The first striking attribute shared by all four political party manifestos is one of style. Labour’s manifesto has the semblance of a powerpoint presentation of proposals taken from previous documents, a tendency which reflects Alfred Sant’s managerial mind-frame. The Nationalists’ is the more prosaic and visionary document.
While the MLP’s proposals dominated the agenda of the pre-electoral campaign last year, the PN has managed to steal the limelight of the campaign, not just by coming up with new proposals but also taking on board many green proposals.
On their part, Alternattiva Demokratika (AD) have come up with a document which is too short for a manifesto, and too long to set the party’s conditions for a coalition. So with the PN moving to greener pastures, and both AD and PN promising tax cuts for higher income earners, the two parties have never been closer.
And yet this ideological convergence contrasts with the bitter struggle in the middle-class heartlands between the two parties.

What’s missing?

Family matters
Not a single word is dedicated to the rights and obligations of cohabiting partners, a promise made way back in 1998 but never implemented by two consecutive PN governments. The only promise the PN is making now is to remove the last vestiges of discrimination in the inheritance laws against children born out of wedlock. Ironically it was a Gonzi-led PN government which legislated that “children born out of wedlock” only receive three-quarters of the share to which legitimate heirs are eligible.
Like the PN, the MLP shies away from controversial moral issues like divorce, cohabitation and gay partnerships but it does give a wider definition to the family by referring directly to “different family forms”.
Both parties fail to address the underlying cause behind the rising number of cohabitations; the fact that people whose first marriage failed are cohabiting with a new partner. Only the introduction of divorce will give these people the chance to remarry.
AD stands out as the only party favouring divorce, cohabitation rights and gay partnerships. The far-right Azzjoni Nazzjonali (AN) which gives the most rigid definition of the family has recently defied its own conservatism by promising the recognition of gay partnerships.
Environment
Although the PN is committed to embark on a Malta Environment and Planning Authority reform headed by the Prime Minister, it makes no commitment to remove political and government appointees from the MEPA board. Neither does the PN address the conflict of interests of architects sitting on MEPA boards, which does not appear to be part of the party’s agenda.
Despite its opposition to the extension of development schemes in 2006, the MLP makes no commitment to abrogate this measure by an appropriate parliamentary resolution. On the other hand AD is making the abrogation of the extension of building zones a condition for any coalition with either parties.
Both parties give no indication on whether incineration will be considered as a waste management option. No reference is made by the PN on the location of the two other recycling plants set to be developed in Gozo and the north of Malta.
As regards spring hunting, neither the PN nor the MLP would declare a political stance. Yet both agree that Malta should bow to EU law and its interpretation by the European Court of Justice. Once again, AD is the only party to make a clear political statement against hunting in spring.
The PN manifesto commits the party to help band clubs and feast committees but makes no reference to the need to regulate fireworks factories which have left a number of causalities in the past years. Needless to say Labour is also silent on this.

Referenda
The two big parties refrain from proposing any changes in the country’s institutional set up. AN stands out as the only party proposing an elected presidency a council of state and the reduction of the number of MPs from 65 to 55. Both AD and AN favour the use of referenda, with AD going as far as proposing referenda on planning permits requiring an environmental impact assessment. While this proposal represents the ultimate democratisation of planning decisions, it could also result in a triumph of NIMBYism which could put spokes in the wheels of socially useful projects.

Integration
In its manifesto the PN squarely condemns xenophobia and racism. But this commitment is not matched by any reference to an integration policy which would preclude the creation of ghettoes of asylum seekers and refugees who stay here for a long time. It just promises a quick repatriation of illegal immigrants.
The same applies to the MLP which simply calls for a “fair deal” on immigration from Europe.
Surprisingly AD completely avoids the question of immigration in its coalition manifesto although the party has consistently defended immigrants’ rights during the past years.
AN stands out by calling for the closure of open centres – a measure which poses a legal quandary because EU law limits detention to a maximum of 18 months for failed asylum seekers and 12 months for asylum seekers. This would mean either that AN wants to infringe EU law or that they want to create an underclass of homeless migrants.
Curiously, despite a vehement opposition towards multiculturalism in its manifesto, AN favours the importation of foreign workers where they are needed.

Better late than never
With a baggage of 20 years in government the PN’s manifesto is full of proposals which were neglected by previous PN-led administrations. An example is its proposal to enforce energy saving regulations in buildings. A legal notice issued two years ago was never enforced by the Ministry for Resources and Infrastructure.
The PN is also promising to set up a board responsible for the health and safety of workers and residents living next to construction sites. The PN manifesto does not say that a set of building regulations, aimed at addressing health and safety issues on construction sites, is still in draft form three years after being tabled in parliament in 2004.
One of the pillars of the PN’s promised MEPA reform is strengthening enforcement. At present there are only 31 enforcement officers in MEPA. In Gozo there are only four MEPA enforcement officers in Gozo to keep track of 1,503 pending enforcements, and to detect new illegalities.
The PN also promises to enforce the centenarian law requiring every building to have a well to collect rainwater. Four years after issuing a draft water policy to protect Malta’s groundwater, the government is now promising a “gradual clampdown” on illegal boreholes.
Rent reform is another long neglected theme resurrected in the PN manifesto. Back in November 2006 Minister Dolores Cristina had presented her final proposals on rent reform to Cabinet. Since then, nothing happened. The PN now promises a rent reform which protects tenants were necessary while doing justice to landlords. In the meantime the PN promised to exempt landlords from paying income tax on the meager rents they receive.
Rent reform remains a priority for AD despite its failure to force a referendum on this issue after failing to get 30,000 signatures for an abrogative referendum. Wary of the social implications of complete liberalisation of this sector, the greens are now advocating a more gradualist approach ruling out the eviction of elderly persons which according to the census, constitute the majority of tenants in rent controlled properties.
But AD is the only party proposing an immediate halt to the inheritance of rent controlled properties by the sons and daughters of present tenants. AD couples this proposal with 0.5% tax on the declared value of secondary properties which are kept out of the rental market, promising to use these funds to subsidies the rents of poor tenants. AD makes it a point to exclude holiday homes from the tax regime.

Labour’s green deficit
Unlike PN and AD, whose discourse intertwines sustainable development with other social and economic issues, the MLP addresses the environment as a specific topic in isolation from the rest of its proposals.
By halving the surcharge the Labour party would give a respite to the lower-middle class which does not benefit from current exemptions which benefit 30,000 low-income earners.
Yet by cutting the surcharge by half for everyone irrespective of consumption patterns, Labour risks sending the wrong message to consumers. AD’s more sensible reform promises to reduce the surcharge for those who do not waste.
The MLP seems to have lost any hope of winning the middle-class environmentalist vote with environmental proposals that are too generic and lacking the vision contained in AD and PN’s manifestos. While golf courses and land reclamation have evaporated from the PN’s agenda, the MLP is promising two golf courses one in Malta and one in Gozo. The MLP is also proposing a yacht marina in Gozo.
Labour is also promising to set targets which set the time limit for the approval of certain projects. While this could serve to reduce red tape this measure could be used to fast-track environmentally sensitive projects which require multi-seasonal studies.
In contrast to the MLP and in direct competition with AD, the PN is making a number of environmentally sustainable proposals. Substituting the registration tax on cars with a tax on carbon emissions makes a lot of ecological sense.
The same party which once defended development in Ramla l-Hamra on the premise that the site was already developed, is now promising to set up a fund for the countryside through which spoiled land outside developments zones would be bought back by the state and rehabilitated. Where the vast amount of money to do this will come, from remains a mystery.
And through green procurement the government promises to give weight to environmental considerations when issuing tenders for the private sector.

So far, so vague…

The Dockyards
Both parties are very vague on what will happen to the dockyard after the end of the current year when subsidies to this aid-dependent industry are stopped by EU law. The PN promises “to continue the restructuring of the yards to make them viable according to the agreements signed with the European Union.”
In a similar vein the MLP promises to make every effort “within European Union structures” to make the Dockyards among the best in the Mediterranean.
But it is still unclear how all this can be achieved in absence of state subsidies. Labour also vaguely promises that within six months it will decrease the tax burden on tourism without saying how and by how much.
Surprisingly Azzjoni Nazzjonali, the party which is dead set against state intervention, is the only party to ask in its manifesto “what will happen to the dockyard after 2008 when the government will no longer be able to subsidise it?” Without giving a reply the party warns against the sale of the dockyard to foreigners.

Education
According to the PN the new system of educational colleges will ensure “a smooth transition from kinder and primary to secondary level based on a system of continuous assessment and benchmarking exams.
This leaves us guessing whether the PN will remove the 11-plus examination which labels 40% of our students as failures.
The MLP’s manifesto does not even mention educational colleges, a reform which will allow students to remain in the same school network from primary to secondary level. It is proposing the introduction of a reception class without committing itself to raise the school leaving age to 17. By doing, the MLP keeps its options open.
Surprisingly such an innocuous proposal which simply seeks to facilitate the transition from kindergarten to primary level has ended up as the most vilified MLP proposal, with the PN exploiting a very negative Maltese trait which – apart from traditionally putting pressure on kids to achieve results as fast as possible – views an extra year in school as a wasted one.
Surprisingly, education fails to get a mention in AD’s coalition manifesto – a significant shortcoming considering that the Greens are the only party opposed to streaming both within and between schools.

Blurring the ideological lines
Defying its bias in favour of privatisations, PN now promises to keep Air Malta under state ownership. It also seems to be re-assessing its labour market policies which led to the creation of precarious jobs. The PN is promising to make the practice of employing staff as self-employed workers (to avoid paying for benefits and leave practice) illegal.
The PN has also endorsed the GWU proposal through which the state will take employment conditions in consideration when assessing bids for state contracts.
Defying its traditional aversion to price controls the PN even promises that “medicine prices will be controlled and where necessary reduced.”
Labour also promises to control the cost of living but only by “strengthening mechanisms controlling abuses in the free market.” This shows an ideological shift from old Labour’s policy of price controls, to a modern mechanism aimed at protecting the consumer while retaining the benefits of choice. Significantly Labour promises “to scrutinise private and public monopolies, duopolies and oligopolies.” Yet it falls short of saying which sectors should be liberalised.
Despite its commitment towards liberalisation, the PN fails to call for the liberalisation of public transport, taxis and other sectors dominated by private monopolies. AD is the only party to favour these liberalisations.
On its part, AD’s proposal to decrease the 35% tax rate to 25% represents a clear shift in the party’s policy to accommodate its higher-middle class constituency. The party promises to offset any loss in revenue by raising taxes on banks to 40%.
The MLP is promising to set up a task force headed by “leaders of industry” whose aim would be that of creating 2,000 new places of work in industry. This task force will be responsible for “strengthening competitivity.” One wonders what the unions will say if the so-called “leaders of industry” come up with proposals to raise productivity at the cost of labour conditions.
The Labour party retains an edge over the other parties when it comes to gender issues. The Labour party is the only party proposing affirmative action as a way to make up for the historic imbalance between the genders in the country’s administration. Under a future Labour government 35% of those appointed in government boards and commissions and 30% of civil service executives will be women.
The MLP also is committed to subsidise childcare centres and “shared mothering” schemes to make them affordable. Yet when it comes to maternity leave the most daring proposal is made by the Greens, who promise to extend paid maternity leave from 13 to 26 weeks with the government paying the cost.

Costing promises
Only months before the campaign started, the PN had costed the MLP’s proposal of halving the surcharge, subsidies for first-time property buyers and eliminating taxation on overtime at an astronomic at Lm115 million. But the PN has not made an effort to cost its own proposal to decrease the maximum income tax rate for those earning less than €60,000 from 35% to 25%. The PN simply states that after two years, the government will be increasing its tax revenue despite the decrease in taxation.
While promising to remove taxes on overtime and giving a guarantee that all overtime will be paid at present rates, the MLP vaguely states: “that it will see that nobody will abuse this measure.” At no point does the MLP state how these abuses will be controlled even if deputy leader Micheal Falzon had hinted that overtime can be calculated as a percentage of the wage packet.
The PN also intends to remove TV licence fees – a source of revenue for non-commercial broadcasting. This is a clear sign that public broadcasting under ‘GonziPN’ is set to remain commercially rather than socially driven.
In contrast to the other parties AD has costed its tax reduction at €22 million and its proposal to extend maternity leave at €7 million.
AN promises the most radical shake up of public finances with a flat-rate taxation system of 18% irrespective of income differences. The party does not even attempt to cost their proposal.

Crossing the lines
Of all four parties only Azzjoni Nazzjonali manages to insult a whole category of people in its manifesto.
“We have accepted as normal members of society criminals, drug addicts, single parents, couples clamouring for divorce after separating after the first marital troubles, abortion, and the majority of youths who cannot enjoy themselves without sex, alcohol and drugs. And the honest citizen is expected to pay for these choices.”
This paragraph taken verbatim from AN’s manifesto sums up the party’s retrograde message which despises modernity and yearns for the restoration of an imaginary social order based on a blind respect for authority.