|
Pajjiz mhux partit, ‘Country not Party’ is an appropriate slogan coined by the Greens. It does not reflect, however the trend so far in elections. Perhaps this election will turn out to be different.
In this election, this newspaper has attempted to offer all the candidates the opportunity to express themselves.
We would like to believe that the interests of each and every voter are primarily the quality of the candidate.
If that is to be the measuring stick, then surely some candidates outshine others in their potential as thinkers and representatives of the people of Malta.
From an electoral point of view, the campaigns of Simon Busuttil, Joseph Muscat and John Attard Montalto come tops. From a political standpoint the points have to be awarded to other candidates for the arguments and point of views they have put forward.
In the Nationalist camp, Joe Friggieri offered a breath of fresh air. An academic who chose to offer a new perspective to discussing politics and suggesting that in the European Parliament it is ideas that count most.
Another PN candidate with a positive and a down-to-earth approach is Dr Ian Spiteri Bailey. He also refused to get lost in partisan debates and appeared strong on the technical aspects of the EU.
From the Labour trenches, Louis Grech scored many points. True, he has suffered for some decisions taken in the past at Air Malta. He is one of the few candidates who has experience in a commercial company and someone who insists on promoting the middle-of-the-road image.
Last, but not least, is Arnold Cassola, who may make a breakthrough in this election. He is the only candidate with first hand experience of the European parliament. His election, if it does happen, will also open new avenues to Malta’s third party.
There are other valid candidates who cannot be discarded such as veteran Michael Falzon and Wenzu Mintoff.
The final choice remains a personal one. A combination of the better candidate and the best for the country should be a priority for all voters.
In the last few weeks, we have witnessed various instances where inquiries have been called for or should have been called for. The case of the repatriated Eritreans, the allegations of influence on the decision related to Iran’s national shipping company, and the need to hold an inquiry into the disaster at St Paul’s Bay.
These issues and others call for an agreed policy and responsible ethic about what constitutes an inquiry.
Are we to have an inquiry with every allegation or incident?
Who is to decide on an inquiry, who is to serve as the judge and jury on an inquiry and what are the repercussions and ramifications from the conclusions of any inquiry?
These are urgent matters that need to be agreed to between all the partners – in politics, in the media, in civil society and the public at large.
The issue is a tricky one but we need to have some direction, fast.
|
