On so many occasions, and once again, the Labour Party is proving toxic to Malta. This is unfortunately so since proverbially the party’s leadership, and core membership, appear to be made up of people who lack sound liberal, democratic and tolerant credentials. The leaders and members also do not seem to share an abundance of high integrity.

The party is perceived as the machine that allows the capture of the state in order to make it serve the illegitimate aspirations of its members and supporters, this invariably at the expense and to the detriment of the rest of the island’s citizens.

The party exploits a national abusive trait and becomes the provider of corrupt illicit gains, undeserved privileges and illegal favours to Labour citizens.

This Labour Party is the creature of Dominic Mintoff. During his leadership Mintoff dominated and tightly controlled the party. Intolerance reigned and occasional violence reared its head, internal dissenters just had to shut up or move out.

Emerging from colonial times, Labour followers have been conditioned to feel victimised and exploited by oppressors. In his political career, to gain advantage, Mintoff continuously utilised and emphasised this oppressor factor. When in the mid-1950s the British aborted the  ‘integration’ love affair, the jilted Mintoff redefined them as oppressors. The Nationalist Party had long before been assigned this oppressor status, with the epithet of enemy of the workers thrown in.

Alfred Sant came close to initiate an evolution of the party towards a more modern, less blind tribal outlook. Supported by moderates he worked to reduce among Labour supporters this unjustified feeling of anger and permanent reparatory entitlement.

This entitlement mentality puts pressure on politicians to provide rectifying compensation. Tragically for Malta, Sant could not progress in his effort to upgrade Labour supporters, since his administration was cut short by a spiteful Mintoff.

So our Joseph Muscat inherited a vintage Mintoff fossil of a party, a disciplined intolerant machine waiting for another turn to make the state its own. Muscat worked on the façade of the party making it look young and modern, effectively hiding plans for a corrupt project of government that his administration would eventually implement.

Exploiting a grateful disciplined blind tribal loyalty, Muscat spread and consolidated his domination through an extensive, fine-tuned, corrupt largesse and a relaxation of the rule of law, involving as many party people and supporters as possible. Recipients of illicit favours get entangled in a blackmail relationship and become less inclined to rebel, even when faced with extremely unacceptable corrupt behaviour verging on the criminal.

Muscat has run down this country in a systematic fashion, according to a detailed corrupt plan that commenced to be defined four years before 2013. The current Speaker of the House gave us a premonition when he rebelled against sinister dealings at the top floor of the Labour Party headquarters.

This rebellion was however suppressed by Muscat with the use of the most effective weapon in his arsenal, suffocating favours shoved down the throats of troublemakers.

To avoid suffocation by this weapon the principled Marlene Farrugia had to, and managed, to move out.

Within Labour we are now witnessing an incredible reluctance of relatively decent people to stand up and speak out in face of the disaster that has been served on the party and the State of Malta. The moderate elements have once more proved unable to assert themselves. Rather than dismissed by the party, Muscat, the creator of this melt down, is leaving of his own free will, arrogantly setting a departure date, in the future, after being thanked and given, for the umpteenth time, a vote of full confidence by his cabinet and parliamentary group.

I believe that the situation will not remain desperate

A majority of the party membership too still feels admiration and gratitude towards this Prime Minister, this architect of a shameful national tragedy. Looks like we shall be made to endure the sight of a Joseph Muscat riding towards the sunset to the tune of Pomp and Circumstance.

I would like to believe that some discouraging utterances of the two contenders for the vacant premiership are dictated by the need to win over the support of hardcore Labour Party members.

If it were not so then we could be in for a prolongation of bad governance and a delay of the much-needed change in direction. No doubt both candidates have an unenviable task ahead, inheriting, as they would be, a state that has reached the pits in terms of institution melt down. If one of them does start a reform he will need all the understanding and support of moderate Labourites.

Now how different a party is the Nationalist from Labour? Is the Nationalist Party ready, as it has done in the past, to pick up the pieces of this broken state? Many observers will tell you not really, and quite a good section of the public seems to concur.

I too find it difficult to give a clean slate to the Nationalist Party.

Unfortunately, the Nationalist Party does feature some of the sins that Labour displays, with however a significant difference, that is, saving a few mortal ones, most of the Nationalist sins are venial in nature. In contrast Muscat’s Labour presents itself with a huge baggage of big, fat mortal sins, many of an unrepentant sacrilegious nature. Just look at poor Malta’s current predicament! With apologies to whoever prefers straightforward talk to parables and innuendoes.

If Labour proves incapable, is there a possibility that the Nationalists will come to the rescue of Malta? Unfortunately, not with Adrian Delia and his entourage leading.

This since, persistently, evidence comes up that this team has not managed to win over a majority of the party’s electorate, let alone hoe to win an election. Basically Delia has had his chance to establish his leadership but for many reasons he has failed.

The man, however, is not so rotten as some would depict him, he has made great efforts and assumed significant personal sacrifices in his bid to lead the party and serve Malta. It just has not worked out, is not working out and does not look like it is going to, period.

I can somehow visualise a possible redeeming action on Delia’s part, a behaviour that perhaps has never occurred in political history. Can he take an initiative and declare his intention to give up the leadership and invite, or rather challenge, the party, and his detractors in particular, to come up with a valid alternative substitute? A substitute who will unite and reconcile as close to unanimity as possible. This immediate substitute should be an elderly experienced veteran, if one is willing to volunteer. Such a veteran will lead for a definite temporary period, will command respect and work to a 15-month timetable, reforming the party and nurturing viable female and male successors.

So is Malta undergoing all this agony in vain? I would say no, not really, we are growing up, we are maturing. We have discovered the power of civil society, an apolitical civil society, that takes fearless initiatives, that tells off errant politicians, pushes them aside and demands respect towards citizens, demands justice for an assassinated journalist and her family. We were not conscious of this power that resides in so many of us.

This power switches itself on the moment we overcome the fear to speak out and manifest our views and opinions.

Thank heaven for Occupy Justice, Repubblika, Manuel Delia, Graffitti, a grieving family and all those citizens who participate when called upon to protest. Let us salute the courage of these people, conditioned as they are by life in a small community, on a small island, where protesting outside the “protection” of a political party is considered a risky madness. Let us not forget that Malta has democratic credentials and is a European Union member. So yes, we can and will move out of this predicament, I believe that the situation will not remain desperate.