 |
|
|
|
Interview
Interview
with Michael Falzon
On party leaders, publicity stunts
and the PA
He brought
an end to one of the most powerful portfolios and then lost his
Seat through changes to electoral boundaries.
Former Nationalist party minister Michael Falzon looks back on his
political career, but tells MIRIAM DUNN it might not be over yet
He admits that he lost his seat in Parliament because his own party
changed the locality boundaries, but when questioned, former Nationalist
party minister Michael Falzon says he is not resentful about the
decision that could have ended his political career.
"These are things that happen, they happen all the time,"
he answers, philosophically. "In the 1996 election, a colleague
beat me by 17 votes. One part of the district which was removed
that year was Pieta, where I'm sure I had 200 votes more than my
rival, but that's the way it goes. It's no use crying over spilt
milk."
His life in politics might have come to a temporary standstill five
years ago, but Mr Falzon has been active since as Chairman of the
Water Services Corporation and is still remembered for making some
key policy decisions during his years as minister for development
of infrastructure and also education.
Perhaps his most significant act was the setting up of the Planning
Authority, which played a major part in devolving power away from
one central office.
So what was behind this decision, I ask him.
"In Malta the minister for public works was a very powerful
person, irrespective of whether it was Lorry Sant or someone else
occupying the post," he explains. "He had too much in
his hands for one person; building permits, housing schemes, roadwork
plans, among others. I felt it was vital to ensure that no single
person would ever have the concentration of power that my predecessor
had and that meant breaking up the structure."
So is Mr Falzon satisfied with the Planning Authority? After all,
it comes in for heavy criticism at times.
"For all its faults, I think everyone would agree that the
PA is preferable to the previous system of bribing the minister
to get a permit, if we are measuring in terms of democracy, transparency
and accountability," he says with a smile. "Perhaps one
might almost worry that they do some things to prove just how autonomous
they are and inevitably, some procedures will take longer. But on
the whole, the objectives have been achieved."
Having been education minister and taking some steps to regularise
university stipends, I am interested to know whether Mr Falzon had
some sympathy for Evarist Bartolo during the stipend controversy.
"Yes, I did," he admits. "The problem in this country
is that when anyone tries to economise and control public spending,
the opposition feels obliged to disagree, even if, deep down, it
sympathises with the government. This is a shame, because there
are areas where both parties should agree that spending needs to
be curbed."
Mr Falzon believes that his days as a student helped prepare him
for his time, both as education minister and also the 10 years he
spent in opposition where he spoke out vociferously on student issues.
"I was a member of the student council for some time and became
president during my last year," he explains. "At that
time we were still trying to abolish university fees, so I have
experienced this issue from both sides of the divide!"
Having graduated in 1969, he moved into politics fairly quickly,
joining the youth movement and being elected to the Party Executive
before making it to Parliament in 1976.
I ask him what those early years in opposition were like during
the Mintoff regime.
"One of our disadvantages was that the PN was very disorganised
during those years, which gave Mintoff an advantage," he explains.
"At the time, the Nationalist youth movement began pushing
for reforms with a view to making a credible opposition. This, coupled
with the dissatisfaction the people had with the Mintoff government,
helped us gain in popularity."
And on the subject of popularity, does he believe that the electorate
were sending a message to the government at the recent local council
elections?
"You have to be very careful about how much you read into such
things," he replies. "Granted, it could be that the Nationalist
voters are sending a message to the party and yes, I know people
who are disgruntled over certain issues, but this always happens
with governments. If you look at the classic patterns of popularity
polls, in mid-term a government is at its lowest ebb, so in this
respect, we shouldn't be that surprised. However, that doesn't mean
we shouldn't be listening to what the people are saying."
Mr Falzon points out that in the previous local council election
held three years before, when Alfred Sant was Prime Minister, the
PN got 55% of the vote.
"This was when you could say that Dr Sant was at his lowest
ebb," he stresses. "What happened in March 2001 was that
more Labour party supporters went out and voted than in March 1998.
The parallels are there for all to see."
And does he feel that a change in leadership at the PN is off the
cards for now?
"I think the way things are working out at the moment, everybody
agrees that the present leader will only continue up to the next
election," he replies, adding, with a smile, "but that
doesn't mean there aren't people already preparing to compete to
be the successor."
While on the subject of leadership, I ask Mr Falzon whether he believes
that Alfred Sant is still the right person to be at the helm of
the Labour party.
"Actually, I never thought he was the right man to be leading
the Labour party," he answers. "Dr Sant is very intelligent
and a good strategist. He can also play with public opinion, especially
when he's in opposition. But people should also consider his performance
when he was in government. The MLP almost tries to make us forget
they were in government for 22 months. I don't think he was really
the stuff prime ministers are made of."
I ask him whether he feels that Dr Sant has successfully dealt with
dissent within the MLP.
"I think what happened was that Dr Sant began by trying to
get rid of all the people who didn't agree with him," he answers.
"But now he is realising that he needs their support to get
to power. He wants every potential voter, so he's trying to hold
out olive branches to people like Toni Abela and Wenzu Mintoff.
Let's remember that there are some Labour stalwarts who didn't vote
in the 1998 election because of the Mintoff controversy and that
undoubtedly affected Sant's performance. Now he has embarked on
a balancing act; looking to do things his way, while simultaneously
not pushing people away."
I wonder whether Mr Falzon views Dr Sant's stand on the European
Union as too rigid, especially his refusal to recognise a referendum
as valid.
"I believe the reason he has adopted this stand is to send
out a message to Labour voters who might be considering voting in
favour of the EU," he answers. "He is telling those people
what will happen."
So what is Mr Falzon's view on the way that the EU debate is going?
He appears to be concerned that the whole issue is in danger of
becoming bogged down with petty arguments.
"We need to be taking a broader look at the picture,"
he explains. "Let us assume that both political parties want
to see the Maltese people's standard of living reach that of developed
European countries. The PN believes the quickest way to arrive there
is through EU membership and this should be the main thrust of the
pro-EU campaign."
He admits this is not always as easy to relay as it sounds, especially
when the MLP and CNI are blowing some of the disadvantages of EU
membership out of all proportion.
"With this in mind, one important strategy is to also look
at the other side – what happens if we don't join the EU,"
he adds. "The answer, I believe, is that it will take us much
longer to raise the standard of living in this country. And we need
to make the people realise this."
Mr Falzon has hit the headlines in his past for his controversial
pro-divorce stand. I ask him if he still holds true to this belief.
"Actually, I didn't quite say I was in favour of divorce,"
he stresses. "The view I expressed was that while I agree with
the PN's belief that divorce has a negative impact on society, we
have now reached the stage where separated people are openly co-habiting,
or getting divorced abroad, so we have to choose the lesser of two
evils, if you like. We need to decide what is best for our society."
I remind him of the time that he also hit the headlines, when he
jumped in the sea at Balluta to prove it was OK to swim there.
"Oh my god, that!" he laughs. "Well, I suppose it
was just a gimmick really. It was a year when the authorities kept
putting up notices saying it wasn't safe to swim because of drainage
problems and then taking them down again.
"An Englishman who lives here eventually asked me if he could
swim or not, so I decided to jump in. It was a bit of a stunt, admittedly,
but I'm pleased to say the problems appear to be much better in
the bay now!"
It would be impossible to leave without asking Mr Falzon whether
he intends to stand again as a PN candidate, after his disappointment
at both the 1996 and 1998 elections.
"Will I contest again? That's a good question," he smiles.
"I'm thinking about it, but I haven't made up my mind yet."
But with his application for the post of secretary general of the
Commonwealth Finance Association still being considered, he certainly
has some interesting plans in the pipeline.
------------
Fact file
Born:
Gzira, 1945
Studied:
University of Malta, where he graduated as an architect and civil
engineer
First elected:
in 1976 as a PN candidate in a casual election in the tenth district
Appointed:
Minister for development of infrastructure in 1987, minister for
the environment in 1992 and minister of education in 1994
Also known for:
his role as editor of ‘The Democrat' and being a regular contributor
to ‘Nazzjon' and ‘Il-Mument'. He is now a consultant to
NET TV
Currently:
Chairman of the Water Services Corporation
|
|
|
