Editorial

Finally, the Labour Party's charade over whether or not to vote in favour of the European Constitution is over. This will, of course, anger that element within the party that is against a yes vote but the Labour parliamentary group's decision at least removes all the speculation that must have been haunting the party leadership for quite some time now. The group's decision has made further discussion on the issue within the party practically irrelevant.

Labour leader Alfred Sant said that after a series of internal discussions, Labour MPs had reached a common position. The immediate reaction to this would be: and not a moment too soon! Their decision is based on a motion approved by the Labour general conference in 2003 when the party had accepted the people's verdict over EU membership.

After so much time in which the party appeared to be in absolute limbo, Labour MPs have now come to the conclusion that sovereignty, neutrality, foreign and security policy and defence would not be negatively affected. In fact, they now feel the treaty would not clash with the Constitution.

It would therefore appear that all is well on the EU-Malta endorsement front, that all are convinced that EU membership was the right course for Malta to take at this stage of its social, economic and political development. On closer inspection, however, the situation is not as solid as it might appear. For even though the MLP lost both a referendum and a general election over their stand on membership, the party leader, for one, still believes that their "Switzerland in the Mediterranean" proposal was the best option for the country. "Yes, I still believe in it," he said in an interview he gave to The Times some time ago.

Like everybody else Dr Sant has every right to hold on to his belief but since the country's membership of the EU is not exactly the same thing as if we are talking about a football club's membership of a federation, does he not feel a bit uncomfortable as leader of a party that projects itself as an alternative government?

When the electorate turned down the MLP's proposal twice, Labour had no alternative but to accept the decision of the majority. Many argued then, and still do today, that had the party been wise enough and accepted the people's verdict as expressed in the referendum in time, Labour would have had a good chance of winning the subsequent general election.

But the MLP buried its head in the sand and stuck to its "Switzerland in the Mediterranean" or "partnership" proposal. When it lost both the referendum and the election, it said it would respect the people's decision. In the interview, he said: "We have to get the best bargains". As if the EU is just about bargains!

Dr Sant still talks in a way that sounds as if the electorate made a huge mistake. In this sense, he is going against the grain, even though the euphoria that characterised the pre-EU referendum period has now been replaced by hard realism that membership is not an automatic key to prosperity.

But judging by the Labour MPs' decision to vote in favour of the European Constitution, it would seem that the party is moving ahead now, even though its leader keeps harping on his belief that their original proposal was the best for Malta. Once the people have decided it was not, it is time for Labour to close that chapter for good.