The European experience

Labour MEP John Attard Montalto has made new friends in Europe and feels that Maltese MEPs are slowly beginning to leave their mark in the European Parliament. Natalino Fenech caught up with him and sought his opinions about Dom Mintoff, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici and Alfred Sant.

Coming from a party that was opposing EU membership how were you received by the Socialist Group?

The first reaction was that they did not know what to expect from the Maltese delegation. Some were not convinced of our policy change regarding Europe; a few even considered us Eurosceptics and were concerned that they had allowed a Trojan Horse within their midst. We had to work hard to win their trust.

During the first meeting of the heads of delegation it was obvious that I had to break the ice. I started my address by asking if anyone had painkillers as I had a severe headache. They all stared at me in bewilderment. Then I explained that I felt just like St Paul after being knocked on the head by a thunderbolt, accelerating his conversion. They all burst out laughing. The chairman did remark, however, that he was pleasantly surprised that the Maltese have a sense of humour. I always wondered why he made that remark!

Can you give some examples of accomplishments?

Achieving official posts is one. I was able to get two vice-presidencies for my colleagues Louis Grech and Joe Muscat within inter-parliamentary delegations to specific regions. After that, getting a vice-presidency for a committee in the European Parliament was a different cup of tea. I presented all our names for three vice-presidencies of the committees knowing full well we stood little chance even to acquire one post. The French head of delegation remarked that Malta had "great expectations" and I responded by applauding the French humility of not having equal expectations. Ironically, Malta ended up by sharing the vice-presidency of one of the paramount committees - that on industry, research and energy - notwithstanding that the French themselves had been determined to get the post.

The salaries and allowances of MEPs are often dubbed a gravy train.

There is a misconception about the earnings of MEPs. The Maltese members earn the same as the Maltese national parliamentarians, about Lm6,500 a year. The allowance that we receive are perceived by some as perks. They can only be perks if they are misused but there is no doubt that just as a parliamentary secretary or minister cannot perform his duties without an administrative infrastructure, the workload of an MEP is so vast it would be impossible to function without an adequate number of consultants, assistants and other staff.

The allowance for employment and services amounts to €15,000 a month. I can state that at times my service provider, who is in charge of all my allowances, finds it difficult to make ends meet. Four-sevenths of the allowance is dedicated to my overseas employees and the balance is for the local complement. In all, I have five full-timers, one part-timer and my service provider.

Is there some form of control on expenditure?

The Parliament requires accounts periodically. I have insisted that the service provider has them audited before forwarding them to the European Parliament. I am in favour that all five Maltese MEPs have their accounts published on a local newspaper on a yearly basis and, if necessary, with names and figures of all the ultimate receivers of the allowances in order not only to appear transparent but to acquire the trust of the Maltese electorate. No national delegation in the EU has ever done this. But if we want to get rid of the label "gravy train" this is the only way to do it.

What do you think of the Maltese language in the European Parliament?

The language issue is important from a national standpoint. My first address to Parliament was in Maltese but to be honest one has to admit that there are drawbacks. We are facing a chronic lack of interpreters, which makes it difficult to decide in advance regarding the language of address, even if we usually know beforehand when Maltese interpreters are unavailable. It is not the fault of the European Parliament but that of the national government, which did not prepare for this eventuality.

How did you get involved with the MLP?

I always sympathised with the Labour movement. My father had contested the elections with the MLP in the 1950s. I was first approached to enter politics in 1982 but used the excuse that I felt too young to contest the election. In reality I wanted to concentrate on my legal profession. Just after the election I was at the law courts when Dr Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici asked if he could have a word with me. We sat down on a bench, he opened his briefcase, took out a white sheet of paper and wrote a letter to himself bearing my initials; he gave it to me to sign. It was a request for me to stand for election on the MLP ticket. Looking back, I don't know whether he would have repeated this manoeuvre had he foreseen my eventual participation in the European Parliament!

What do you think of Dr Mifsud Bonnici today?

I have always admired him. I do not always agree with his point of view but there is no doubt about his sincerity. He is one of the few politicians I know who has absolutely no personal ambitions and who believes in and practises socialism. I resent the lack of respect that is sometimes shown towards him. Dr Mifsud Bonnici was always against Malta joining the EU, on the other hand the Malta Labour Party had declared it would abide by the electoral decision of 2003. I believe the problem is that Dr Mifsud Bonnici considers his viewpoint as a matter of principle while the MLP considers its position as one of policy.

What is your relationship with Dom Mintoff?

I was closest to Mr Mintoff between 1987 and 1996 and I can say it was an opportunity that only comes once in a lifetime. There is no doubt the man is a patriot, head and shoulders above all others. In my opinion, however, it was a pity that he did not step down in 1979 when he reached the apex of his carrier and had attained his dream of freeing Malta from all foreign military bases.

Does he take your advice?

Presumably you are referring to the fact that for many years I was his lawyer. It is very difficult to give him advice and I found that the best way to manoeuvre was to make decisions without consulting him; a very risky endeavour. In the Delimara constitutional case I won the issue relating to the peaceful enjoyment of property and lost that of political discrimination. Knowing Mr Mintoff, he would definitely have preferred to have won on both counts, even if winning the case on one of the issues is sufficient. Few may believe it but he never wanted the money; he did not want the building of the power station in Delimara. I have always surmised that it was not only a political decision but a way to keep Mr Mintoff's attention elsewhere at a time of great political sensitivity. The Nationalists knew they would break his heart if they rendered L-Gharix unusable and that is exactly what they did.

Parliament unanimously voted for the ratification of the EU Constitution. Is that a contradiction in terms that France and the Netherlands have voted against it in the referenda?

To be honest, I felt much more uneasy when we were the only socialist party that had not taken a decision, one way or the other, about the EU Constitution. In my opinion the constitutional issue came too soon after the party's change in EU policy. Obviously, the time frame regarding ratification was not in our favour.

What is your relationship with Alfred Sant?

When he was Prime Minister we had an excellent working relationship. He first gave me the industry portfolio, then that of the economy. In my final month as minister, although this has never been made public, he gave me the responsibility of the shipyards. I know he respects the fact that I speak my mind. Few realise how sensitive he can be, as I have experienced during the worst time of my life, when I buried my father and fell into a coma. I later got to know that he stayed by my side holding my hands and wiping my face.

After the 2003 election you declared your intention to contest the leadership but many doubted if you really wanted the post?

The truth is I didn't. I just wanted to make the party electable. I knew that if we did not carry out drastic changes we would not make it at the next election. I believed, as many others did, that Dr Sant and his deputies were going to resign and my political nightmare was that the party would be hijacked by a wing of the party that would definitely quash any hopes of electoral success.

Were the comments you had given to NET TV, about the need for the change in MLP leadership, courageous or impulsive?

It is not important whether it was bold or impulsive. What was important was that someone had to bring to the forefront the whole issue of change and I would like to think that I was the catalyst to the eventual changes that took place in my party. During the leadership contest I tried my best to keep within the parameters of fair play. I was the first to congratulate Dr Sant on his victory in the leadership contest and the next day it was business as usual. We had a job to do - to get the Labour Party back into government.