Put your cards on the table

Despite the political rumour mill incessantly pointing at an early summer election, the PN seems intent on hanging on to power until the very last day and Labour seems equally intent to keep the country guessing over the actual proposals of its electoral programme.

Although Labour insists that its proposals are written and ready to be published in the eventuality of an early election, the former tourism minister Karmenu Vella is still responsible for the drafting of the programme. To sex up the dreary subject of electoral programmes, Labour's manifesto even has its own personal secretary in Aaron Farrugia.

When faced with reasonable questions over the palpable wariness the PL has in publishing the manifesto or at least parts of it, Labour defends its corner by saying it will not play into the government's hands and will only reveal its plans when elections are called.

By default this means that the electorate will only have a few weeks to absorb, decipher and understand the Opposition's proposals, and this during a hectic electoral campaign which will focus on anything but the parties' programmes as a blueprint for the future.

Certainly, a few proposals from all parties' programmes will be picked by opposing parties and possibly mocked and shot down (repeater class anyone?). However, this automatically excludes a proper and mature public debate on the party's manifesto. Is Joseph Muscat happy with having a shallow and superficial debate on his blueprint for the future, or does he really want to do things differently?

If the policies are really done and dusted, then the PL is duty-bound to explain what these policies are if it really wants the electorate to judge and decide whether the party is a viable alternative to the present administration. The party in government demonstrates what its policies are in its everyday deeds. To a certain extent, the PN has clearly and officially stated, black on white, its beliefs and its ideas, such as on divorce and gay rights, while the Labour Party has not taken an official stand but rests on its leader's personal beliefs.

Labour's apprehension that their ideas will be either mocked or taken over by the government indicates a mixture of fear, inferiority and opportunism. It is partly an admission of defeat before the ball has even started rolling.

Labour's past inability to match or outdo the PN in terms of effective propaganda and use of the media seems to have scarred the party permanently. This time rather than risk being outdone, the party has chosen to keep its mouth shut. For sure, the Mile End is no source of courage and self-belief.

Labour's stubborn insistence to keep the cards firmly close to its vest also indicates that the party would rather remain silent and win by default rather than behave like any Opposition party should behave itself in a democracy. If you are good enough to govern the country, prove your worth in opposition. An over-cautious and feeble Opposition makes an even poorer government.

Probably the truth is that the party has some kind of policies and proposals written somewhere, however the party cannot rest on its laurels just because it scored a significant victory in the 10 March local council elections.

Although the elections resulted in a landslide victory for Labour, Labour only registered a marginal increase of just over 100 votes, while the PN suffered a haemorrhage of votes (over 11,000), when compared to the previous rounds of 2007/8.

What the recent local elections showed is that the unpopularity of the Nationalist Party doesn't automatically translate into votes for Labour.

The Labour Party has to give the electorate reasons to vote for it, not just reasons to vote against the party in government.

If all the PL has to offer are shallow statements without a new story to tell, then it mustn't be surprised if voters turn their backs to Labour once again.