The Malta Labour Party parliamentary group’s decision to back the European Constitution Treaty could be a signal that the two major parties in Malta are finally agreeing on something of vital importance to the country.

We have seen, over the past months, that the two parties – the PN and the MLP – are finding some form of common ground in some areas of national interest. However, the MLP – which must still approve the yes vote at an extraordinary general meeting in a few weeks’ time – must be sure of what it is saying now, as an unjustified reversal on its position later on will open up a veritable Pandora’s Box.

There have been a few instances that come to mind in recent weeks that have shown that the two leaders, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi and opposition leader Alfred Sant, seem to have drawn closer.

During a conference organised by the Malta Business Bureau to examine Malta’s position one year after EU membership, both leaders gave well thought out speeches that had the same message, although in different forms.

Dr Gonzi, on the one hand, urged Malta to roll up its sleeves and take the bull by the horns. Dr Sant also seemed to convey the message that Malta needed to buck up, but criticised some government measures and gave alternative examples of what he felt could boost our competitiveness. But at least they were both more or less on the same wavelength.

Dr Gonzi, in particular, thanked the MLP for not trying to make political gain about Malta’s joining of the ERM II to introduce the euro currency in 2008.

To go back to the MLP parliamentary group’s backing of the EU Constitution, one must mention the MLP leader’s proviso that although the treaty was not automatically in conflict with Malta’s neutrality and sovereignty, a lot depended on the political will of the governing party.

He said that if either of the two above-mentioned issues were affected, the MLP would immediately reverse the decision upon being elected.

We do have a tendency in Malta to come to agreement, perhaps too early and superficially. The consequence of this is a very fast unravelling of all that that has been agreed to, ending up in a worse position than when we started – the proverbial one step forward and two steps back. An example of this was the much-vaunted social pact wherein the country was led to believe – by all the parties concerned – that agreement was imminent. What happened? Something went wrong at the very last and we were left up the creek without a paddle.

We need to ensure that this does not happen with the ratification of the EU Constitutional Treaty. This issue is far too important to “play political tennis with”. A decision needs to be taken and we need to put it behind us and concentrate on the bread and butter issues. Issues such as the treaty are only as much of a distraction as you make them.

If the MLP (and obviously PN) intend to back it, then a frank and open discussion should take place, perhaps not only in parliament, but also between delegates of the two parties to ensure that everything is clear. Both parties should state their case to each other and constructively criticise if it is warranted.

Either way, a decision needs to be reached and finalised. While one can fully understand the MLP’s proviso about neutrality and sovereignty, a matter that the MLP has always defended, we cannot have U-turns such as the VAT issue and even the EU fiasco. The more we mess about, the further we fall behind.

The truth is that it is good to know that the two parties are very much in line on this issue, especially considering the division that existed on EU membership. What is important is that, once a decision is taken – and it now seems more likely that the MLP will be voting yes – we do not go back on our word just for the sake of doing so.