Zero tolerance

Former MLP leader and Prime Minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici spells out his views on the EU Constitution

As Campaign for National Independence chairman, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici would like Malta to get out of the European Union as soon as possible. As a Labour Party delegate he will keep on insisting in persuading fellow party delegates that the current EU treaty is absolutely disastrous for Malta and that it should be changed. As CNI chairman he would reject the Constitution completely but as an MLP delegate he is offering a compromise: a “constructive abstention” in parliament.
When we meet this week I cannot but ask the former Prime Minister whether this amounts to political schizophrenia? “I understand that there are people in the MLP who do not want to touch the EU subject again because they are afraid of losing the next elections. I realise that a compromise is necessary to keep the party united. A qualified abstention is the compromise.” Throughout the interview KMB, like a radio transmitting on two frequencies, keeps on alternating between CNI and MLP modes.
I point out to KMB that in November he had signed an MLP motion that called on the party to work within the limits of the possible to do away with the negative aspects which the EU membership treaty negotiated by the PN could contain. There was nothing in that motion calling for a withdrawal from the EU.
“Yes that is correct. But the MLP general conference encouraged the party to undo the negative aspects of the treaty even from the Opposition and see that the treaty is not disadvantageous and harmful to the people especially the workers. In the light of this the party is committed by the motion to do everything to change the treaty even from opposition. That’s why I am not calling on the party to vote against the EU Constitution. I am just calling on the party not to vote in its favour.”
Are you calling on Labour MP’s to abstain? “I understand the party’s concern not to lose pro EU Labourites and floating voters. Constructive abstention is contemplated in the George Vella report on foreign policy matters. If the party is willing to make use of constructive abstention when it is elected in government in the EU’s Council of Ministers, why should the party refrain from using constructive abstention now?”
But if the party accepts your compromise, will you continue insisting on taking Malta out of the EU? “The CNI never accepted EU membership because the campaign was unfair and vitiated. The people’s consent was ‘stolen’. Many are now realising they have been tricked to vote in favour of membership. That is why many Nationalists are now feeling betrayed. But I insist, I am not fighting this particular battle in the name of CNI, otherwise I would call on the party to vote ‘no’.”
Ironically the new Constitutional treaty makes the CNI’s wish to get Malta out of the EU Constitutionally possible. Would CNI recommend Malta using the exit clause?
KMB answers: “Definitely, the exit clause is there to be used.”
Karmenu Mifud Bonnici has gone on record saying that if the MLP does not approve the Constitution it would be betraying its principles. So would KMB remain in a party guilty of betraying its principles? KMB excludes leaving the party or forming a new one. “Yes I will remain and I will continue fighting until there is a majority in the party that understands that the current treaty is absolutely disastrous for Malta. Now I am referring to the membership treaty not the Constitution. The party should seek to change the treaty until it wins a majority in the country.”
KMB is quick to remind me: “I have always insisted that the party should never renounce the exit option. One cannot negotiate a better treaty with the EU without having a fallback position.”
Our conversation turns to KMB’s stormy relationship with the MLP’s leadership. Will you be participating in the four assemblies announced by the MLP leadership to discuss this issue? “If I am allowed, I will participate in all four assemblies. I have already asked the party to hold discussions in political clubs in which I would discuss with anyone chosen by the party. They turned down my request. I even asked them for a list of the delegate’s addresses so that these will receive my views apart from the reports prepared by George Vella and Joe Brincat with Pawlu Lia. This would only have been fair because the documents were earmarked to arrive at a positive conclusion. The MLP also denied me this opportunity.” KMB also points out that the report attributed to Joe Brincat and Dr Pawlu Lia was in fact written by Brincat and Lia had no part in it.
“My only chance left to communicate with the delegates is by attending all these assemblies. And I will insist on attending all of them.”
But since these meetings will be regional will KMB be able to attend all four meetings or only the one in which delegates from Hamrun - his home town - will be attending? “I am a delegate from the Hamrun region but I will insist on attending all four meetings. The MLP leadership will be present in all these meetings. If the party wants an open discussion it should allow me to participate.”
But does KMB have any support? “The grass roots cannot understand how the party can join the government in voting for the EU constitution.” Are there any MPs supporting you? “Yes.” I insist by asking KMB to name the MPs who are supporting him. “I can’t tell you that.” Are there any others apart from Anglu Farrugia? “Yes” answers KMB. Not satisfied I ask him for the number of MPs who are supporting him. “I can’t say but a number of MPs understand my position.” So why are they refraining from expressing their support in public? “They are forbidden to speak in public.” Is the party trying to silence you? “I was invited on Smash TV for a programme presented by Brian Hansford and George Vella refused to participate. They do not want to discuss with me in public.” Why? “Hansford told me that the party does not want a public debate in which divergent views on the issue are expressed.”
When was the last time you met Alfred Sant? “The last contact I had with him was before the last conference when I was going to present a motion seconded by a delegate from Gharghur which called on the party not to accept the supremacy of EU laws over our Constitution. The leader called me to meet him. He informed me that the party would not be discussing the matter before the local elections. He told me that the discussion would commence after the elections. On that occasion I had expressed my disagreement, but I did not insist on the motion. In my opinion the party should have declared from the beginning that it will never accept the supremacy of the EU laws over Maltese laws, but I accepted. That was the last time we spoke.”
Many are saying that KMB is simply colluding with Mintoff to embarrass Alfred Sant. Are you simply executing Dom Mintoff’s orders? “Absolutely not. Mintoff wants to renegotiate a new treaty with the EU. Personally as CNI chairman I am far more radical than Mintoff. As CNI chairman I want Malta to get out of the EU as soon as possible. Mintoff disagrees with me on proposing a constructive abstention. But I am not discussing this with him. He is definitely not influencing me.”
Our conversation turns to the Constitutional aspects of the treaty. I point out to KMB that Dr Joe Brincat is arguing that the Maltese constitution can remain supreme in certain matters while the European constitution will be supreme in other matters. “An important distinction has to be made. I am not saying that the Constitution of the EU should not prevail over the Maltese Constitution. I am not even saying EU laws should not prevail over Maltese laws. This is because Malta has already renounced its sovereignty on certain matters where EU law prevails. What I am objecting to is the fact that through the new Constitution EU laws will prevail on the Maltese Constitution.” KMB finally reveals the true motivation behind his call on Labour MPs to abstain. “That is why I am recommending the party to abstain. In this way the qualified majority required to overturn article 6 of the Maltese Constitution will not materialise. As long as the EU Constitution is approved through a simple majority, EU laws will not override the Maltese Constitution and the Maltese law courts would be able to annul any EU legislation which contradict the Maltese Constitution.”
I challenge Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici on whether the Constitution will violate Maltese neutrality. I point out that the new constitutional treaty permits qualified abstention on foreign policy matters. Karmenu is quick to point out that this is conditional. “By abstaining Malta will not be able to impair the action of the Union. He immediately quotes section 300 of the EU constitution which states that one cannot obstruct the effectiveness of the EU’s policy.”
But is there anything in the Constitution, which obliges Malta to participate in military matters? I point out that membership in the EU defense agency is optional. “The moment a country joins the EU one joins a military alliance. Malta’s Constitution says that Malta should not form part of military alliance. There are two specific provisions in the new Constitution, which would oblige Malta to participate in military matters. One of these provisions obliges all member states to help and assist any member state that is the victim of an attack on its own territory.”
I point out that this statement is followed by the phrase
“this shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain member states.” Unlike George Vella, KMB insists that this phrase applies to NATO members not neutral states like Malta. KMB also refers to another Article, which obliges EU member states to act in a spirit of solidarity with member states hit by a terrorist attack. KMB has no objection to cooperating against money laundering activities but he is completely against showing solidarity through military means. KMB remarked that countries like Spain were victims of terrorist attacks due to their participation in the invasion of Iraq.
But is there anything fundamentally wrong in participating in peace-keeping missions like the one the EU is running in Kosovo? “This was the most objectionable act of the EU. Sending peace-keeping missions after starting a war does not make sense. It was Germany and the Vatican who broke up Yugoslavia when they supported Slovenia and Croatia’s bids for independence.”
I point out to KMB that the discussion in France is focusing on section 3 of the EU Constitution which deals with economic and social arguments rather than arguments on sovereignty. KMB agrees. “The Constitution is full of references to neo liberal principles. The MLP is not even discussing these aspects. This part of the Constitution was not even discussed in the European convention. The economic and monetary policy is neo liberal. There was no critique towards this in the MLP reports.”
KMB has always been known for his unorthodox economic views. I ask KMB how Malta could become more competitive. Once more KMB blames the current crisis on the EU. “Malta’s economy is becoming even less competitive due to its EU membership treaty. Production costs will increase. Malta cannot be more competititive inside the EU.”
But can we keep on attracting the type of investment in manufacturing that Malta attracted in the 1970s and 1980s? “Manufacturing firms are not coming to Malta because we are no longer giving State support. The EU does not permit this as we would be distorting competition.”
As KMB returns to his typical CNI anti-EU mode I could not but help asking him: Will his continued insistence on leaving the EU harm the MLP’s prospects? “Surveys show that a percentage of those who voted ‘yes’ are now against membership. If one counts these with those who had voted against, one would have a majority. I am sure that when the pension reform and the dismantling of welfare starts more people will start opposing the EU.” But what has pension reform to do with the EU? “See section 3 of the Constitution which states that public services should not distort the market,” answers KMB.
Karmenu is still remembered as Malta’s Prime Minister during the turbulent 1980s. Does KMB regret anything he did as Prime Minister in the turbulent 80s? “Nothing, except not being able to employ everyone because I always believed in the right to work.” Did not his policy of employing thousands of people on the eve of the 1987 election contribute to increase the country’s deficit? “The deficit was created by the Nationalists through their unjust policies on salaries in the public sector. For two years I insisted that no wage increases should be given till everybody is employed. That’s why we did not end up with all those debts when in government.”
Finally I ask KMB on the direction the MLP should adopt in order to win the next election. “What should concern us is not winning elections, but our beliefs and principles. If we preach the truth we will win. If in order to win we end up abandoning Labour principles, I am not interested. I will not have any interest in a party with a right wing Thatcherite agenda even if it is called a labour party. I am interested in a party with a just social policy, whether it’s called a communist party, a nationalist party or a labour party it does not matter. I am only interested in policies and beliefs.” Some in the MLP still consider KMB a guardian of the true socialist faith, others will frown on him as permanent electoral liability. What is sure is that KMB will not be silenced.