Commentary

There are a number of points in the ongoing discussion on the need of a declaration on the regionality of Gozo that all the parties concerned - Gozitans, Government, and Opposition - agree on.

The first is that although the Electoral Commission acted according to the Constitution by removing part of Gozo and attaching it to the north of Malta, this created a highly anomalous situation.

The commission should have noted in bold, black on white, that though this had been done due to the increase of the number of votes in Gozo, it goes against the spirit of the Declaration of the Regionality of Gozo entrenched in the document on Malta's accession to the European Union. The commission should have invited Government to quickly find a better solution. This was not done.

The second point is that the dismembering of part of Gozo is certainly not for the good of the island. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of Opposition have expressed themselves in this regard. Last Sunday, 'Roamer', writing in this newspaper, hit the nail on the head with the heading Ut unum sit (That it may be one). We have no doubt that both Dr Lawrence Gonzi and Dr Alfred Sant agree that disunity would in no way promote the interests of Gozo.

There is a lot of disagreement about the rest. Last week, Government published a Bill to amend the Constitution so that Gozo may not be divided when electoral districts are drawn up. The Opposition, though admitting that the dismemberment is detrimental to the island, seems to have second thoughts on this Bill. Labour deputy leader Michael Falzon told The Times that it is too early to comment at this stage.

The government should have passed this Bill earlier, at least before the Electoral Commission had concluded its work. It is indeed astounding, if not bizarre, that the government left the problem to raise its head, and then decided to tackle it. I have drawn attention to this problem for years. However nothing was done to tackle it.

It is definitely not easy to predict what the Opposition would do when the Bill comes up for discussion. The two Gozitan Labour MPs and the two Gozitan Labour mayors have seemingly been given strict instructions on how to express themselves on the matter. I have no doubt that these two gentlemen and two ladies have the welfare of Gozo at heart and are in favour of the regionality of Gozo.

They should go out of their way to convince the party leadership on the necessity of entrenching the regionality of Gozo in the Constitution. Theirs is certainly no easy task. It is not a simple matter to convince a person living in Malta of the real interests of the island of Gozo. I agree with 'Roamer' that the possible opposition of the Labour Party to this amendment is politically risky.

It must be repeated, yet again, that the growth of the population of Gozo is unnatural. It was brought about by residents of Malta - some 3,000 - who have registered to vote in Gozo so that they can qualify for cheaper ferry travel.

If the Bill is rejected, Government has other options at its disposal. The easiest and the most expedient is to legislate on residence and make it illegal to register as a voter with the address of a holiday home.

It is presumed that these Maltese do generate business on the island, therefore the owner of the holiday home should be given a concession to pay reduced ferry fares just like Gozitan students and workers, who are obliged to travel to and from Malta.

The entrenchment of the regionality of Gozo in the Constitution should however remain a top priority and this should be seen to at the earliest.