Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/646116
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2016 15 "Let me put forward different scenarios… I'm not saying I neces- sarily agree with them, but there are different ways of looking at this. Take the Nationalist Party. Yes, if Labour is outvoted, it would mean a Nationalist government, all other things being equal. Now, if the Nationalists are in power, they might do the same thing and get outvoted again… in which case, we'll have the pendulum effect you describe. However… and I have absolutely no brief for the PN… Si- mon Busuttil did something which I think is rather positive, by putting forward a package of good govern- ance proposals. You might say it's a bunch of hogwash, or a load of spin… but my hunch is that the PN would introduce such policies to be as watertight as possible…" But the same could be said for Labour's 'Taghna Lkoll' motif. It's easy to make those proposals in opposition. There is certainly no guarantee that Busuttil's good gov- ernance promise will not go down the same road as Muscat's 'meri- toccracy' pledge… "In that case, the two-party logic dictates that the pendulum will swing back to Labour again. But things are not necessarily restrict- ed to a two-party logic. For exam- ple: local council elections cannot be compared to general elections, but people do vote for other par- ties at that level. I myself was elected to the Sliema local council four times; the same goes for [AD candidate] Ralph Cassar in At- tard. The mechanisms are there to move out of the two-party system. Whether people want to do that or not is another question. What you or I may want is not the issue here. Many people want to retain the two-party system…" This brings us to another dimen- sion. Ultimately, politics is a ques- tion of demand and supply. If the popular will is precisely to main- tain the two-party system… out of a national culture of pique, per- haps, or because of the perks asso- ciated with having 'your' party in power, etc. – where does that leave parties like AD, which are trying to break the mould? "Let's tackle the demand first; we can talk about supply – i.e., what the parties are offering – later. There are many different catego- ries of voters. We talk of 'switch- ers' and 'floaters', for instance. These are social constructs; it's a question of terminology… but 'switchers' are roughly those voters who switch between parties on the basis of which could offer them the best 'deal'. A floating voter, on the other hand, will not have a prefer- ence, but might be swayed by one or more issues that are important to him or her. When it comes to this category, my hunch is that they tend to vote Labour or PN be- cause they consider a Green vote to be a wasted vote. Why?" Answering his own question, Briguglio points towards the elec- toral system first. "It is undeniably tailor-made for two parties, but I strongly believe that a third party can be elected all the same. It is dif- ficult, but not impossible. Another consideration is the specific con- text of any election. In 2003, for instance, there was the issue of EU accession. For many people, that was more important than having a third party…" But that consideration is now dead and buried, and still AD has not elevated itself beyond its usual percentage. … "There are other issues, however. In the last election, when I was leading AD, I knew many people who wanted to vote AD but in- stead voted Labour. One example would be the issue of gay rights. There were many voters who, on this issue, were probably closer to AD's position than Labour's; but they believed that Labour would deliver more because they would be in government…" Could it also be because the dif - ference between the three parties has been eroded? We have already seen Labour and PN converge to- wards the centre on the economy, and also (up to a point) on civil lib- erties. Now, AD seems to be echo- ing some of the conservative views of the PN.., for instance, by oppos- ing embryo-freezing. This in turn points towards an endemic dilemma in today's situ- ation. There is now a multiplicity of views and opinions that are sim- ply not represented at all: neither in parliament, nor even in public discourse. My own opinions on things like female reproductive rights, for instance, are still con- sidered anathema by all three par- ties… even though they would be considered mainstream and nor- mal in most Western European countries. Elsewhere, very differ- ent views – for instance, of people who protested against the Muslim public prayer sessions in Msida – are not represented either. On both fronts, there seems to be a reluctance to actually represent such voter segments… "When I was chairperson of AD, it was my strong belief – even if there were differences of opinion within the party – that AD had to search for political niches. Among the niches which existed then, and still exist today, there is definitely the environment… however, using the logic mentioned previously, some people might argue that it would make more sense to vote PN, on the basis that a party in government can achieve more..." Does this indicate that AD may have been overtaken even on the environmental front? "No, I don't think so. AD should definitely remain a voice for the environment, because it is the only party that has a consistent record on this issue. But it cannot focus solely on the environment; it needs to occupy niche issues be- yond that sector…" The one area where AD has also been consistent is civil liberties. "Certain civil liberties have since been taken up by Labour: for in- stance, gay rights. On this issue, I feel AD has mellowed out a little. Before the election it was more vociferous, and also spoke out on particular rights. Our manifesto, for instance, talked of full mar- riage equality. Marriage, not civil unions…" Briguglio points towards other 'neglected niches': especially, the social aspect. "For example, pre- carious employment. Nobody is speaking about this anymore... not even, surprisingly, the GWU. We're all talking about how the economy is growing, but… let me give you an example. Last week, there was an article about massage parlours, and how there was an increase in elderly men contract- ing STDs. But there was nothing about what I call 'modern-day slavery'; the work conditions of sex workers, for instance. And there are other exploited categories, too. Child-carers, for example. It's good that the government extend- ed childcare services... but what about the wages paid to child-car- ers? They are very low, and their responsibilities are very great…" This, Briguglio argues, marks the main difference between 'Green' and 'Liberal' parties in the rest of Europe. "Green Parties usu- ally have an interest in the Green economy, which is very important; civil liberties; local issues; and also the social dimension." There are other issues, too: in- cluding some which AD is against. "AD is definitely against abor- tion, for instance. It's the only Green Party in Europe to take that stand; even Green Muslim par- ties agree. But to be fair, that was a consistently democratic decision taken by AD. It wasn't forced down the party's throat. Any member is free to attend an AGM and try to change that position. As things have always stood, from 1989 up to today, the vast majority of AD members have always disagreed with that civil right…" But the issue is not just about being 'for' or 'against' abortion. In Malta, we have a very archaic law which doesn't make any exception of any kind whatsoever: not even in cases where the mother's life might be in danger. In practice, we all know that under such cir- cumstances abortions are indeed carried out… not even the Church objects, because of the 'double ef- fect' principle… but there are no guarantees for the future. We have already seen how the PN, under Lawrence Gonzi, moved decidedly towards the Evangelical Christian position by flirting with groups such as Gift of Life. What if a future government decides to prosecute women who miscarry (as has happened in certain US states); or press murder charges against doctors who perform life- saving, abortifacient surgery? Why does not even AD argue in favour of a more sensible, less draconian legislation? Has it been bullied in- to submission by extremists? "I know Arnold Cassola very well, and have enormous respect for him. I mean that very sincerely. It is widely known that we didn't always see eye to eye on every- thing; I was the more radical left- winger of the party, he was more on the conservative side. But he really did contribute a lot to AD, and I feel this needs to be acknowl- edged more. On this issue, I can safely say that his is not a cynical stance. Cassola's position on abor- tion is not a case of political op- portunism; he genuinely disagrees on principle…" But the issue goes beyond per- sonal views. Surely, a political party should be more than merely an extension of its leader's private opinions… "Agreed. I believe that, what- ever one's private opinion on such matters, there should always be a debate. If nothing else, discussion can serve to strengthen one's po- sition. And yes, there should be a debate on whether our laws are effective, or how they can be im- proved. I also firmly believe that one of AD's roles is to be the party that puts forward certain issues to be debated… issues that the other parties won't discuss…" Not so much now, however. On euthanasia, for instance, Cassola even stated that he had 'no inten- tion to even discuss the issue'… Briguglio shrugs. "Euthanasia is going to be discussed, whether or not AD takes part. Someone has submitted a letter to parliament, and I assume it will be placed on the agenda for discussion. It was also discussed on Xarabank; half the country will have seen that epi- sode. Cassola is within his rights to state that he disagrees with eutha- nasia; where I disagreed with him was on ruling out the discussion altogether. I believe that AD needs to hold a more open debate… not just on this issue… even to the ex- tent of inviting non-members to the discussion table. If not, there is a danger that society will be much further ahead than the party…" Quoting British sociologist An- thony Gibbons, Briguglio points out how the British Labour Party experienced something similar in the 1980s. "Labour lost many elec- tions in sequence, largely because it refused to discuss issues that were considered relevant by large parts of its own electorate. OK, then it moved to the 'third way'; I won't discuss the merits of that decision, however. What I am say- ing is that parties should be open to discussion, even just to have a barometer of where they stand in today's society. I think that is very important…" Meanwhile, there is another issue facing AD at the moment. At the last election, AD registered 1.8% of the national vote (with Briguglio at the helm). Our latest polls indicate that they currently stand at 0.8%... which is lower than their first ever electoral performance in 1989. The party has shrunk back to mi- croscopic proportions. How does Briguglio account for this? "It is a worrying statistic, unde - niably. Even the European elec- tion results were disappointing. My honest and sincere appeal to AD, as someone who is within the party but not in the executive, is that it needs to hold some kind of forum or convention – call it what you will – where it can dis- cuss even those issues it disagrees with. It is very, very important to have a sense of engagement with society. A hermit engages only with himself. One has to engage with society, even to reassess one's own position. Your position may be strengthened in the process; or you may realise your positions were wrong… or no longer in synch with society. But that, to me, is what politics is all about. There is a constant need to see where one's views fit in with those of the rest of the population; interaction has to take place, otherwise a polit- ical party may find itself overtaken by the rest of society." Interview Sociologist and former AD chairperson MICHAEL BRIGUGLIO argues that political parties need to engage more with society, or risk being reduced to irrelevance It is very, very important to have a sense of engagement with society. A hermit engages only with himself ENGAGEMENT Every oligarchy reaches a peak, then faces a downfall. I would say that Labour has no guarantee of winning the next election DOWNFALL