The statement made by opposition leader Alfred Sant during last week’s General Workers’ Union national congress provides much food for thought.

Dr Sant, while putting forward the Malta Labour Party’s vision for the future, extended an invitation to whoever could contribute to and be part of the change the MLP had in mind for Malta. The invitation is also open to the GWU “which has always been a privileged partner of the left-wing movement”.

Dr Sant was saying nothing new – and he himself confirmed it last Sunday during a party activity in Rabat. It is a known fact that most GWU members are MLP

supporters.

But what he said did bring back memories of times past when the MLP and the GWU were statutorily linked, so much so that the union was represented on the government cabinet.

It also brought about comments from representatives of other unions, who said that there should be no distinction between workers represented by the GWU and those who are members of the other unions that exist in Malta. Some of them said that Dr Sant’s remarks were out of place.

Unions are separate entities from political parties and from the government and opposition.

Their main duty is to defend the rights and working conditions of employees, many times defending them from the impact of measures introduced by the government of the day. Therefore, if unions are part of the government, as was the case when the MLP and GWU were statutorily linked, they would not be able to do their job properly.

The MLP and GWU were statutorily linked on 21 May 1978 and, at the time the “marriage” was made, it was said that the Workers’ Movement – that is the MLP and the GWU together – was the greatest force in Malta and that nothing would destroy it.

After the Nationalist Party won the 1987 and 1992 elections, a joint statement by the MLP and GWU in March 1992 announced the dissolution of the fusion “in view of the changed industrial climate”. The then MLP leader Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, who was soon be replaced by Dr Sant, said the fusion had been made in the interests of workers but changing circumstances had led to its dissolution.

It was said at the time that the dissolution would pave the way for a better relationship among all the unions, and between the other unions and the MLP. Whether this is the case is another story.

What Dr Sant said last week rekindled these memories. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi interpreted the comments to mean the “marriage between the MLP and GWU is still very much alive”, in spite of efforts to the contrary, with Dr Sant himself saying that, after all, the GWU has always been a staunch ally of the MLP.

Dr Sant should have avoided making such a comment because, after all, it is the MLP itself that will be hurt most.

The MLP is trying hard to put its past behind it and trying to promote the idea that it is an alternative government. It is doing its best to expose the government’s inefficiencies and at the same time offer solutions to the country’s problems. The fact that, since the last general election, the MLP has won two local council elections and the election for the European Parliament shows that it is on the right track.

Such comments from Dr Sant, however, and in particular remarks that lead people to remember the difficult years under the Labour administration of the late 1970s and early 1980s, may be interpreted – as in fact they have been – as meaning that the GWU is still too closely linked with the MLP.

Of course, Dr Sant did not say that the MLP and the GWU were to be linked statutorily again. He did not say that the Workers’ Movement was to be recomposed again.

But his comments raise a number of questions and these questions have to be answered.