|
We might not have been given a “new way of doing politics”, but a new way of judging government’s performance and credibility is clearly taking place amongst independent minded persons.
The yardstick is no longer the traditional Nationalist-Labour divide. All political parties, particularly the one in government, are now being judged according to European standards. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is a growing disenchantment with political parties and disengagement from the political system as a consequence. People are no longer excited to rush to the polling booth just to vote for the lesser of two evils. Citizens refuse to be held hostage by their traditional party. They expect good governance, and are judging all three political parties not by their rhetoric or promises, but upon their performance.
Nowhere is this more pronounced than in the civil rights camp. Europe is a beacon of civil rights, the protector of minorities and the standard bearer for tolerance and solidarity. Just analyse the way both the large parties are treating the divorce issue. One party leader has refused to give his backbenchers a free vote, while the other remains totally non-committal. Can there be a less European way of addressing this issue?
Elsewhere, the thorny issue of party donations is greeted by deafening silence on either side. In European countries like Italy and Germany, illegal party donations have rocked governments and led to imprisonment for donors. More recently, the UK has been shaken by the “cash for honours” scandal. But even where no scandals have come to light, lack of transparency inevitably leads to the suspicion of a cosy relationship between the world of politics and business. Locally, both parties simply refuse to address this issue. Instead, they expect us to believe that their party headquarters were built, and their gargantuan media machines financed, only by small party donors.
The hunting issue is another case in point. Faced with the initiation of infringement procedures, government has responded, not by acquiescing to the Commission’s reasonable demands, but by defying the European Union still further. Has there ever been a clearer case of political opportunism? Government policy dictated at gunpoint by the fear of the hunting lobby.
On this and other issues, government seems to think it can simply pick and choose from the European menu according to its own exigencies. Even here, inconsistencies are crying out to be exposed: on the one hand, it expects citizens to tighten their belts in order to qualify for euro entry, conveniently citing the pressure of Maastricht criteria as justification for the national sacrifice. On the other hand, European pressure to transpose the Birds Directive, to mention but one issue where government will is clearly lacking, is repeatedly ignored.
Government can no longer hide behind childish excuses. The intelligent, independent-minded citizen knows that the real reason is electoral pressure. We were led to believe that joining a club entails abiding by the club rules; but then, it seems that government is only interested in enforcing those rules insofar as fiscal measures and collecting taxes are concerned. When it comes to strengthening civil rights and defending the environment, its resolve appears to evaporate in the March sun.
And yet, many European measures could be introduced at little cost. There is little expense involved in introducing conflict of interest regulations or ensuring good governance. Such regulations need not apply only to politicians, but also to professionals, members of the judiciary, civil servants, and any cases where duty may be in conflict with pecuniary interests. How expensive would it be to run a truly public broadcasting service? Is it costly to appoint independent minded persons as board members? Hardly; yet this quintessentially European way of doing things simply refuses to find its way into the Maltese modus operandi.
Sadly, we have remained politically charged and driven in all our actions. The party faithful are appointed to high office, while numerous high calibre persons who operate outside political networks are never called to office. The country is poorer as a result.
The new way of doing politics should simply be the European way, where meritocracy wins over nepotism, national interest over partisanship, and excellence over mediocrity. We believed this was the way forward after accession. This is why we will continue urging government to abide by its real mandate, and introduce European norms even where these come at an electoral cost.
Ultimately, government will be judged on its performance rated at the European level, and no longer on a narrow comparison with the party in opposition.
Europe is indeed the new yardstick.
|
