The leadership contest in the Malta Labour Party is all a question of trust: it is not the contenders’ manifesto that is important but their commitment to put their manifesto into action. We all recall how the previous leader Dr Sant promised heaven on earth in every leadership contest but then such promises all fell on deaf ears. One of these promises, I recall, was the publication of a newspaper in English, and the rest is history.
The procedure is still the name: every candidate has his or her own manifesto to which they stick until they achieve their goal; but such manifestos always fail to include the commitments to put into action such promises, and to inform the supporters and the delegates, from time to time, to what extent this manifesto has been implemented.
Love me or hate me but I cannot but echo what the man in the street is saying: how come most of the candidates had to wait 20 years in opposition to come up with proposals for a radical change in the party? Where were they in all these years? Were they in the core of the party or were they just observers? If they were in the inner circle, how come they did nothing to change things to save the party from another electoral defeat? And if they were demoted to just observers, how do they have the audacity to face delegates and Labourites with their programme for change, when they had all the time in the world to make the change but for one reason or another they failed?
It is therefore no surprise that many of us in the outer circle of the Malta Labour Party are asking how these people, this time round, can conduct the change that is needed in the party. Or is this just another electoral spin which will stop once the leadership contest is over? Labour cannot afford another electoral defeat and every contestant has to assure us the commitment to apply the manifesto to the letter.

People tend to have short memories but it will not be amiss to audit the manifestos of the Dr Alfred Sant, Dr Michael Falzon and Dr Charles Mangion triumvirate when they were elected to the helm of the party. Does anyone remember any of them mentioning their manifesto after they were elected, or does anyone recall any implementation of their manifestos? I am sure that you do not because it seems that such documents are only valid until the election result and after that it seems that there is only one place for them: the wastepaper basket.
No wonder that this time round the party cannot afford to make the same mistakes, and that this leadership contest is not just the election of the party leader but the election of the future Prime Minister of this country. The scope of the Opposition is not to remain in Opposition but to govern this country.

It is natural therefore that we would ask for assurances that whoever is elected from the present set-up practices his or her manifesto. I am not surprised that none except Dr George Abela has promised an internal audit on the party finances. I am not surprised at all, because those within Hamrun know that they cannot point any fingers towards any mismanagement, as it will rebound on them, and the question will always remain: where were you in the last 20 years?
We all know how most of them did not have the courage to take a stand when Dr Sant was in power for fear of being isolated and boycotted by the party machinery, thus losing their seat in Parliament and in the administration. We know how they allied with Sant because it was only through this alliance that they secured their hot seat.
How can the same people now come forward and without any regrets, and without having the courage to say sorry to those Labourites who are sorry and hurt to this day about their party’s third consecutive defeat? They expect the electorate to forget the past and trust them this time that they will be the catalyst for the change that is needed in the party.

And let us be honest: they are saying what we have been saying for the past 10 years since the 1998 defeat. They are saying what the outer circle of the party has been hammering on for the past decade, but who were branded as “traitors” when they stimulated the same ideas. But all in all we are glad that they have finally seen the light and hopefully their manifesto will not be another occasion for mere bluff.
Dr Alfred Sant is still there: at least as Leader of the Opposition. And it is quite worrying how none of the contestants have asked the party machinery whether Dr Sant will resign from Leader of the Opposition once the leader of the party is elected. How is the system going to work? Will Labour have a leader of the party and a separate leader of the Opposition? Rumour has it that this arrangement goes down quite well with some of the candidates and if so, they must come forward so that the voters in the leadership contest will have a full view of the whole situation.
They all know who can save the Malta Labour Party, but they are afraid that if this happens they themselves will not be saved. This is the whole crux of the problem with Labour: who is to come first, the love for the party or the love for the seat? So far the party machinery has worked for the latter option, and we all know the results. If they want to continue with this pattern, they might as well go ahead but they cannot expect the Labourites to continue to remain happy in opposition.
The ball is in their court!