A new legislature has been inaugurated and parliamentary life resumes precariously as the Gonzi administration navigates, this time round, with its wafer-thin majority. Parliamentarians on both sides of the House will have to adjust their bearings in the light of the new situation.

There is something to be said for the fact that the electoral post-mortem analysis by the media had dragged on for so long. It was not so much the photo finish that gave rise to protracted soul-searching. What stirred the imagination was the fact that the electorate contrived to produce a situation that highlighted a high degree of electoral abstentionisms.

The soul searching was not only about what had gone wrong, and what remedial action needed be taken by politicians to win back electoral confidence. It was about whether or not the Maltese electorate has reached a stage of democratic maturity and has come of age, as it were.

In either case, the political establishment must be in a position to respond.

Maltese society has occasionally demonstrated some sensitivity to the approach of this new millennium. The advent of “pluralism” liberated the Maltese intellectual outlook by slow, perceptible degrees. Our traditional way of life gathered some momentum as the accelerating rush of progress began to break the dams that contributed to our isolation or provincialism.

All of this gave rise to an increasing number of challenging, some times inquisitive, some times defiant, voices in the local media and in the political world.

Defiant voices

These voices belonged to journalists and opinion makers, as well as others who looked at the established order in the eye, and disputed the validity of old assumptions. Very often they did so cogently and potently, at times even irreverently.

These “defiant” voices did not come exclusively from the young, although it was often the young critics who predominated. Being new, the views expressed by the new breed were bound to draw attention, not only because they were novel, but also because they were often valid enough to merit consideration.

In many ways, this amounted to a manifestation that Maltese public opinion was becoming more inquisitive, and intellectually prepared to face and to seek solutions to its problems.

The new wave added fuel to controversy, and indicated how the nation’s pulse was beating. It encouraged hope of a new dawn.

Arbitrary government, bureaucratic inefficiency, partitocracy, official secrecy and lack of transparency, as well as all sorts of hypocrisy, have to be exposed and rooted out.

It is not merely a question of highlighting the depredations or irresponsibility of wayward officials and politicians. Progress demands their being out of harm’s way and substituted by more worthy successors.

The “new wave” is aggressively demanding “results”, rather than concentrating on debates and arguments about “principles”.

There is no way of coming to terms with the 21st century, unless we proceed from words to some fundamental, tangible changes.

Democratic solutions

Politicians, opinion makers and critics must have the knack of being in tune with the times. Their powers of articulation, their experience and common sense help to make them a cut above their audience. In so far as they express opinion, theirs is as good as that of their followers. And, in a democratic environment, each opinion deserves the respect due to it.

Every democratic community must find its own solutions. Democracy is a system of institutional competition for power. Without competition and conflict, there could be no democracy. Opinions have therefore to be deployed in the public forum. And this is how democratic opinion could be moulded.

Democracy means “rule by the people”, or rule with the consent of the governed.

This is a libertarian aspiration of people everywhere who resent the repression and corruption of authoritarian or totalitarian ruling elites.

People across the globe aspire to be ruled with their consent, and the right to turn their rulers out of office if a given situation so demands.

Democratic governments everywhere – in the industrialised world and in developing countries alike – are constantly tempted to trim their policies with an eye on their electoral prospects. But the ultimate and overriding objective of democracies is good governance, and not the pursuit of power by politicians.

The public interest

It is in this context that opinion makers and critics have a vital role to play. Their real role is that of watchdogs of the public interest.

Their responsibility is to maintain an oversight of the public domain, and to communicate their observations and opinions to their audiences. Their role is complementary to that of politicians. When the situation demands, they may be called on to stand up to politicians.

Situations may arise when the State threatens to become dominant in society, or is inclined to protect inefficient economic actors, whether capital or labour. The State may impede economic growth by misdirecting the flow of capital and resources, and by distorting investment decisions. Where the prospect of ill-gotten gains is a motive for the pursuit of office, the democratic process becomes a power struggle rather than a contest over policies. The same applies where the pursuit of ill-gotten gains becomes the objective of the elite subordinate to politicians. The State may be soft in maintaining law and order, and may have the wrong social policy priorities.

In all these circumstances, and in so many others, politicians and bureaucrats may be out of tune with public opinion and its perceptions of the national interest. They have to be challenged if and when necessary, and supported when circumstances so demand.

Opportunities for corruption are perennial features of public life when democracy goes out of focus. The only remedy is accountability, which requires a free press willing and able to monitor the democratic process and the conduct of public officers. Accountability serves governability by limiting the power of the State, and especially the Executive, with a view of preventing abuses and maladministration.

In more recent years, there has been ample evidence of salutary electoral interest in economic and administrative matters that bear on the citizen’s quality of life and on the environment. The “floating voter” has come to stay and is making his presence felt.

The last election has proved that the electorate is increasingly showing that it has a mind of its own.

As they venture into the new legislature, politicians on both sides of the House will travel at their own peril if they do not factor in this fact of life in their considerations.

[email protected]