A former close confidante of Dom Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, SAMMY MEILAQ is a staunch socialist.  The 75-year-old former militant speaks to Mario Xuereb about politics, corruption and neutrality.

MX: What kind of society do you envision?

SM: If I could decide, I’d choose a socialist and democratic society.

MX: And where do you think Malta stands today?

SM: Today, we have remnants of democratic socialism, but they are diminishing. The direction Malta is heading is anti-socialist.

MX: How can you sense this decline?

SM: Economic deregulation has empowered employers and weakened unions. Private property rights are privileged, while industrial rights, including the right to strike, have been restricted. This trend isn’t exclusive to Malta; it’s happening across the West. After World War II, until the 1980s, there was a build-up of democratic socialism in Western Europe, with strong socialist parties. Today, many of these parties have abandoned their socialist principles.

MX: For the past decade, Malta has had a social democrat party in government...

SM: Yes. The Labour Party is part of the group of Socialists and Democrats, but if it were up to me, I’d align it with the European United Left, which still upholds the old principles of democratic socialism. What’s happened in Malta is that while the economy has grown, so has social inequality. That’s a contradiction. It’s anti-socialist to grow the economy but reduce the workers’ share.

MX: Social democrats in Malta and Europe have embraced free-market policies and economic growth. They argue that way they can support the lower tiers of society. Isn’t everyone benefiting from this?

SM: No, that’s not true. Europe and Malta only follow free-market principles where it suits the capital owners. Governments, including Malta’s, have printed money – what they call ‘quantitative easing’ – to bail out corrupt banks, causing inflation across the eurozone, which is essentially an additional tax on people.

MX: So, in your view, Malta’s Labour government is capitalist?

SM: Obviously.

MX: How do you feel about that?

SM: Today’s Labour government prides itself on being ‘business-friendly’. They say you must first create wealth before distributing it. But in post-war Europe, socialist policies like those of Mintoff in Malta showed that investment and development could happen alongside true socialist principles. The idea that private business should be left unchecked to drive development is false.

MX: Can you give an example of where the private sector is being left unchecked?

SM: It’s not absolute but, as I said, deregulation has increased across Europe, including Malta. Industrial laws today favour employers, granting them more rights while restricting workers’ rights. For example, the right to strike is much more limited now – there are rules requiring advance notice and limits on how many can strike. The worst is when an effective strike gets declared illegal, as happened to the nurses in Malta.

MX: But if workers’ rights have diminished, why aren’t we seeing more industrial unrest or protests?

SM: First, there’s plenty of work available, and we even need foreign workers. However, the legal protections for workers have decreased, and unions, in my opinion, are making a mistake by not uniting under a single council. We are the only European country where unions don’t operate collectively. This weakens their bargaining power, especially when dealing with the government.

MX: NGOs in Malta complain about lack of governance. Do you agree?

SM: Absolutely. The lack of governance is a major problem, leading to widespread corruption and mismanagement. It’s becoming evident that something needs to be done.

MX: Why is Malta in such a state?

SM: There are honest politicians in both main parties but there are also those who are in it for personal gain. The ‘butisti’ are more interested in their pockets. Both parties have their share of self-serving individuals in parliament.

MX: You seem to be equating both political parties but the levels of responsibility are different…

SM: Corruption is cross-party. It’s not exclusive to Labour or Nationalists. During the Nationalists’ time, there were corruption scandals like the Fairmount case, which the General Workers’ Union exposed, but nothing happened. Now, with Labour in power, it’s more visible because those in government have more opportunities to exploit.

MX: In your view, is corruption being tackled?

SM: Not at all. There are three factors promoting corruption in Malta. First, there’s the privatisation of parliamentary democracy. Parties, especially Labour in government, have become reliant on corporate lobbyists for funding. These donations aren’t charitable – they come with strings attached, and donors expect a return on their investment. To fight corruption, we need to ban corporate donations to political parties. Bernie Sanders refused corporate donations but still raised significant funds from small, individual contributions. His average donation was $20 and he still raised as much as other candidates. He had a strong programme for the people.

MX: Ultimately, he wasn’t successful in his bid for the White House.

SM: But that was because the Democratic Party leadership didn’t want him as their candidate, and they used a loophole in their rules to allocate extra votes against him.

Parties, especially Labour in government, have become reliant on corporate lobbyists for funding- Sammy Meilaq

MX: Besides banning corporate donations, what else would you change?

SM: Malta’s culture of omertà. The government keeps many things hidden, even the contracts for the renting of umbrellas on Comino. This secrecy is unnecessary and promotes corruption. We need open government policies where everything, including contracts, is made public unless there’s a genuine security concern. The Whistleblowers Act, the Freedom of Information Act and the anti-SLAPP laws are all good, but they should be part of a larger, open government policy. But neither party has this on their agenda.

The big four accounting firms in Malta are what I call the ‘four legal mafia families’. They audit private companies but also help them evade taxes and launder money. They operate legally, but the second part of their role – helping companies avoid taxes – should be removed. It’s anti-social.

MX: Labour is currently undergoing changes, with elections for key positions.  What’s your take on this?

SM: These changes are tactical, not strategic, and will only create empty noise. The prime minister might be trying to create a more efficient administration but there’s a bigger issue. The internal politics of the government are dominated by speculative corporate lobbyists.  They have too much influence on decision-making, especially in sectors like construction.

MX: Who are these speculative lobbyists?

SM: People like [Joseph] Portelli, Ċaqnu and Yorgen Fenech. They fund political parties, not out of generosity, but to further their own interests.

MX: Are you saying these lobbyists are more powerful than the prime minister?

SM: They have a lot of control over the economy and government decisions. In construction, we’re facing overproduction. It benefits a few contractors and landowners, but it’s not good for the Maltese people. It’s damaging the environment and making us dependent on foreign workers.

MX: Does the economic model need changing?

SM: I’m not an economist but there’s a global movement advocating for ‘de-growth’ —the idea that not every sector needs to keep expanding. Some areas should grow if it benefits the people but others should shrink where necessary.

MX: Are you saying Malta’s economy should stop growing at its current rate?

SM: Not necessarily. Ideally, the economy should continue to grow but only in areas where it’s beneficial to the people. Other sectors, like construction, should scale back.

MX: Which sectors should grow, in your opinion?

SM: There are areas we haven’t yet fully explored where growth would be beneficial. We need to focus on those.

MX: Should tourism continue to grow?

SM: No, we should focus on attracting higher-class tourists, but it shouldn’t keep growing indefinitely.

MX: What about construction?

SM: No, construction shouldn’t grow either. Neither tourism nor construction should keep expanding.

MX: So, in your view, these sectors should shrink?

SM: They don’t necessarily need to shrink but they shouldn’t keep growing either. There should be selectivity in economic growth.

MX: Should Malta continue relying on foreign workers for sectors where locals are unwilling to work?

SM: The current situation concerning foreign workers is a historic first for Malta. In the past, foreigners would force their way in and impose their superiority. But now, for the first time, we are inviting foreign workers.  For this reason, it’s the economic model that should be criticised and not the foreign workers. Insulting them is ignorance. However, I don’t believe Malta’s economy should rely on foreign cheap labour. This creates a divide. Some people genuinely care about improving workers’ conditions while others exploit them for profit.

MX: You’ve always been vocal about Malta’s neutrality. What are your thoughts on neutrality in 2024?

SM: I fully agree with Mintoff’s stance that Malta should remain neutral, as outlined in the constitution. Before we joined the EU, Mintoff wanted guarantees that Malta would stay neutral, not get involved in wars, even for Europe.

MX: Were those guarantees given? Are you satisfied with them?

SM: No. The guarantee Mintoff wanted was much clearer. I have a copy of the agreement between Malta and Italy, where Italy agreed to defend our neutrality without Malta being involved in conflicts like NATO in Ukraine.

MX: Ukraine was neutral for some time but was still attacked. Couldn’t Malta face a similar situation?

SM: That’s not what happened. Europe invaded Russia twice, once with Napoleon and again with Hitler, both times through Ukraine. Ukraine was used as a stepping stone by European armies. That’s the historical context.

MX: But wasn’t there fear that Russia would invade Europe through Ukraine?

SM: The first mistake the West committed was provoking Russia by expanding NATO eastward, closer to Russia’s borders, and by supporting a coup in Ukraine. The Minsk Agreement could have provided autonomy to Russian-speaking regions in Ukraine, similar to the situation of Scotland in the UK. But Zelensky reversed his position, deceiving Ukrainians, Europeans and all of us.

The grassroots need to rebel- Sammy Meilaq

MX: Are you comfortable with Malta’s foreign policy?

SM: Malta’s foreign policy is clearly being dictated by the US. According to our constitution, we’re supposed to work for peace, which means staying neutral in conflicts. But Malta consistently sides with NATO, whether in Ukraine or Gaza. Our position is much more pro-US than pro-Palestine. There’s also hypocrisy – our government criticises Georgia for repressing protests while, at the same time Biden sent the US National, Guard firing rubber bullets at peaceful protesters.

MX: Do you feel that your views are represented in the Maltese parliament?

SM: Not at all. Both parties need a major upheaval. The grassroots need to rebel – not violently but forcefully enough to push the parties to change direction.

MX: Do you still vote?

SM: No. In the last local elections [June 2024], I voted for a particular candidate who stood for election in Baħar iċ-Ċagħaq, but in the European elections, I didn’t. If a general election were held today, I wouldn’t vote for Labour, especially because of their stance on neutrality. If things don’t change, I won’t vote at all.

MX: Since Labour came to power in 2013, have you voted in the general elections?

SM: I’ve always been loyal to the party and voted in every election. But this issue of neutrality is pushing me away. While governance and the economic model are internal matters that can change, the biggest reason I may not vote remains the neutrality issue.

I’ve always said that Malta should not join the EU army.  I publicly ask the prime minister why hasn’t he declared in parliament that Malta won’t join the EU army.

There is a legal precedent which we may use.  Europe granted the UK the option not to join the EU army before Brexit. Why hasn’t Robert Abela made a solemn declaration that Malta will never impose military conscription on its youth?  It is becoming increasingly fashionable in Europe to bring back conscription.

Malta’s involvement in NATO’s Parliamentary Assembly is also dangerous because it discusses military operations. This makes us a legitimate target for Islamist terrorists, especially with what’s happening in Gaza. If the Maltese people realised this, they would be protesting against the government. We’ve become a legitimate target because we’re aligned with NATO. Imagine what could happen to our tourism industry if there were a terrorist attack.

MX: You’ve always voted Labour, but you were also involved with the Front Maltin Inqumu and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici in the mid-2000s. Did you still vote Labour during that time?

SM: Yes, I’ve always voted Labour, even during that time.

MX: Even after the disputes between Mintoff and Alfred Sant?

SM: Yes, I tried to mediate between them twice. I’ve always maintained a good relationship with Alfred Sant and we had coffee recently.  We happen to follow different brands of Labour.

Joe Paris and I were closer to Mintoff, and we always tried to resolve their differences. But I can tell you I always voted Labour. If the neutrality issue doesn’t change, I won’t vote for Labour anymore.

MX: Let’s talk about your past. You were a dockyard worker and a Labour activist from a young age.

SM: Yes, I served on the Labour Party executive for 12 consecutive years, from 1985 to 1997. I also served four years on the Discipline and Vigilance Board from 1988 to 1992, and I was involved in many mass activities within the party. I worked closely with Mintoff and Mifsud Bonnici.

MX: During the Labour governments of the 1970s and 1980s, what stands out to you in terms of their work for Malta?

SM: Their philosophy was to uplift the working class, with the belief that helping the lower classes would eventually benefit everyone. Today, it’s the opposite. There’s this idea that subsidising the wealthy will lead to trickle-down benefits for the poor. But that’s a lie. Mintoff’s approach was to raise the lower classes, not rely on trickle-down economics.

MX: Do you think Mintoff succeeded in this?

SM: Absolutely. I remember a time when Valletta was full of beggars. People were migrating to Australia for work. Young couples had to live with their parents because they couldn’t afford housing. Mintoff built houses, established social services and believed in lifting people from the bottom up. That’s very different from today’s economic theory.

MX: There was a lot of unrest in the late 1970s and 1980s, with protests that sometimes ended badly, like the torching of the Times of Malta building in 1979 and the attack on the opposition leader’s house. Then, in 1984, there was the attack on the Curia.  What changed since then?

SM: Those were turbulent times, but you don’t see such actions today because the two main parties aren’t as diametrically opposed as they were.

MX: What do you mean by that?

SM: The conflict used to be horizontal. Labour was truly left-wing, and the Nationalists were truly right-wing. Today, both are neo-liberal. The opposition now comes from grassroots movements, like Graffitti and NGOs like Repubblika, which is incidentally exposing the weaknesses of the Nationalist Party.

MX: How?

SM: Because they are vocal about issues that the Nationalist Party isn’t capable of doing. To my mind, it shows that the Nationalist Party is weak in its beliefs and in its past.

MX: Are you saying Repubblika is revealing the Nationalist Party’s ideological weakness?

SM: Yes, Repubblika is exposing the Nationalists’ weakness because they should be the ones attacking the government on certain issues. Their lack of criticism, when they stand to gain most, shows they are ideologically and administratively weak.

MX: And why do you think the Nationalists aren’t making these critiques?

SM: Because there are opportunists – ‘butisti’ – on both sides of parliament, and they all have something to hide. Both parties rely on speculative corporate lobbies. Parliamentary democracy has been privatised, and this applies to the Nationalists as much as it does to Labour. I criticise Labour because I want to see it improve and not depend on speculative lobbies, but the Nationalist Party is no different.