|
Labour EP candidate Wenzu Mintoff would like to be “more socialist than the socialists” but he believes that Malta needs to make its own case in the European Parliament Former Alternattiva Demokratika Chairman Wenzu Mintoff admits that he wasn’t planning to contest the European Parliament elections until “people” from the Labour party encouraged him to do so.
“At first I wasn’t interested in this election but then there were people who encouraged me,” the 44-year-old lawyer says. “Let me put it this way, there were people who encouraged me to contest,” he reiterates. “Deep down I felt that if I found it hard to contest when I was being encouraged to, it would be even harder to contest a general election when you have to put yourself forward. So if I don’t take the plunge this time, with all the pros and cons, then I can’t see when I will be taking it.”
Dr Mintoff would not be drawn into stating who is actually backing him although it seems he is being encouraged by the party leadership. In any case, he received the party delegates’ backing, more than the required 70 per cent threshold, and in a few months’ time he will be running against his former colleague Arnold Cassola, among others.
To all those accustomed with the traditional politics of patronage, the European Parliament must be unappealing. Dr Mintoff dismisses the notion of “electoral promises” immediately, fully aware of the connotation of this term with the Maltese electorate.
“No. I don’t think you can make a lot of promises when it comes to the European Parliament. Most of the EP’s powers are consultative, and we’re talking about MEPs from the smallest member state, whose representatives will be divided between two parties or more. So it’s not a question of promises; I will give my unconditional commitment for the common good of the Maltese. In my opinion the Nationalists could have negotiated a better membership agreement, especially when you consider that we are a tiny island on our own on the periphery of the continent. I know it would be virtually impossible to renegotiate the membership agreement, but certain negative aspects of the Accession Treaty should be reconsidered . The EU is not a static institution, it is developing everyday. So our participation in the EP can be significant at least with regards to future developments in the EU.”
It is a pity that Labour had to lose an election to make such an argument, I point out. The EU was essentially against Malta’s interests according to Labour’s foreign policy until a year ago. Only now is the MLP admitting that it can work in Malta’s interest within the EU.
“The EU tends to adopt the ‘one size fits all’ approach when drafting its regulations,” Dr Mintoff says by way of an explanation, adding that he was one of those who did not vote in the referendum. “They are regulations which make sense for those countries whose economy has been developing gradually over the years, and which are still dismantling their protectionist mechanisms. They are much stronger economies than ours, closer to the centre of the European markets, and they don’t have our particular problems. Even though there was an emotional element in Labour’s approach, accentuating some points to the extreme in a referendum campaign, it was all about getting a flexible, particular package for Malta. Now the situation has changed, the people opted for EU membership, but Labour’s position retains flexibility as the starting point.”
Now that the scenario is different, opting out of the EU would be extremely damaging to the country’s future, “it would be traumatic,” he says.
Still, Labour has to convince its grassroots to get to vote in the first place. How is he going to encourage Labourites to vote?
“Maltese politics is made of extremes; black and white, good or bad. To get people to realise that the scenario has changed is not easy; and in four years’ time the scenario will also be different. That’s why you cannot tie your hands saying that EU membership is so bad that we would get out as soon as we’re in government. The main argument to convince people to vote is this: the Nationalist Party was represented during negotiations. MEUSAC was a consultative body but the government always decided which position to adopt on its own; being the party in government, they’re on the Council of Ministers and in all EU institutions. So the European Parliament should be dominated by the voices of civil society, which are not represented at all. Now we have the chance to show that there are others who can make a better case for Malta, in the national interest.”
But the MLP could have promised to negotiate a better agreement, not oppose the EU outright. It had all the chance to do that but it just opposed EU membership at all costs, I insist.
“Well, Labour was stating which areas were sacred, which issues were not negotiable. To do that, Labour felt it would be better to conduct bilateral negotiations rather than multilateral. In any case, the main argument that the party should make is this: The powers of the European Parliament are limited because of several factors. Ultimately you have to be in government to make your case with other governments. Labour should use this election as a stepping stone to government. This should be the message – that the PN is not making the best case for Malta. To do that, the first step can be the European Parliament, but what is essential is to be in government.”
If elected, Dr Mintoff will end up flanking his counterparts of the Party of European Socialists with whom the MLP had a murky relationship until a year ago. Coming from a Labour yet Eurosceptic party, would he feel comfortable working with one of the most enthusiastic EP groups?
“Of course I like working with socialists, so much so I would like to be more socialist then they are,” Dr Mintoff replies. “However, their fight for social rights, the harmonisation of workers’ rights… on paper they’re excellent but in practice – for countries which are still developing, like ours – the effect of introducing all these regulations at one go will not mean more workers’ rights but jobless workers. The fundamental point for a country like ours, which is still building its economic foundations despite 40 years of independence, is our competitiveness in attracting foreign investment. The other member states took some 40 years to introduce these regulations gradually and we’re actually dismantling monopolies at the same time as they are. We need to take our time.”
This might be problematic, given the socialists’ insistence on workers’ rights and on improving the social acquis, but Dr Mintoff insists that “the worker’s most important right is the right to work”.
Jobs are a rallying call for the electorate, with both parties insisting on the need to create employment. It is difficult however to identify a leftist economic plan that could generate jobs without resorting to the infamous workers’ corps. Isn’t this a crisis of the left?
“It’s a crisis that is affecting the left the world over, Malta included,” Dr Mintoff admits.
Political ideology and analysis is perhaps Dr Mintoff’s forte. “That’s the stuff that interests me most in politics,” he says. “We do discuss these issues inside the party but if you tell me we don’t discuss them enough I would say you’re right.”
But apart from the global crisis of the left, the MLP is also suffering from the legacy left by none other than his uncle – il-Perit Dom Mintoff.
“Labour under Alfred Sant had a time-bomb called Mintoff, waiting to explode. I got so interested in politics precisely because of this time-bomb. He was the man behind Labour’s rise and downfall. It’s a contradiction which every Labourite lives with, but it’s high time we get out of it otherwise we’ll remain conditioned by him.”
Dr Mintoff says there has been no contact with his uncle “in years”.
“If I had to give him an advice – which I know he won’t heed – I would tell him to cherish the respect he enjoys and stop harming his reputation, although he has already done a lot to tarnish it.”
Meanwhile, the impression one gets is that Labour is banking on the PN’s burnout to win the next election.
“I get your point. We’re moving towards the Americanisation of politics, where image and gloss seem to be more important than substance. You have a new PN leader who was elected on the promise of continuity; there is the possibility of having Fenech Adami president, and he won’t be just a figurehead, I’m sure he’ll condition his anointed successor. Image is important, mind you, but substance is what is needed in politics. There is substance in Labour’s electoral programme of last year although it had a lot of lose ends. It was full of proposals but it lacked a common thread which could unify it into one programme.”
As to the new PN leader, Dr Mintoff believes he should be given a chance although it seems he will just preserve the status quo.
“I respect him as a person who is prim and proper. While the Nationalists try to keep their tentacles on all the sites of power, they chose the most decent person who could give a semblance of respectability to an outdated government. We have to wait and see.”
Having said that, Dr Mintoff dismisses the notion that Dr Gonzi is a centre-left politician.
“The fact that he concluded his inaugural speech quoting the party anthem, saying that ‘God is with us, so we will win again’ is far from centre-left; it’s confessional politics.”
|
