Turning back the pages through the long and arduous struggle for Independence amongst Malta’s own political parties of the time, we may wonder that we ever actually got there.  We may say that the whole journey took 150 years from 1814 to 1964 but the negotiations had been in progress for nine years. 

When the bills were passed in London and news reached Malta, Il Helsien’s headline was, “Nationalists sell Malta for a few pounds.”. 

Mintoff gave a plan for an independent Malta with its neutrality guaranteed by the United Nations – “a Switzerland in the Mediterranean”.  He also told the Russians that the defense treaty between Britain and Malta was for the sole purpose of insuring the safety of the Middle East oil wells; but when he was in office, he would reciprocate Soviet industrial and commercial aid by seeing that no British base was set up in Malta.

The financial agreement provided for British aid to Malta of £50,000,000 over the next ten years.

In connection with National Day festivities and the ceremony of commemoration, the Prime Minister, Dr George Borg Olivier, said “Let us set a shining example of being united as a nation .. .to lead our Island home to happiness and prosperity.” 

And here we are today.  Much the same if were not for economic prosperity and separation of Church and State.  Same battles, same slogans, same views.  The truth that cannot be denied is that we, as a nation, did manage to get on our feet and make it possible to provide jobs and education to our people and their families.

The belief in the ability of the Maltese to take their destiny into their hands, though it met with difficulty and tough times, paid off and produced results through vision, hard work and help from Britain and other countries.  Having placed our faith in ourselves we achieved real independence.  Ultimately, what is independence if not to believe in yourself and your ability to do better?  It cannot be defined by money, nor by distance from authority.  It creates responsibilities and requires fortitude and determination.  Guiding principles help to ease the troubles and were it not for our faith in God, we may have never made it.

Not long ago, the Nationalist Party was forced to choose between God and State. It is almost as if the whole divorce saga was evoked just to reach the bitter end of the storm that raged at the time of negotiations and had never quite subsided.  And to make completely sure that the message was delivered, the Gay Marriage and Adoption law was enacted. 

It is different, though, for the Labour Party who can still rely on the GWU to provide their base.  The GWU criticizes freely and willfully and imposes its own stance on all – members or not – as it leads the PL from behind.  But if the Church had to defend workers rights or speak of what it believes is good for society, there is outrage.

No wonder that the Church today is barely making its voice heard – though it should.

What place is there today for the Church in what has become a secular state?  I believe it is very far from what the Archbishop had in mind in the nine years of collision leading up to the Constitution.   For the PN, there are those who look ahead to being a political party of the centre and others who will not forsake the religion upon which its identity has been so largely formed.

Will it fall to the people, then, to redefine themselves, fifty years on?  In reality, one political party can be much the same as the other in office.  The size of the segment of “floating voters” or “switchers” will get bigger because voting will become more opportunistic and individual.  To the Left or to the Right, with money deciding the outcome more and more. 

Is this really what Malta had in mind when it took over its fate on 21st September, 1964?  

The way of life expressed at the time was one that would maintain our heritage of religious ideals.  The two were not separate.  The principle was strongly contested and divisive. In the end, the power of the Church was curtailed but core issues were respected and entrenched into the Constitution of Malta.

When the population is fed up and becomes cynical enough to stop caring, we will have lost our hope of living peacefully and contentedly.  The sense of something having been taken from us will pervade the mind of those who can remember the day when the Union Jack was lowered and the Maltese flag was raised so quickly after it.  Red and White and the George Cross in its place there to remind us all of the life we gave for protecting this island and the stability around it.  And cheered on by those who had faith in God and Country.   Not all, but many, did cheer and look ahead full of courage.

Can we recognize where we are now?  In a way it may be a good thing if we do not well recognize where we are as it means we have moved and got on.  On the other, if we do not have any trace of what we aspired to be, how successful can we feel? 

Will the €130 million from the sale of Maltese passports say we have succeeded?  Can the sale of the energy provision for the islands be some comfort to us?  And is being treated like a proletariat, without even the right to know what was signed in a contract, what was transferred, what was sold and bartered to strangers good enough for us?

This issue is a matter for the people to concern themselves with.  If the electorate has been so keen to become a modern, secular state they should now assume responsibility for protecting their own conscience and place and not just lie down and allow a completely alien way of politics to drive right over them.  Do we want a healthy democracy or a sham of the past to suck the life out of our morale and fibre?  We are an independent country, with elected leaders and we have a voice which needs to be heard and respected.  Somehow, I thought we would be in a better place fifty years on.