Mutiny in the Opposition ranks

Every now and then we learn of Members of Parliament dissenting from their political party, whether in office or in opposition.

We have had instances where rebel MPs led to the downfall of their own governments – the cases of Dom Mintoff in Alfred Sant’s government and Franco Debono in Lawrence Gonzi’s are two colossal cases in point.

Lately, this dissent has moved into the Opposition ranks. We have had, within this legislature, the case of Edwin Vassallo voting against his own leader’s instructions – Simon Busuttil. Now Busutill himself ignores the new party leader, whom he did not endorse, and abstains, together with five other MPs, on a motion presented to the House by Adrian Delia. Even the Democratic Party, with which the Nationalist Party formed a pre-electoral alliance, has opted to go its own way and vote against its hitherto ally. It appears that the line of communication between these two parties has fallen asunder.

All these elements of dissent indicate that there is a mutiny currently taking place within the Opposition ranks. The government – which benefits most from such internal upheavals in the Opposition ranks – uses this lack of concordance within the Opposition to forcefully make the case – and not without reason – that the Opposition does not boast a unified voice, is riddled with internal strife for power, and is therefore unable to offer an alternative government to the present one. This is compounded by the fact that the less the Opposition acts as a unified force, and the more the government manages to divide the Opposition, the better for the government to rule unhindered. Coupled with the fact that the Opposition’s popularity ratings are at rock bottom, that the economy is a success story and that overall Malta is doing well, continues to boost the government’s hold over the population.

Now I am not one to defend the institution of the whip. Personally, this is a highly undemocratic institution, where the inner core – the leadership of the party – uses this institution to dictate to fellow MPs how they are to exercise their vote in the House of Representatives as per their respective party leader’s command. Moreover, this institution, as has happened several times, is used to replace free discussion in the parliamentary group with leader diktat.

Yet we cannot have a situation where the Opposition is in disarray; more so when a government has by far a morethan-comfortable majority in the House. With a mainly twoparty system as ours since 1966 (I am considering the Democratic Party a one-off exception over a fifty-year period), Malta cannot afford to have a weak opposition.

It appears that the pre-electoral pact between the Nationalist Party and the Democratic Party has vanished into thin air and that internal discord among Nationalist MPs is rife. A mutiny within the Opposition is in the offing. Nonetheless, the end loser is not only the Nationalist Party, but democracy itself. For how can you have a vibrant, functioning democracy when one of the two sole players (the Opposition) is not functioning as it should? A dysfunctional opposition is no less a peril to democracy than a tyrannical government is.

These are, of course, challenging times for Malta, and for the Opposition in particular. Malta needs a strong opposition to be able to stand up to a stronger government. The Opposition needs to put its house in order, and when I refer to the Opposition, I am referring to all the MPs on the Opposition side of the House, both Nationalist and Democrat. Unless and until this is done – possibly through more dialogue between both Opposition parties, more discussion at parliamentary group level, and a concerted effort to arrive at agreed decisions – it is only democracy which will suffer. In the meantime, the government remains free to bulldoze all its measures with the Opposition sitting pretty on the fence, devoting much time to tackling internal strife rather than the interests of the country which they are called upon, as an opposition, to defend.

How can you have a vibrant, functioning democracy when one of the two sole players is not functioning as it should?