way or another. But it would be arrogant of any politician to expect to have some sort of "hold" on votes and be able to sway them from one side to another at his/her whim.
Trying to persuade people to vote one way or another by means of arguments - be it solid or flimsy - is one thing. Trying to irrationally scare voters from another party because "it would not get us elected" is another and certainly not something any politician should be proud of.
Chatting over coffee, a couple of friends who are voting Labour for the first time told me that we should refrain from mentioning small sectors such as the Malta Shipyards.
"They are few in number and, to say the truth, most people either do not have anyone who works there or do not really fancy them. You are jeopardising votes by giving them importance," one of them said.
It seems to be a valid argument but I beg to differ.
First of all, I am proud to be in a party that does not do "policy-by-numbers". In other words, our policies reflect what we truly believe in and are not simply driven by polls or by the mere number of people that would react positively to our statements.
In a democracy, politicians must be brave enough to speak up for minorities.
Secondly, the message to the wider public is simple: Would you rather have in government someone who is ready to go that extra mile to save your job when it is at stake and give you new opportunities or someone who resigns himself to failure and thinks that nothing can be done?
Labour is saying that it will seek to extend the deadline on the Malta Shipyards with a view on making it viable. These will be intricate discussions but we must give it a try.
On the other hand, the Nationalist Party is not saying what it will do if the December 2008 targets it had set are not met, even though the party leader hinted that workers would not lose their job.
Thus, the choice about the Malta Shipyards is clear. On the one hand, we can try to make the final push to drive the enterprise into viability following the progress registered since 1997. In other words, our skilled workers would be able to earn their daily bread in a productive job.
On the other hand, one can opt for more a' la PN restructuring, whereby workers are transferred to other parts of the public sector doing jobs well below their capabilities while the country loses an enterprise which has potential in a traditional and an innovative business.
Corruption and the need for good governance are key issues in this general election.
The outgoing Administration's dismal track record and the developments of the recent days speak volumes and do not need further comments.
The way in which the Development Control Commission was reconstituted for just nine days before the general election following the damning auditor's report is scandalous.
Why all this urgency?
Is it possible that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority could not refrain from discussing development permits until a new government is installed?
The current Prime Minister, in his caretaker role, should have refrained from taking such a dubious decision, especially if he is convinced that his party will win another term in office.
I think you can guess for whom I am going to vote.
The choice on your vote is obviously yours.
Let us just remember that we are one nation and, whatever the result, we are too small to be divided.
The Maltese people are one.
Dr Muscat is a Labour member of the European Parliament and vice president of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee.