Lapsed Promises

The Malta Independent



To justify not giving a mere second reading to Labour`s proposal for holding a post-election referendum, the Prime Minister cited the argument that he is committed by the 1998 electoral manifesto to hold a referendum as soon as negotiations are completed.` Not holding the referendum on this side of the election would be breaking an electoral promise which according to the Prime Minister is unthinkable.

Forget for a moment the innumerable instances where electoral promises were not delivered and this without exhibiting similar compunction. From the last manifesto I could mention for example, promise number 15 to remove residential restrictions for local council elections, promise number 16 for establishing a method how to elect mayors, promise 20 for Gozo to benefit as a separate region from EU assistance, promise 21 for` a University branch in Gozo, promise 39 to keep food and medicine items free of consumption taxes, promise 41 to set up an autonomous statistical institute, promise 42 to keep government debt within 60% of GDP, promise 43 to bring the public deficit down to within 3% of GDP, promise 46 to use privatisation proceeds to reduce government debt and not to accumulate further debt, promise 49 to build an Arts Centre instead of the derelict national theatre at City Gate, promise 52 to build infrastructural connection between the two Valletta harbours, promise 53 to develop Fort St Angelo, promise 55 to develop and up-grade our roads through easy EU funding, promise 86 not to change present regulations for hunting and bird trapping, promise 122` to extend tourism TOSS scheme to all markets, and on and on and on.

`according to our Prime Minister whilst we should overlook the fact that so many electoral promises ... should be overlooked, he just cannot be expected to overlook this referendum promise` However it is true that promise number 228 says explicitly that after conclusion of negotiations for EU membership a Referendum will be held so that the electorate with a specific vote will decide whether or not to join the EU in membership.

So according to our Prime Minister whilst we should overlook the fact that so many electoral promises, and other pledges made during the 1998 campaign like the famous cool hundred million EU funds per annum, should be overlooked, he just cannot be expected to overlook this referendum promise and he is determined to hold the referendum imminently and certainly before the next general elections.

If one flashes back momentarily to the summer of 1998 when all these promises were scripted, one would recall that at the time the EU enlargement date was being prospected as 1st January 2003. So promise number 288 cannot be seen in isolation.` It forms part of a promise to negotiate and proceed to membership within the term of this legislature with the proviso that the final terms of accession are approved by a specific referendum. `The referendum pledge per se is therefore expired as the government has no longer the faculty of execution it had projected for itself when the manifesto was made.`

Now as it so happens, and certainly without any demerits of this government, the enlargement date has slipped into next legislature.` The faculty to execute the negotiated terms is missing. The referendum pledge per se is therefore expired as the government has no longer the faculty of execution it had projected for itself when the manifesto was made.

A consultative referendum on this side of the election fails the basic ingredient of the faculty of execution.` It becomes a mere political tool whereas it is intended to be a national above politics consultation process.` Labour`s proposal to hold an immediate post-election referendum, is not only sensible but fully within the spirit of the promise 228 which is being invoked to justify the unjustifiable.

Labour has always maintained that a referendum binds the government that holds it (and hence also a future Labour government that offers to hold a referendum) and has further offered to bind the opposition in case of a 60% endorsement.

Yet it is so convenient for the government to invoke lapsed electoral promises whilst liberally neglecting still relevant ones. The national interest can wait.