German lessons

Few would deny that Europe is passing through a time of crisis. The failure to adopt a new Constitution is the most apparent result of this crisis. But the crisis is not limited to EU structures. It is pervading individual countries. It seems European peoples have lost the confidence and determination so evident in post-war Europe. Some say it is a question of leadership. Others point to slow economic growth and globalisation. Many naturally enquire why the economies of the US and, to a lesser extent, of the UK are outpacing those of most European countries. Is it the effect of the Reagan and Thatcher reforms that have enabled them to withstand the competition of new emerging giants?

Is the result of the recent German election another aspect of the same predicament? The unthinkable has happened. An election that until a few weeks ago was deemed to be a virtual walkover turned out to be a perfect stalemate. The dynamo of the European Union has been rendered completely paralysed by the electorate. It would be nonsensical to claim that, after all, this is vox populi. No one would claim that a hung Bundestag was the will of the electorate. It is rather that no one has provided a banner to which a majority could rally. Though there is no dread of the repeat of the Weimar Republic experience, the final result is that whereas Germany needed a strong government to carry out radical reforms in the taxation, the labour market, the pensions and health fields, it is being faced by the spectre of impossible coalitions.

It is true that Germany has a long history of successful coalitions. But this time no two parties would have a majority, except the two major parties. However, not only their share of the vote has been greatly reduced but to complicate matters it is nearly identical in numerical strength. In such a scenario the grand coalition, which is the most likely in the end, has become more difficult to secure. But how effective would such a coalition be? Under Angela Merkel the CDU/CSU have moved to the right much, much more than the SPD could stomach. The loss of votes and seats to the Left party is a stern warning that there is a limit to the extent of concessions their traditional supporters would tolerate.

This is not a problem for Germany alone. Many were expecting that once the German election was out of the way, a new strong German government of whatever hue would provide the impetus for quick decisions to be taken at the European level by the end of the year. Not only does the situation make for a stagnant German economy but also for lack of decisiveness in Brussels. Decisions on the 2007-2013 budget by the end of the year look problematic. In our case we are doubly hampered. Economic growth in Europe's locomotive and, hence, the rest of Europe, our main market, with positive outcomes on our economy looks more remote. The lack of a quick decision on the budget will fetter our plans.

It would be foolish not to reflect on the German conundrum especially since our electoral system is being questioned. The threshold of five per cent of the national vote for parties to be represented in the Bundestag was designed to be a guarantee against fragmentation while ensuring democratic principles. In this respect the electoral system has failed at the very moment when Germany needs clear and decisive direction. If this can happen in a large country imagine what could happen in a small country like ours when so much more depends on the government.

Now there is no perfect system. It is being claimed here that democracy means the alteration in power. This is sheer nonsense. The justification of democracy is the execution of the popular will. The electoral system should be designed to respect this will. But history teaches us that many a democracy was destroyed because it became ineffectual. Stability as represented by a strong government is the other side of the equation. For the purpose of elections is for the people to give their mandate to a majority to rule for a fixed term with the aim of piloting the country forward, with the proviso that this mandate is returned to the sovereign people to reconfirm it or to hand it over to others.

It all depends on what we want. Do we treasure stability most or the representation of every shade of opinion? Can a strict proportional democracy provide stable government? On balance the US, the UK and Scandinavian experience seems to point that better results can be achieved by single party governments. But most of the rest of Europe has prospered under two or multiparty coalitions. However, some countries have found it necessary to radically reform their electoral system to generate more stable and durable governments with the ability to take unpopular decisions when necessary. France and Italy spring to mind. In the 60 post-war years the latter country was not able to elect a single government which lasted its full term. It looks like the present government's durability is due mostly to the Prime Minister's determination to achieve this record, even at the expense of unholy compromises and ineffectuality.

If the dilemma exists in these large countries, what can happen in a small country where a couple of thousand votes can make all the difference? Our own system has largely been successful in producing stable, effective governments, which have performed our own economic miracles. Suffice to mention the radical changeover from a military services based economy to one founded on tourism and manufacturing industry. But it has also produced weak unstable coalitions in the early 1950s when the country suffered economically and politically.

This is not a plea for the status quo and against change and reform. It is an appeal for common sense and reflection before we take the leap. It is not so much a question of fixing a threshold as the proper percentage at which it should be fixed. Surely all but a few would agree that the threshold should aim at preventing the representation of single issue groups that would sacrifice all to achieve their minority aim. It should also deter the formation of undemocratic extreme left and right parties that would abuse democracy to destroy it.

Then it would be up to the sovereign electorate to decide whether Malta's interests would be served better by strong single party governments or ineffectual bickering coalitions.

Vox populi vox dei.

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health.