|
The day after any election in Malta, the land where politics is the biggest sport, is no ordinary day. Yesterday’s election is no exception. The election, as a result of the high gear profile stupidly unleashed by the two party mega media machines has turned into a do or die electoral test for both the two major political parties.
Exceptionally, however, it would appear that the smaller Greens and a few of the more colourful independent candidates have won much attention and indeed praise from the average electorate.
They are seeing a vote for the smaller party and indeed for one of the independents as an opportunity to dent, if not damage, the two party political systems which people are finally beginning to consider most offensive.
The political stakes for the two party leaders and their parties are high. This is Lawrence Gonzi’s first electoral test. His party fights this election without its traditional biggest electoral asset, Eddie Fenech Adami. His absence is clearly noticeable in the many strategic campaign errors committed. The obscene abortion attack on AD, the central campaign message of belonging to the biggest European grouping which failed to ignite any campaign emotion and the misuse of Net Television especially during Thursday nights’ programme will long be remembered as blunders. It is a pity that candidates with such accomplished standing should have been let down by central office.
Alfred Sant fighting yet another election after three consecutive defeats is literally fighting for his political life. Calls for his resignation are likely to become far more vociferous if he fails yet again this time round. If, however, as is possible, many a Nationalist voter tries out AD and as a result Labour surpasses the PN in first count votes, or even obtains an absolute majority, there can be little doubt that Alfred Sant will not only survive but may have placed himself in a better position to win the General election.
The MLP campaign inevitably embroiled in contradictions regarding its U-turn on Europe, focused far too much on Alfred Sant and again not sufficiently on its candidates.
The AD campaign appears to have hit a synch with the present national mood and was greatly helped by both errors on the PN side and on the credentials of its sole candidate. The mood appears to be in favour of protesting, to give the two parties a lesson. This willingness to punish is due to the feeling that the two party dominance has increased the country’s problems, with their eyeball to eyeball confrontation.
Amongst the independent candidates we cannot help but reveal our opposition to Norman Lowell’s xenophobia and extremist ideas which, if supported by close to a thousand votes in the election, will introduce a worrying novelty to local politics.
Will it be 3-2 to Labour or 3-2 to Nationalists or will it be 2-2-1? As people place their bets, today promises to be yet another television viewing marathon for most of the population. The next few days promise to be exciting they could spell the beginnings of a new way of doing politics. No longer a sport, but symbolising the confrontation of ideas. On the other hand, the result could just mean more of the same.
The revelations and the two accusations being made in regard to John Dalli, the Foreign minister, have attracted public debate and scrutiny. There can be little doubt that it is in the public interest that the alleged wrongdoing is scrutinised fairly and in full transparency. Most of all the issue, in the spirit of fair play should not be politicised. It is also of paramount importance that the issue is cleared up as quickly as possible.
The revelations concern two alleged examples of wrongdoing. The first issue raised by Dr Alfred Sant, not coincidentally on the eve of the European elections, alleges that John Dalli used his ministerial authority as minister for foreign investment, to influence a decision taken by an Iranian shipping line to award a private, not Governmental, contract to a Maltese Company, whose directors and shareholders include members of the minister’s immediate family.
This allegation, immediately denied by the minister, was also categorically denied by the Iranian shipping line. To date, there is no evidence at all that the influence took place. If and proved that there was any influence there can be little doubt that it is a resigning matter.
This in no way detracts from the fact that the setting up of such a company betrays bad judgement. It however brings into question whether members of the immediate family of a Minister are free to enter commercial contracts with private companies using the services of a Government owned entity.
It would be in the interests of all concerned if guidelines relating to correct political behaviour drawn up by The Nationalist government in the early nineties cover such situations. The Prime Minister would be well advised to re-look at these guidelines.
The second accusation, raised by The Times, not by Dr Sant, alleges that the foreign ministry is making its flight arrangements via a travel agency which is a shareholder in a Company whose directors include the Minister’s two daughters and a former driver of Mr. Dalli.
This practice is incorrect and a case of bad judgement. While in no way detracting from the seriousness of the allegation, it could be appropriate for a general analysis to take place to see if this has been a prevalent practice under all national governments both Nationalist and Labour. Yet again guidelines if not already approved at Cabinet level, regulating such matters are urgently called for.
The Prime Minister is correct to collect information, to ask for more information, if available, to be passed on to him and to ask his Minister to give a detailed report. Collating of information is necessary in the interests of fair play. The issue is far too serious to delay a decision. We are fully conscious of the difficulties this creates for the Prime Minister as he investigates his competent Minister and former political rival for the party leadership. This indeed is his baptism of fire. In fairness to John Dalli enough time and facts have come out for the Prime Minister to decide on a course of action. His delays will inevitably be interpreted as a willingness to decide only after the European party elections. This smacks of political opportunism and possibly an attempt by the Prime Minister to use the Minister and the issues involved as scapegoats should the Nationalist Party fare badly in the election.
The choice facing the Prime Minister is clear. He should either support his Minister or demand his resignation.
The choice facing the Minister that is to abide by the conclusions of an inquiry should the Prime Minister decide to call one. In all fairness, John Dalli has, on a number of occasions, stated that he has nothing to fear from an inquiry.
What is sure is that this issue needs to be cleared.
|
