Odd Timing

 21^st September 2007
The Malta Independent - Friday Wisdom

I am one of a very small number of columnists who have been regularly trying to raise public conscience on the very undesirable state of affairs that exist with regard to financing of local politics.

My latest on this subject was in this column on 6 October 2006 titled ‘Offending democracy in name of democracy’ and my earliest was in October 1990 in a speech at a Labour Party conference to commemorate its 70th anniversary. This speech was eventually published in the January-March 1991 issue of the now defunct magazine Society which at the time was edited by the current Opposition Leader.

You might think that I ought to applaud the sudden enthusiasm which seems to have rubbed on to our Prime Minister to push ahead with tangible progress on this matter even though discussions between the main parties have been frozen for years in the Galdes Report, with disagreement about the level of a quantitative threshold to apply before donations enter the realms of compulsory reporting in the interest of transparency.

My approval for putting this crucially important subject on the national agenda is however severely tempered by the timing of such initiative. On the eve of an election, when the present administration has been in office for over 20 years, nearly uninterrupted, the party in government has had ample time to collect “voluntary contributions” of questionable magnitude not only to finance the coming general elections and its successors, but also to build a super modern new headquarters.

On the contrary, Labour Party, mostly out of office for the same period, is now more than ever being perceived as a government in waiting. This is the only time when Labour has an outside chance of raising some “voluntary financing” which can enable it to run an election campaign that gives it a fighting chance to match the PN in the election communication strategy and outreach.

I cannot help feeling that the timing of the PN initiative is not motivated by a genuine desire to eliminate barriers to the true workings of the democratic system but is rather meant to blow the whistle and freeze the game at a time that will give it an unfair advantage over Labour with regards to the resources available for financing the upcoming general election.

Political party financing is a serious issue and cannot be allowed to become a tactical instrument to give a temporary advantage here and inflict a temporary disadvantage there. It needs goodwill from both sides which is unlikely to emerge at a time when we are rapidly slipping into general election campaign mode.

It is something all parties have to take head on with continuity after the next election and work out, without the pressures of an election campaign, a system that renders the political parties a transparent instrument for the execution of the democratic will of the electorate ruled by the principle that the rich and the poor, the learned and the uneducated, the blue-bloods and the mud-bloods, all have one vote each.

The political parties should stop disagreeing about the threshold beyond which there has to be total disclosure of donations. Lino Spiteri suggested that there should be no such threshold and that all contributions should be reported and put under public scrutiny to ensure that all such financing are without strings attached.

I disagree. Political contributions should not be legitimised by having them reported. There are all sorts of fronting tricks to ensure that transactions as reported do not reflect the reality of who is actually providing the financing. Contributions should be abolished, outright.

Parties should finance their operations by membership fees and commercial operations of their subsidiaries (which should be restricted to media companies to ensure that political parties do not extend their political power to other commercial areas like financial services, travel services etc.).

Commercial companies cannot by their own nature make genuine contributions with no string attached. Individuals are taxed enough by the State and should be relieved of the pressure to make regular contributions to their favoured party except through fully official and uniform membership fees.

So where would political parties get their financing from? Political parties are crucial instruments for the execution of the democratic expression of the electorate and it is sensible that they finance their operations in a controlled manner through state funding.

Whoever works for the state should be funded by the state. Any other system would unavoidably lead to confused loyalties, where those who are meant to work for the State will have to juggle through a maze of interest conflicts in trying to safeguard the interest of those who funded politicians’ way to power.

We use taxpayers’ money to finance many other services that are not commercially viable, including health, education, law and order, sports and culture. Why not include political funding in the same measure? Or are we to allow politics become a business venture in travesty of the democratic principles that should inspire it?