Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/621909
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 3 JANUARY 2016 News 7 Politics Muscat had trusted Falzon to serve in the most sensitive of posts. Moreover it also raises the question of why Muscat had to wait for so long before taking a decision on what to do with Falzon. Still, taking decisive action on Falzon may give Muscat the chance to show that he means business and that none of his cabinet mem- bers has a perpetual lease on power. One option for Muscat would be that of standing by his min- isters facing allegations, as Eddie Fenech Adami and Lawrence Gonzi did in most cases. The party has done so already in the case of Ian Borg, in the safety of a corruption commission report which endorsed the ombudsman's damning report but found no evidence of corruption. The party has also defended its Marsaskala mayor, who despite admitting to soliciting a premises for the council from Sadeen, was cleared by a governance board whose members include notorious Lorry Sant aide Ronnie Pelligrini. But if he stands by Falzon, Muscat risks misjudging the mood of the country, which has grown less tolerant of blatant abuse. In fact Falzon may be useful in giving the country its pound of flesh. By sacrificing Falzon, Muscat may well buy his own redemption. Does it pay to be honest? One question lingers, whether good governance is enough of an issue to dent Muscat's hold on power before the next election. One may even conclude that good governance on its own may come at a loss. This may explain Muscat's reluctance to address long standing issues such as the occupation of public land at Armier, an issue which may well cost Busuttil votes following his decision to re- scind his party's past agreements with the Armier lobby. In planning Muscat may even be expecting the dividends of plan- ning policies which may have opened the flood gates for ODZ de- velopments but have led to an appreciation in the value of derelict properties. Moreover, by accommodating lobbies like developers who were traditionally closer to the PN and forcing the latter to take a stance, which further alienated the opposition from these lobbies, Muscat may have secured essential support in winning the next election. For one thing has to be recognised: Muscat's policies have also benefitted commercial groups traditionally closer to the PN who may now feel safer with Labour in power. Sandro Chetcuti's in- vitation to his fellow brethren to make hay while the sun shines may send shivers down the spines of environmentalists but may signal a dramatic realignment in the political system, with Labour repositioning itself to the right of the Nationalist Party. The downside of this is the creeping perception of oligarchy, from which some may already be feeling left out or not included enough. For while Gonzi's main problem was saying to many nays and a few big notable yeses to the few, which made the excluded angrier, Muscat's main problem may be that his many yeses will be never enough to satiate everyone, especially if the appetite of speculators and rent seekers continues to grow unabated. Added to this is the inevitable alienation of the traditional La- bour voter and switchers who truly believed in the Taghna Ilkoll pledge and who harbour an aversion to big business. Muscat may well feel safe in the knowledge that Labour core voters may be disgruntled but will never cross the Rubicon, and that it may take more than one election for the PN to be trusted again in govern- ment by switchers who left it in 2013. Feel-good versus good governance Muscat may also bank on the feel-good factor generated by eco- nomic growth to cross out any misgivings on his style of govern- ance. So far Muscat has proved himself as a very capable manager of a capitalist economy. Moreover, unlike Alfred Sant he projects optimism and hope in a prosperous future. Not only has he defied the doomsday sce- nario evoked by Simon Busuttil before the 2013 election (when he warned that Malta risked a bailout under Muscat) and retained the economic stability of the Gonzi years, but he has banked on accelerated economic growth triggered by a state-induced con- struction boom. He has also used some of the monies in sustainable social invest- ment in universal childcare services. But this ignores the impact of bad governance and dependence on construction and the exploitation of foreign cheap labour on the long-term fortunes of the economy and social well being. The sudden economic collapse of countries like Spain (after a decade of property bubble which burst on former Socialist leader Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero's watch) and Greece (which was acclaimed as an economic success story when it was hosting the Olympic games in 2004) stand as reminders of how cronyism and political patronage weigh down on the economy, even after bursts of ap- parent growth mostly triggered by speculation and trickle down illusions. Moreover, attracting big Middle Eastern and central Asian money may be the sign of a confident globalism but in the ab- sence of good governance this may also accelerate the descent in good governance standards of countries where businesses are all too familiar with cronyism. When handpicked in the absence of public tenders, such businesses may well seek the same treatment from the Maltese government in what could become a race to the bottom. The PN is right on good governance. But will Labour's economic success drown out their din? MATTHEW VELLA I'm a supporter of the PN's good governance pledge but I am also aware that Labour voters are finding it hard to be lectured on politi- cal morality by the successors of the Gonzi administration. Simon Busuttil is keen on telling people his new broom sweeps clean. But others will be quick to tell him that his old brush knows the corners. Or that he was at the heart of Gonzi's political engine-room when he captained the 2009 European election campaign and when he authored the 2013 general election mani- festo, during which he campaigned as deputy leader. He attempted a cosmetic reshuffle to push veterans onto the backbenches, amongst them eight former ministers (one resigned to be an independent MP, while yet an- other left the House only to make way for another former minister to be re-elected by casual election). So for all intents and purposes, Labour voters cannot fathom why the PN's good governance pledge – a pack- age of 109 proposals to fix the leakages of the Maltese po- litical system – should command their attention now. In part, the problem lies with history. 25 years of Nation- alist administration saw egregious abuses of governance, planning rules, and environmental neglect. Those who will make the effort to remember will easily conjure the 2006 extension of development zones, the largesse to construction magnates like Charles Polidano 'ic-Caqnu' from the planning authority, the way Gonzi gave his Cabinet a 'secretive' pay rise at the height of the financial crisis, the abuse of public procurement rules through the use of direct orders, or finally the Enemalta oil scandal of 2013. Busuttil will easily admit to these historical errors but wants to exhort voters to look beyond the Gonzi admin- istration and believe in him as an agent of change. But the polls put Muscat ahead of Busuttil by 11 points in the MaltaToday trust barometer (October 2015), even though "undecided" voters are on the rise and Busuttil's small gains are closing the wide gap. And this takes us to the next group of voters, who were sympathetic about the change in administration in 2013 but are questioning how fast Labour has been in jettison- ing any pretence at being a model of good governance. In its current 'party of state' mode, the monolithic Labour Party sees nothing wrong in mirroring the way former Na- tionalist administrations poured out munificence to its own activists and cronies. This surprised cautious 'switch- ers' and floating voters – those who profess no blind loy- alty to either party but believe in politicians living up to their end of the bargain – who might not want to abandon Labour by voting for the PN again (as that would imply voting for Gonzi's heirs), not after having invested in ef- fecting a 'much-needed change' in Maltese politics. While some former PN voters who did the unthinkable in 2013 may find it easy to return to the PN, many of these voters have no time to think of alternatives to the two- party model (the Greens are at their lowest ebb in terms of historical polls). A sizeable chunk believe their trust in Muscat is reaping its benefits in terms of economic growth, domestic con- sumption, business environment, tourism numbers, and in a few years' time, the windfall from the sale of golden passports to the global rich. Even though the foundation of his above-eurozone-average performance lies in the cautious stewardship of PN administrations during the 2008-2009 crisis, it is to the victor that the spoils go. They also see certain deliverables that are changing society as we speak: free childcare put mothers back into the workplace and saved young families thousands in cash; energy bills were cut ahead of the switchover to LNG; Malta ran to pole position on gay rights, legislating for civil unions and gender identity laws; and in spite of its shortcomings, Labour introduced a Whistleblower's Act, removed time-barring on political corruption, and a political financing law. On the other hand, power has sat uncomfortably on La- bour's shoulders and this jars with voters who see through the Potemkin village of 'meritocracy and transparency'. Hundreds of political appointments were made that were not necessarily based on competence but on a 'trust basis' (in some regards, this is a necessary act of governmental administration); the press has been awash with reports of cronyist arrogance; and Muscat has been forced to bleed his Cabinet of various ministers (more could be yet to come in 2016). Recent news that Muscat's wife is a con- ciliatory mediator for army personnel in disputes with the top army brass has conjured up Peronist allusions. Simon Busuttil's good governance package effectively throws a spanner in the works: it asks critical voters to re- appraise Muscat. Even some of Labour's inner core are aware that they have been caught napping, but now they are also growing tired of the monkeys throwing peanuts at them. Like the Nationalists before them, they will grow tired of all this good governance guff and demand they be just 'left alone to do our job'. "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time," wrote F. Scott Fitzgerald. Those voters trying to make head or tail of Labour's opposing directions on governance and eco- nomic progress might be the brainiest of the lot. Come 2018, or even maybe 2017, Muscat could be set to win re-election by voters who – weary though they may be of the governance quagmire bogging down Labour's goodwill – still believe this administration is energetic enough to keep the economic motor running smooth. They include voters – mainly from the world of entrepre- neurial self-reliance – who benefited under the PN's net- work of patronage and found a new home under Labour, and wanting to milk the political machine for as long as it keeps giving. Even Busuttil knows that Maltese voters tend to give short shrift to good governance when the good times are rolling. They will vote by the same principle that kept so many Nationalist administrations in power: proven com- petence as against untrustworthy pretenders. Politics