The Ragonesi factor that was

He was present for all official talks that led to Independence. He worked with Gorg Borg Olivier for 35 years. He believes that despite their different diplomatic styles both Mintoff and Borg Olivier got what they wanted. KURT SANSONE talks to Dr Victor Ragonesi at his office in Valletta

The year is 1964 and Malta is preparing itself for independence from the British colonial masters. It is a historic moment and the country is at a crossroads. For the umpteenth time the Maltese Prime Minister’s First Secretary, Victor Ragonesi takes off for London to participate in talks that will eventually lead to the much-awaited appointment in Malta’s history.

Dr Ragonesi recalls the intensive talks and the uncertain times that accompanied Independence but he has no doubt about the importance of the date. "After years of colonialism, which was not always imposed correctly, Independence was a historic step, probably the most important event in Malta’s history," Dr Ragonesi reminisces.

For this veteran lawyer not even the present, characterised as it is by the uncertainty accompanying Malta’s prospective membership of the European Union, can match the exciting times that preceded Independence.

"European Union membership is of national importance, but it cannot be compared to Independence," Dr Ragonesi reiterates. He argues that Independence gave the people the right to determine their own future. But does he believe that EU membership will threaten Malta’s sovereignty.

"No, the EU would not threaten Malta’s independence and this is evidenced by the countries that are member states. Despite years of forming part of the union they are still independent and sovereign." He draws an interesting analogy. "Independence is like virginity, you only get it once and you only lose it once and I do not believe Malta will lose its independence by joining the EU."

Dr Ragonesi explains that until two to three years ago the idea was brewing within the EU of a more centralised union run by the Brussels bureaucracy. "This did not go down too well with a number of countries. So much so that the idea to remove member countries' rights to veto EU legislation was soon dropped. Today, we have a situation where one EU member state, Ireland, is holding the enlargement process in the balance because it has rejected the Nice Treaty. The Irish decision shows that the individual member states are still sovereign," Dr Ragonesi emphasises.

He elaborates, "I for one do not want my country to lose its sovereignty because that is a basic principle." Dr Ragonesi argues that the very basic concepts that gave birth to the European Community, namely solidarity and subsidiarity, are safeguards against the loss of sovereignty. Dr Ragonesi agrees with the vision held by former French President Charles de Gaulle, whose idea of European union was a federation of independent states.

"I do not know if that is ever possible to achieve," Dr Ragonesi admits, but he argues, "in today’s world no country can remain on its own."

Dr Ragonesi points out that even the United States, which is the world’s largest economy has sought to form an economic block with its neighbours Mexico and Canada. He continues, "The vast majority of European countries want a more intense co-operation, South American countries are working to try and establish common policies to tackle global issues and the Far East is seeing more initiatives being developed for increased co-operation."

In such a scenario, Dr Ragonesi argues that Malta has to determine, which block suits it best. Quoting Dante, Dr Ragonesi adds with a smile, "Malta cannot remain ‘tra color che son sospesi’."

I point out that the Labour Party’s option does not advocate an isolationist policy. Dr Ragonesi agrees but puts forward a simple argument. "We have to understand that Malta is a small country. We need other countries to eke out a living but they might not need us as much as we need them," he reasons.

"The alternative, independently from where it comes, has to be acceptable to the other side as well. The EU has to perceive the alternative option as being in its best interest," Dr Ragonesi argues. He continues, "the art of politics is not only adhering to your basic principles but also being able to adopt those principles in practice and make them acceptable to the other side."

The lawyer understands that internally the EU has a lot of difficulties. "Just take the issue of immigration. It has exposed each member state’s insistence to protect their individual interests. Each country wants to control immigration from countries outside the EU and this also explains the shift from centre left to centre right governments. It goes to show that despite being part of the union, countries still seek what is in their best national interest."

Dr Ragonesi identifies the single currency as another cause for concern. He explains that although the Euro, has been accepted by the majority of Europeans, in countries such as Germany and Italy, there is a growing trend in public opinion against it. "The economic benefits the Euro was supposed to bring, have not materialised as was expected," Dr Ragonesi remarks.

The obvious question crops up: with such problems why should Malta join the union?

"It is simple," Dr Ragonesi argues, "we do not have any practical alternative."

Harking back to the past I ask Dr Ragonesi how he came to know former Prime Minister Gorg Borg Olivier with whom he worked for 35 years.

"I got to know Dr Borg Olivier during the war," Dr Ragonesi recalls. "At the time I was still a student at University and Dr Borg Olivier was one of the three Nationalist Party representatives on the Council of Government," the lawyer adds with a twinkle in his eye.

Dr Ragonesi continues, "After the British interned Nerik Mizzi and Sir Ugo Mifsud died, Dr Borg Olivier was the sole representative of the Nationalist Party on the council."

The former Prime Minister’s contribution to the Council of Government, despite the odds, earned him Dr Ragonesi’s admiration. "I had gone to Borg Olivier’s office and asked him to give me tickets to be able to attend and observe the council meetings," Dr Ragonesi recalls. He adds, "I admired him for the way he defended the party’s principles single-handedly."

Soon after the war was over and Nerik Mizzi returned from exile Dr Ragonesi was asked to help in the party structures. "I used to go to Nerik Mizzi’s office twice a week to help in the typing and research," Dr Ragonesi says. Eventually, he became responsible for the publication of the party’s first newspaper called Il-Poplu.

He recounts with a smile, "it was a weekly newspaper four pages long. Nothing like what we have today." After that it was a gradual ascent to the top echelons of the party until in 1954 Dr Ragonesi was elected Secretary General of the Nationalist Party.

What does he think about the perception that Dom Mintoff was a better negotiator than Borg Olivier when dealing with the British?

Dr Ragonesi explains that both leaders had different qualities but they also had one common trait. "Whatever Borg Olivier and Mintoff wanted to achieve they did." Dr Ragonesi says.

He describes the contrasting diplomatic tactics adopted by both

leaders.

"Borg Olivier was a fine diplomat who negotiated with two basic principles in mind, honesty and rectitude. He also knew how to wait. As for Mintoff, he wanted things to be done here and now and his was a tactic of blackmail."

Dr Ragonesi believes that the two tactics were useful at different times. "Without Borg Olivier’s persistence and perseverance we would not have achieved Independence including the defence treaty, which provided us with the security required for foreign investment to come to the Island. On the other hand, Mintoff’s rough way managed to convince the British and NATO to increase their financial contribution from 5 million to 14 million after 1971."

Recalling the post-Independence years and the transition in administrations, Dr Ragonesi feels that under the Nationalist administration there was more respect for the Constitution and for human rights. "After 1971 the Labour government introduced the concept of a rigid government, which had its positive aspects but unfortunately it also created a situation where human rights were not always respected," Dr Ragonesi remarks, recalling also the way Nationalist Party meetings were disrupted.

A believer in an efficient civil service, Dr Ragonesi says that the Labour administration after 1971 ruined the civil service by employing people on the basis of political allegiance. "The civil service was the pride of the country and people coming out of university wanted to join the service but after 1971 government lost a lot of its good people, who found solace in the private sector," Dr Ragonesi explains.

Today the situation is not much different. Dr Ragonesi laments the lack of discipline, which has hounded the civil service ever since.

"The sense of duty is lacking and in some government departments abuses go unchecked. Furthermore, privatisation such as that of the Posts has not yielded the desired results," he argues.

The problem according to Dr Ragonesi is that a lot of people just want to sit on the fence. "Government is there to establish the general principles of policy but then it is up to the heads of the civil service to make them work efficiently. It is not the minister’s prerogative to intervene in the running of each department unless the general policy direction is not being respected," Dr Ragonesi stresses.

He does not hide his disappointment at the current administration’s lack of initiative to take the bull by the horns and bring in a measure of control in the civil service.

"Government has taken a number of good initiatives generally speaking, but I would have expected to see better use of the civil service and less dependence on consultants," Dr Ragonesi says. I ask him whether the civil service should be trimmed and he answers bluntly, "if consultants are necessary because the civil service is not capable then the number of employees with the civil service should be reduced."

I broach the subject of the impending referendum on EU membership and ask Dr Ragonesi whether he thinks the Labour Party is justified in saying that it will not recognise the result. He replies, "If a referendum is held with all the necessary information available, by a free and secret vote then everybody should recognise the result."

The lawyer believes that only another referendum on the same issue could turn down the result of a referendum. "To be truly democratic the Labour Party should hold another referendum but as things stand I do not know how they are going to develop. I sincerely cannot understand how any political party could soldier on with its ideas unless they were in the best interest of the country," Dr Ragonesi says.

I ask Dr Ragonesi, ex-Secretary General of the Nationalist Party for his opinion on the leadership issue. "I do not believe the leadership will change now," he replies. Dr Ragonesi agrees that the race between Lawrence Gonzi and John Dalli could be creating some tension in the party. "But this is normal" he reiterates. Dr Ragonesi adds, "Eventually the party will decide on its future leader in a democratic and open way just as it has always done."

Being so close to politics all his life I ask Dr Ragonesi for his reaction to the general perception that politics is a corrupt world. "I do not agree with blanket statements of the sort," he replies. "Corruption does exist but I sincerely believe that the vast majority of Maltese politicians are not corrupt and they do their job out of genuine service to the country," Dr Ragonesi concludes before rushing off to Court where he is still active despite his venerable age.