Alfred Sant has to go! If Labour wants to win the next general elections, Alfred Sant has to go! Give him an early retirement; thank him for the services he gave to the party, and let him make way so that finally and on its own merits, the Malta Labour Party will, once again, be at the helm. I know that I am going against the tide and that the guns will once again be pointing at me for writing what the party needs to hear but I have no regrets as I have no strings attached and what matters most is the love for the Party above the love for the leader or the leadership and the perks that are carried with it.
After the second consecutive defeat in the general elections, I had no qualms in stating that Alfred Sant had to make way for a new leadership within the party. I shall not delve into the reactions I received but I shall once again state that I am still of the same conviction, if not even more convinced. Nationalists pray for Alfred Sant to remain leader of the Malta Labour Party because with him there they know they face a weak opposition and they stand to gain another term in office. My heart aches when I hear all this and it aches even more when I see no shed of light for any changes within the party.
When the leadership was contested after the last general elections, Sant promised changes and improvements, but to date no one ever dares to question to what extent his manifesto been accomplished. His two deputies have also disappointed us. Their mission was not to be what it is today: they had the specific task of making the necessary changes within the party so that it will be a credible and strong party for the upcoming general elections. Even the secretary general had the same agenda: today his agenda changes to one of endless hosannas for the ‘mahbub leader’.
The general conferences of the party are meant to be brainstorming sessions intended to bring about the necessary change that is needed in the party. The presence of the media does not allow the party delegates to speak frankly and air their views on the administration of the party. Some hide behind the principle of ‘transparency’ for justifying the presence of the media. But transparency should upheld for the sake of the party delegates and the party supporters and for the media. Today Labour has reached the ridiculous situation that better treatment is given to the Nationalist supporters than to the Labourites. I cannot understand, for example, how Labour does not invite the Labour dissidents like myself to the general conference as observers in an attempt to put into practice the dictum ‘ il-bieb miftuh ghal kulhadd’!
If Labour wants to win the next general elections there is still a lot of hard work that needs to be done. First and foremost, let the leader understand that the Malta Labour Party did not start with his leadership. Labour has a glorious history that the leader should be proud of. Unless he reconciles with Mintoff, and let bygones be bygones, Labour will stand no chance of winning any general election. The party administration, on the other hand, must work hard to bring the lost sheep back to the party. It is only with these solid foundations, that Labour can then look forward to reach out for the floating voters. Because let’s face, in Malta a general election is won with the floating voters.
However, in Labour’s case the general elections have to be won not only by the floating voters but also by its so-called ‘dissidents.’ No attempt is being made to encourage them back into the party. Most of them do not want to be involved as long as Alfred Sant remains leader and are willing to destroy their vote or not vote at all in the general elections until he is removed from office. I agree that the dissidents ought not to dictate who is and who is not to be the leader, but on the other hand everybody knows that now the party has a very big issue to address: that of credibility. And let us be frank, Sant does not inspire credibility.
After his re-election I expected Alfred Sant to stand by his electoral manifesto for the party leadership and that would have instilled the credibility most people see missing in him. However to date, the manifesto seems to have been brushed under the carpet and nobody dares to question what has happened. I remember that one of the suggestions was that the party would have a daily newspaper in English. How he ever believed that this could happen, I do not know because the party is in dire straits and he ought to have known that it was not a financially viable proposal.
But with the party machines all under his control it was no wonder he got re-elected. So far so good, but the question still remains as to whether he can deliver what he promises and give the labour party a victory in the next general elections. So far I have to say that we have seen nothing new within Labour except new faces in the administration and perhaps a stricter control on the party finances. Although, let us face it, nobody was brought to book for the state of the party finances under Sant’s leadership.
The party has not got to grips with the fact that public relations are the pivot for any general elections. Since the last general elections, nothing has changed in this regard. The Public Relations Officer of the party is still not employed on full-time basis, there is no political punch in the news and the political programmes on the radio have been reduced to a minimum. Labour’s only newspaper is not a good watchdog of the government and is as static as ever and the Ghaqda Nisa Laburisti has rendered itself suitable for tombola parties, coffee mornings and nothing else.
It is so unfortunate that during the general conference no attempt was made to address these deficiencies within the party, although, let us face it, the delegates find it hard to speak their mind with the media prying over them and always ready to gain political mileage. This media business is proving to be advantageous to the leadership but not to the party – the media shields the leadership from possible confrontation on the party business. Confrontation is healthy and who is afraid of confrontation is insecure and devoid of a good basis for dialogue.
There are still two or three years at most for the next general elections and Labour is still in time to take the bull by the horns and revamp and revitalise the party. The administration knows what it has to do: it must bring to the table the report which discusses the reasons for the defeat of the last general elections for discussion.
That report was not commissioned and financed by the party for the benefit of Alfred Sant, but for the benefit of the party. So far he has done nothing to build a strong public relations department; revamp the newsroom and the political programmes on the station’s radio and television by providing the necessary re-training in order to have his message heard by Labourites and floating voters; make the Labourites feel once again that they belong to the party; invite the ‘dissidents’ back; resuscitate the Sunday newspaper Kullhadd so that it will be worthy of a newspaper of the party in opposition where the focus is shifted from contributions of the party loyalists, as is the case currently, towards a full scrutiny of the government; transform the Ghaqda Nisa Socjalisti from a tombola organising machine to a forum where women feel that they have more to contribute towards the party. The party has not seen any progress since the last elections defeat.
Love me or hate me, call me whatever, but if he has not by now instilled trust in the electorate, he shall not be able to do so over the next three years and Labour cannot lose the next general elections. How the party machine is ready to sacrifice the hardships of the Labourites for another five years I sincerely do not know. That is why he has to go!
(And no hard feelings, of course).
