Brexit is here - Alfred Sant

So that’s how it is. Brexit has at last arrived. It took so long to put the decision on track because it was triggered by a referendum. As I see it, a referendum has a less than worthwhile function in a parliamentary democracy, in which MPs supposedly assume the role of representing the interests of citizens.

When a decision is taken by referendum for which MPs are not prepared, surely turmoil will arise.

Two elections had to take place over three years before the Brexit decision could be implemented. In this, it is immaterial whether the implementation was good or bad.

All too often, with a referendum it’s like one is playing Russian roulette, in which a bullet is lodged in a revolver holding six slots, and you must it at your head without knowing whether the trigger will be hitting the slot containing a bullet.

When David Cameron placed himself in this situation, he went on to pull the trigger.

In Malta, regarding the entry of Malta in the European Union, Dr Fenech Adami played the same game. But he had behind him the full political and logistic support of the European Union. The same did not happen when the British referendum was the issue.

And now Brexit is in force.

British MEPs

I was sorry for the British MEPs, especially members of the group of socialists and democrats. All sounded emotional and were depressed, though they did not all show or conceal it in the same way.

There was somebody who said or wrote this: as European MPs, the Brits were among the most eager to take on parliamentary work. They would participate in the process by which resolutions are finalised in a painstaking manner, and they continued to do so right up to the end. I had noticed this myself, at least in so far as the socialist group is concerned.

I have in mind for example the female co-ordinator for the socialist group in the petitions committee: she took over with full enthusiasm that assignment during the last six months, as if Brexit was not looming. (Now Alex Agius Saliba has replaced her.)

Obviously, I’m referring to antiBrexit MEPs. Those deputies who were pro, mainly members of the Farage group and the British

Conservatives, were exuberant.

Lesson

The European Union would be mistaken if it concluded that the UK’s departure from its ranks resulted from an evil manoeuvre intended to disrupt European unity.

The European “character” is greatly different from the ways of life that one finds in other continents. The European objective to attain “ever closer union” – as enshrined in the treaties – will continue to be considered by some national entities in Europe as potentially threatening to their way of life. They will continue to contest it for one reason or another. Yet they will remain as European as the staunchest federalists in the European Parliament.

The strategy that has been adopted... of moving towards this “ever closer union” in different sectors, with efforts that follow each other on a step-by-step basis... sounds prudent. It has ruled out the introduction of strong measures overnight.

On the other hand, it has given rise to suspicions that are not altogether unjustified. It will continue to do so. Is European Union being extended by stealth without taking into account the national interests of the individual countries concerned?

There’s a danger in this – that Brexit will not remain an isolated occurrence.

Proud

I don’t much appreciate the callsign or slogan, call it what you will, which proclaims that one is “proud to be Maltese”. Frankly I do not see why I should be proud of something I did not choose but found it chosen for me at birth.

On the other hand, if the call stands say, for pride in the democracy that we would have planted and cultivated in our country – or pride in the economic or social successes achieved by Malta, then that would be more appropriate. It would make sense because it relates to praiseworthy action that has been purposefully undertaken, and which we would have endorsed and strived for.

“Patriotic” values should not just be discarded, even if there are some who consider them to be irrelevant. However, we should be clear regarding the basis on which they are to apply. Nor should the be promoted blindly.

One can understand that they are not at all irrelevant by noting how much bigger national entities than ours have continued to promote them right to the present day. Just consider the practice of giving honour to the flag in the US; it is carried out in schools there as a daily routine.

Villa Frere

That Villa Frere in Guardamangia could end up demolished or hemmed in so that in its place or around it, some other big structure can be built, would be just another shameful and unpardonable deed. Only in this country is it deemed to be one more unimportant incident. Elsewhere, that kind of building would almost automatically, be classified as needing to be conserved and properly maintained.

Here, if it is to be saved, that might happen because a number of concerned citizens rise up in protest and for once their voices prevail.

One may be tempted to exclaim how we cannot go on like this.

Yet, we have been following the same approach for quite likely whole centuries. Otherwise, why would we have so few buildings still standing that date from the Middle Ages? Indeed, the hard clay with which it was customary in the past, to seal roofs against rainwater and damp used to be lifted from the pottery to be found in Punic tombs, among other sources.

Impeachment

As designed by the founders of the Amercian republic, the impeachment process by which the President of the US can be removed from office hardly makes sense any more. With the ever growing political polarisation in the country, the outcome of the process increasingly depends on how the power balance in the US Congress has shifted between Republicans and Democrats.

Actually, it has always been like so but up to a few decades ago, the idea was that as a Republican or as a Democrat, in the end when examining actions by a President that are manifestly illegal or illegitimate, you would vote in line with what was lawful.

One way or another, that is what began to happen when the process to remove President Nixon started rolling in the year 1974. But since that date, matters have changed radically.

It’s not just in Malta that extreme partisanship has managed to undermine institutions. Nor is it fair to attach all the blame exclusively on President Trump. He continued to encourage the rot but it had started well before his time.

Today reaching any judgement about whether very significant actions are justified or not is seen only as just a partisan exercise.

I was sorry for the British MEPs, especially members of the group of socialists and democrats. All sounded emotional and were depressed, though they did not all show or conceal it in the same way