Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/260953
12 BEING in Opposition is tradition- ally perceived as easier than being in government. Yet the party in Op- position is currently facing tough times. Still reeling from a stinging electoral defeat last March, the PN has awoken to the fact that it faces a distinctly uphill struggle to re- gain political strength for the next electoral appointment, and that its own finances are far from being on a solid foundation. And mindful of its recent (considerable) internal dissension problems, it has em- barked on a process to 'update' its structures to cope with these new realities. Francis Zammit Dimech, a former contender for the leadership, was entrusted with overseeing this re- form: a task which he describes as "a great honour"... even though, by his own description, it also sounds like a heck of a lot of work. It tran- spires that the PN's structures are little short of gargantuan: meet- ings were held with party council- lors on a district-by-district basis; the various sectional committees and other hives of party activists; the executive council and its many branches; a youth movement; a women's movement; a workers' movement… "And we also had meetings with people outside the party, to get a fresh perspective," Zammit Di- mech adds cheerfully, reclining in a leather-bound armchair in his spacious legal office on Republic Street (right underneath a portrait of himself in exactly the same po- sition, which creates an uncanny double-vision effect). All this places the former envi- ronment minister – himself one of the longest serving PN MPs, hav- ing been returned to Parliament in every election since 1987 – in an ideal position to comment on what the actual cause of the PN's evident internal disenchantment is all about. What emerged from all those meetings, anyway? "If there is a common thread in the feedback, it is that they all insist that the party remain in closer con- tact with the grassroots. To listen more, and to be there for them…" Another way of looking at it is that grassroots complaints also add up to an indictment of the former leadership – of which the present leadership appears to be a continu- ation. Even Zammit Dimech's own proposed revisions to the statute seem to indicate this: foremost among the proposals is a widening of the pool of voters to decide the party leadership. The last two times the PN gen- eral council convened to elect a new leader, there were similar calls for the electoral process to be opened up to all card-holding party members, instead of the more eas- ily-controlled 900 members of the executive council. Isn't this also an admission that the party grass- roots may be dissatisfied with the past two choices of leader? And wouldn't even the demands for more consultation also be a reflec- tion of the quality of leadership of the PN in recent years? Zammit Dimech shakes his head. "Don't forget that the person most keen on conducting this reform [in direct reference to the exten- sion of the leadership election base] was Simon Busuttil himself. I think the overall message em- phasised a need for change. At all levels, people feel that the party structures needed to go through a process of rejuvenation. What the results of our exercise reflect is a wish to be more involved in that process… not dissatisfaction with the leadership." To drive this point home he adds that many of the party of- ficials also expressed support for both Busuttil and former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi. "Many made it clear they would have made the same choice, both in the case of Gonzi and Busuttil. It was evident that they were satis- fied with the choice of the party councillors on both occasions. That also includes myself." And yet, Francis Zammit Di- mech was himself a contender for the leadership in 2008. Does this mean he also approves the fact that he was rejected by the party council? "I took no offence at that," he replies genially, reminding me that he had withdrawn from the contest before the final stages and had backed Gonzi in the fi- nal round. "I think it is obvious that the real choice was between Lawrence Gonzi and John Dalli. The feedback we got from meet- ings was that they [party officials at all levels] perceived Gonzi as the better choice. They are not saying they would not have cho- sen Gonzi… just that they would have preferred to be part of the decision-making process." At the same time there seems to be a divergence between the stated aims of the party reform, and the modus operandi of a par- ty that does not seem very keen to listen to different opinions. Zammit Dimech is also a candi- date for the European Parliament Election next May. The first un- official salvoes of the campaign have already been fired, and one of the effects was a media ban im- posed by the Nationalist Party on one of its own candidates, Kevin Plumpton, over his public com- ments regarding the revised Indi- vidual Investor Programme. In brief, Plumpton posted an online comment to the effect that the PN should support the revised scheme, even though the party was still in the process of seeking to challenge it on legal grounds. As a result he was chastised by the party and denied space on its media. How does one reconcile this with the fact that Nationalist Par- ty officials all agree that the party needs to listen more? Zammit Dimech however de- nies that Plumpton was unduly chastised for speaking his mind. "You will appreciate what we went through before the last election" – a reference to multiple back- bencher revolts that ultimately cost the government its majority in parliament – "As a result we are now more conscious of what we say about issues where the party has taken a stand… once a decision is taken, we must all abide by it." All the same it seems rather harsh on Plumpton, whose comments were after all echoed by PN leader Busuttil himself a little later. Like the young MEP candidate, Busut- til also claimed victory over the amendments imposed by the Euro- pean Commission to the IIP scheme. From this perspective it doesn't even look like Plumpton was singing from a different hymn book… Zammit Dimech agrees that he wasn't. "If you go back to the par- liamentary debate last October, you will remember that government had rejected a number of amend- ments put forward by the Opposi- tion. These were all later reflected in amendments to the scheme, to bring it in line with what we had suggested all along." But all is fair in love, war and Eu- ropean parliament elections, and Zammit Dimech hints that "being right", on its own, is not always enough. "Kevin Plumpton was right that the scheme now reflects the basic demands of the PN. But the way a single sentence was taken out of con- text by the Labour media also shows how careful you must be when mak- ing that kind of statement. We need to be sure of what we state on any issue, not only in its totality but also in all its component parts." So if I've understood correctly, people are still free to speak their minds in the PN. They just have to be very careful what they say… "They have to be careful that what they say is not used against the par- ty. But in principle, all party mem- bers are free to express their views. That includes Plumpton too. He re- mains a PN candidate." But he has been blocked from the party media just before the onset of an election. Isn't that the equivalent of telling the electorate not to vote for him? "Not at all. If that's what the party wanted to say, it would have re- moved him from the list of candi- dates. In fact there were people who wanted him out of the race altogeth- er. But that's not what happened." In a sense the entire episode also touches on a subject that will short- ly be very topical: the European Parliament. Plumpton's comments are framed against the backdrop of a curiously anti-climactic example of the EP in action. Last month the parliament voted overwhelmingly in favour of a resolution criticising Malta's sale of passports scheme. This prompted intervention by the European Commission: and the up- shot was an amendment which sud- denly made the same scheme not only legitimate, but also endorsed by the Commission. You could argue, then, that the European Parliamentary resolution not only failed to halt the sale of Maltese citizenship, as planned… but facilitated it to a considerable degree. Given that we will soon be called to elect MEPs, isn't this also an illustration of how powerless and ineffective the entire institution re- ally is? Zammit Dimech however contests that the amendment forced by the Commission was in any way minor or cosmetic. "There are fundamen- tal differences in our interpreta- tions of what happened. And I don't think the EP resolution was ineffec- tive. Had the EP vote not occurred the Commission would not have acted." Perhaps, but the Commission's action fell far short of expectation, considering that the EP resolution also urged Malta to withdraw the scheme altogether… "We disagree on this too. I think the amendments forced by the Com- mission constitute a major change… in fact they are so significant and ef- fective that government is already to trying to dishonour its agreement with the Commission." Interview By Raphael Vassallo PLUMPTON- GATE You will appreciate what we went through before the last election… as a result we are now more conscious of what we say about issues where the party has taken a stand EC AGREEMENT These are the terms of the agreement with the European Commission. Is government being honest and implementing the terms in full? Or will Joseph Muscat fudge this agreement as well? Picking up the pieces