A pre-electoral pact

Taking their cue from the tumultuous events in countries such as Italy and Greece - where matters were exacerbated by governments' reluctance to enact vital but unpopular decisions - our political leaders would exhibit foresight and maturity by pre-emptively agreeing on a programme of change that would go ahead regardless of who wins the next election.

Such a pact would bind the winner to embark on a number of necessary reforms, and the loser to back (or at least, not to hinder) the agreed-upon programme of change. The net result would mean that future decisions may be taken and implemented without the automatic fear of one side trying to take political advantage over the other, by riding the inevitable wave of popular disgruntlement.

Although such pacts are not unheard of abroad, historically there has never been any local initiative aimed at putting aside petty political differences for the ultimate good of the country. This would therefore be a first for Malta, marking an important milestone in the ongoing process of democratic maturity.

It would also be timely. Many level-headed people today, cognisant of the lowering standard of living of most Europeans, are beginning to realise that our country is increasingly vulnerable. Our main export and tourism markets are found on the European mainland, which is already in deep recession and likely to remain so for a number of years. These countries' spending power is rapidly dwindling... and so too is the local equivalent, as was evidenced by a less lucrative festive season than usual.

This is not to say that our situation is entirely analogous to those of financially crippled European countries. We can rightly draw comfort from the fact that our otherwise enormous national debt is limited only to local creditors, and that unlike so many other countries we have so far not indebted ourselves to foreign banks or institutions.

What will happen, however, if or when Maltese people become unwilling to subscribe to government bonds? We need to pre-empt such a situation, as well as to ask ourselves serious questions about our social security system. Is it sustainable? What sort of action is needed to safeguard it in future? Failure to address these questions today will inevitably lead to lower pensions and fewer social benefits tomorrow.

Attempts have admittedly been made to address these issues in the past; but the stumbling has always been the same. Historically, political parties have always been too afraid of yielding political advantage to their rivals, to ever take the bull by the horns.

It is high time we finally put this duality behind us, at least for as long as it takes to address a concern which is (or should be) common to all. For instance, the salient points of a pre-electoral pact might include the introduction of means-testing for eligibility to social services. Attention should also be given to unemployment benefits, which are sometimes paid out to persons who do, in fact, work clandestinely. These people are defrauding the State and also creating an unfair level playing field, to the detriment of both the public exchequer and the growth prospects of honest operating businesses.

These and other issues are well known to all. But while there is broad agreement on what needs to be done, the fact remains that politicians inevitably baulk when push comes to shove.

Besides, modernising Malta is simply too great and daunting a challenge for one victorious party alone. It can only be achieved with support of the opposition party and civil society as a whole. To this end, there is a vast programme that the country urgently requires. A fair society demands a change in our electoral system, giving a wider category of people a fighting chance to win representation through minority parties in parliament.

Furthermore, a society which values meritocracy demands that public appointments be vetted by parliament, so that prospective candidates are thoroughly scrutinised by representatives of the people they will ultimately serve.

Social mobility also demands major investments in public education, especially in the formative years. Many of these changes require a bi-partisan approach, whereby the country's resources and talents - already limited by constraints of geographical and population size - are pooled together, rather than limited further through the prevailing political apartheid system, which as a rule excludes practically half the population.

No doubt, both major parties will pay lip service to many of the changes we are suggesting. Indeed they already have, by suggesting Constitutional reform (much of which also requires bi-partisan consensus). But history has always illustrated how such external indications of future co-operation evaporate into thin air, the moment an election campaign begins in earnest.

This time round, however, there is simply too much at stake to allow the short-term interests of political parties to derail Malta's future economic prospects. What is therefore needed with urgency is a written agreement on the part of all concerned, so as to guarantee the implementation of necessary reforms regardless of the election result.

There is still time to achieve this before the election. Let us therefore put aside smaller issues, and concentrate instead on the truly important goal while the opportunity lasts.