Call an election

Parliamentary business has for the past year been dominated by the course of events leading to Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando's resignation from the Nationalist parliamentary group, to set up a coalition with government; and Franco Debono threatening not to vote in favour of the budget as long as Austin Gatt remains a member of the Cabinet.

Despite the absurdity of this condition - which conflicts with the prime minister's constitutional prerogative to choose his own ministers - Debono's stance and attitude have remained uncompromising. Accordingly, his moment of truth has arrived, and today it is his vote which will decide the government's fate. Macbeth's words come to mind: "I am in blood. Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er."

Put simply, Debono has now taken his brinkmanship one step too far. Whatever course of action he decides to take this evening, his credibility will be put to the test. If he were to retract his threats, he would appear very weak. If he goes ahead, he will definitely find the approval of half the population... but not of the other half.

Either way, it is time for this theatrical farce to be terminated by calling an election: something this newspaper considers should have happened a long time ago.

The Debono saga calls into play a number of considerations. Irrespective of whether one considers Debono to be a rebel or a reformer, there can be little doubt that both his attitude and the prime minister's management skills have left much to be desired. Debono is clearly wrong to lay down conditions and to attempt to bully the prime minister into sacrificing Austin Gatt in return for his own support for the budget. This smacks of egocentricity, lack of team spirit and most especially disloyalty of the first degree.

And while it is true that his parliamentary seat belongs to him (and not to the party, as has elsewhere been suggested), it was won on a party ticket and both good judgment and political acumen would have dictated that he carry on his fight within the party in a spirit of loyalty.

Moreover, if he finds his principles and views incompatible with those of the party, he should have resigned from the party and set himself up as an independent MP.

To this extent he is rightly labelled as a rebel. However, this does not mean that the reforms he has proposed from the outset are unworthy of consideration.

On the contrary, Debono's programme warrants an intellectually honest analysis. His repeated calls for a resignation culture, as well as a bigger sense of accountability and appreciation for conflicts of interest, are spot on. They are part of the process of Europeanising Malta and would, if enacted, enhance our democracy.

Debono is equally correct in questioning the total dominance of the political parties in our society. Their lack of accountability and the lack of legislation to regulate them have distanced them from the people and in the long term, will increase people's indifference to politics. His attacks on partisan broadcasting, with a national station clearly slanted in favour of the government of the day, is likewise correct. The state of broadcasting is a blot on the credentials of the Nationalist Party, which had fought an uncompromising battle against partisan national broadcasting in the 1980s.

From this perspective, one can equate his reform programme with a lost opportunity, which the government should have taken up in earnest. Hence the limited management skills of the prime minister, who as the first among equals should from the outset have appreciated that the management of egos, so pronounced in most politicians, was never going to be easy.

Although sincere, Dr Gonzi's immediate attempt to appease Debono by visiting him at his house was labelled as a sign of weakness. Debono took advantage of the goodwill shown to  him, and kept up his attack on the prime minister. A situation that should have been nipped in the bud has now reached the point of no return.

Just as the Mistra episode should have been exposed for what it really was - a case of poor judgment -  Debono's attitude should have been seen to by the prime minister earlier on.

Both incidents, however, have two things in common: one, a lack of loyalty and team spirit exhibited by the protagonists; and secondly, a misreading of the popular mood on the part of the government... which, by failing to accept many of the rebels' progressive ideas, showed a lack of sensitivity to the wishes of the people.

This is now all water under the bridge. Today is D-day. The uncertainty and sense of fatigue that the whole Debono and Pullicino Orlando saga has caused is thankfully coming to a head at last.

This newspaper once again calls on the prime minister to exercise his most important prerogative and to go to the people, even in the eventuality that Debono abstains this evening in parliament or in the vote two days later, when the estimates under Austin Gatt's ministry come up for approval.