News • 1 June 2003

The revolt that was

A mini-revolt has taken place within the Malta Labour Party over the past few weeks, and one cannot say that it is a change for the worse.

If Labour intends to have a serious crack at making itself electable, it has got off to a promising start.

EU membership has been accepted without so much as a whimper of protest in what perhaps has been one of the most un-dramatic volt-faces of Maltese politics. Only a few within the MLP are prepared to slag the EU at this point in time and, while Labour would do well to criticise Brussels when criticism is due, EU bashing has become unpopular.

The Labour rank and file seem to have accepted the decision without too much ado, confirming that even before the elections many Labour supporters looked brightly at the 12 golden stars.

The decision not to continue contesting membership is a strong indication that Labour is showing that it can take important decisions in the interests of the nation. Even if Labour was right on the EU, the last thing Malta needed was for the debate to continue.

Labour grass roots media darling Emmanuel Cuschieri has been unceremoniously sidelined after coming a cropper at the polls. His ever popular but spiteful radio programme seemingly consigned to the rubbish dump of history. Cuschieri is Labour’s president, so his censorship at this stage cannot be taken lightly.

Labour heavyweight Dr George Vella saved face by doing the honourable thing after leading a party to defeat by resigning, while Dr Joe Brincat proved stubbornness is not always a quality to be admired, and would have done better to follow Vella’s example. The two ‘old’ faces leading Labour now make way for new leadership faces, names, and hopefully, qualities.

The election as deputies of two moderates that don’t form part of leader Alfred Sant’s inner core, has been widely noticed by both sides of the political divide. What will happen next remains unclear, but a struggle is expected for the administrative positions within the party and, perhaps more importantly, for the heart and soul of the party.

Dr Michael Falzon and Charles Mangion, represent the future of the party and have the potential to make political discourse with the party government more agreeable than was ever the case in our short independence.

This country needs to look ahead and politicians should not be bickering about especially unimportant issues if this prevents our forward motion.

With hindsight, and for the moment, Alfred Sant’s election as party leader is some sort of a blessing, even if with Sant as leader he remains Labour’s major stumbling block.

Given that Sant’s contestants for the leadership job were probably not the best men for the job, and at least one of those contestants even admitted so,

However its appears that Dr Sant has his own ambitions. There is no doubt that Sant had a good look at recent history. Dom Mintoff, who proved to be Sant’s downfall in the past, and was also a man for U-turns, also fell from grace in 1958, went on to lose elections in 1962 and 1966 only to be elected in 1971 and hang on to power seemingly forever.

The circumstances are changed now, and politics is increasingly more a matter of good teamwork than the charismatic person at the top. If Sant reads the times well he will know that he would be wiser to call it a day and allow for a new face to take Labour to victory next time, rather than risk yet another dismal election loss for Labour.