Last Tuesday morning, Opposition Leader Alfred Sant listed 23 reasons as to why the Malta Labour Party feels there should be a Cabinet reshuffle.

On the evening of the same day, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi chose to ignore the issue completely when addressing party supporters at celebrations marking Independence Day.

After months of rumours about possible changes in the ministerial set-up, speculation that came mostly from the Labour media, it is the MLP leadership that is now pushing for a reshuffle, which it says would be in national interest.

We are now in the middle of the legislature, an ideal time for a reshuffle – if the Prime Minister believes there is a need for one – as it would give the ministers enough time to leave their mark in whatever portfolio they are given before election day.

But once this reshuffle did not take place over the summer, it is highly unlikely that it will happen now unless, of course, unexpected circumstances pave the way for changes in the months to come.

The 23 points listed by Dr Sant practically cover each and every ministry, which was tantamount to saying that all ministers need to be changed, in his party’s opinion. Considering that, when reshuffles are made, these as a general rule involve a few ministries, what Dr Sant was saying in between the lines was that all the Cabinet must go. This is, of course, Labour’s intention. The party will keep on hammering about what it thinks are the government’s inefficiencies in a bid to win the election, sometime in 2008.

As in anything else, there are pros and cons in a reshuffle process. Ministers who may not be performing up to expectations are shifted to another ministry or, in rare cases, removed completely from the Cabinet. New ones are appointed, with the possibility of some moving up the ranks from parliamentary secretary. All is done with the intention of bringing about better results.

While new blood is in itself a positive matter in that it brings with it fresh enthusiasm and a different outlook, it may be interpreted to mean failure, in particular of the ministers that are moved. It could also result in a kind of unsteadiness that would hit the whole government, and this at a time when the country needs all the

stability that it can muster to re-emerge from the economic difficulties it is facing.

Generally speaking, it is always hard for a prime minister to reshuffle his cabinet. For one thing, most of the ministers are established politicians – in our case some have been ministers for over two or more legislatures – and their being shifted around or even removed is not an easy decision to take.

Secondly, a prime minister must also consider the alternatives. Would a reshuffle keeping the same ministers but giving them a different portfolio be beneficial to the government? Would the introduction of new ministers give a government the boost that is needed? Are there parliamentary secretaries or backbenchers who deserve the “promotion”? Is there a need for the Cabinet to grow bigger than it already is? Should the Cabinet be made smaller? Would it be better to keep the status quo or go for a change that might, in the end, prove more harmful? Should a team that has won in the past be changed? Is the team still winning? Will the shifting around create “internal trouble” within the Cabinet to the detriment of its workings and go against the party in government’s interests?

These are all considerations that a prime minister has to make before deciding what to do.

As said before, as things stand now it is improbable that a reshuffle will be made. But Dr Gonzi is known to be a man who is not afraid to take tough decisions, even when they may seem unlikely.

Who knows, he might surprise us.