People often ask me why the Greens continue to fight, seemingly against all odds, for parliamentary representation. The answer is simple. We persist in our struggle for two principal reasons; the first is our mission to place the environment truly at the forefront of our country’s political agenda. The second is our deep conviction that a multi-party democracy is healthier than the prevailing two-party five-year quasi-dictatorships that divide the country down the middle.

Contrary to what many people think, the Greens do not consider the emergence of other political groupings as a threat. Our primary value, embedded in our party’s name, is democracy. The people’s choice is more important to us than scaremongering clichés like stability and governability. In more than one way we believe that the emergence of other political groupings may act as a political catalyst to have a third, or fourth party, elected. However, our belief in the benefits of multi-party democracy is not dogma. It’s not just about having more parties elected, but about having other parties elected with clear liberal and democratic credentials.

Right, so now we have the fourth party. It is a regrettable reality that this political grouping is clearly being constructed around a very conservative, right to far-right political creed. Their leader’s declaration that they are not of right or left is, to say the least, incredulous. One has only to consider their political agenda to date, which includes the verbal bashing of immigrants, single mothers and homosexuals, a subtle anti-EU position, a Victorian vision of society, a 1950s role for women, opportunistic pandering to hunters and misogynists, and a political system that grants even more power to the leader; presumably in their case, a married heterosexual male with six children.

The result of this political development is that Malta now has three conservative parties and just one liberal party. Pushing forward a liberal, environmental and reformist agenda will now be a more challenging feat for the Greens. Considering how far right Malta would drift were we (hypothetically, of course) to disappear from the political scene, the responsibility for taking a clear stand on key liberal and progressive issues is even greater. Let me explain why, using three very topical issues.

The first issue is the Environment. The two large parties have very shady credentials on the environment. The Nationalists are able to use their PR mega-machine and sneaky strategy to win brownie points on the environment with sharp U-turns such as that on Xaghra l- Hamra; a U-turn we welcomed. However, their silence on the imminent rape of Ramla l-Hamra last week was both deafening and damning, evidence of their pick-and-choose environmental policy. They did have the courage to stop the hunting season 10 days early, true. However, as Simon Busuttil announced, they have every intention of opening the spring hunting season next year. Labour, on the other hand, are championing golf courses – not one, not two, but three. They only declared themselves against the Xaghra l-Hamra golf course after the Greens and civil society organisations objected. Their spring hunting policy is not different to that of the Nationalists – the latter simply manage their PR better. Our biggest criticism of the two large parties regarding the environment is that they are financed, and consequently controlled, by the construction industry, a charge they have never refuted. What about the new fourth party? Will they offer Malta a change? Unlike the other two, they don’t have the construction industry financing them from the outside. No, better still, they have a leader contractor on the inside, sitting on the party executive. In addition, they are already pandering to the hunters, and apparently have already signed up the leaders of the FKNK. They haven’t declared themselves on golf courses, but with Malta’s premier golf entrepreneur on the party executive, one need not rack one’s brains to imagine what their position will be.

The second issue is Divorce, for which the Greens have a track record of consistency. We have always recognised the right to divorce primarily as a civil right, but also as a social necessity. For 18 years we have been highly critical of the hypocritical and pathetic situation in which Malta does not accept divorce, except if granted in a foreign jurisdiction. The position of the large parties on divorce is cowardly and shameful. Their neo-clerical positions make a sham of secularism. The Prime Minister, although not as militant as his predecessor, refuses to acknowledge the need for divorce, let alone recognise that it is a basic civil right to terminate your marriage and re-marry. The Leader of the Opposition, who a decade ago displayed unique sincerity by not taking a religiously sworn oath as Prime Minister, is now too close to an election to uphold his secularist credentials and is shying away from the issue. What about the fourth party? The third man on Dr Muscat’s team, who often relies on papal encyclicals to make a political argument, has declared his militant stand against divorce; he makes Tonio Borg seem liberal! The Greens will not give up the struggle to introduce divorce; we will do so irrespective of the electoral price. Upholding civil liberties and ensuring that thousands of separated people (desirous of a second chance at marriage) are not sacrificed on the altar of electoral expediency are issues on which there is no compromise. We will never steer right to pick votes.

Then there is the issue of democracy. The two large parties guard their control over Malta jealously, and in some instances rather viciously. Their refusal to budge on the electoral threshold is perhaps the best case in point, but there are several others. They remain reluctant to introduce legislation that will serve to widen democracy and trim their power. To be fair to this government, the introduction of a Whistle-blower Act was announced this week, a law the Greens have been arguing for since our inception 18 years ago; a real political example of better late than never. However, this is only the start. Far more is needed. Our colonial libel laws insulate them from proper media scrutiny. Their reluctance to introduce a Freedom of Information Act clearly shows their resistance to improving political transparency and accountability. The complete absence of a law on the financing of political parties allows both Nationalists and Labour to operate media empires and finance electoral campaigns costing millions in complete secrecy. In all fairness to Dr Muscat, his thoughts seem to mirror ours on this matter. However. his proposals to bring about a change do not ameliorate our democracy. In fact, they worsen the situation by concentrating power in fewer hands. Dr Muscat is proposing to have an elected president, who is to be given far wider constitutional powers than our present head of government. Assuming that both Labour and PN agree to change the Constitution to meet Dr Muscat’s demands (were I Josie, I wouldn’t hold my breath), the result would be the granting of more power to either Dr Gonzi or Dr Sant. How this would bring about a more participative democracy and give smaller parties a fairer chance beats me.

With the risk of now having three conservative parties steer the country further right, the Greens must take responsibility for ensuring this country does not regress back to the times when the boundaries between politics and morality disappeared. Liberal democracy is built on the foundations of tolerance, the rule of law and respect for privacy. Any diversion from this is not only a threat to our freedom but also to our civility (development, progress??).

Edward P. Fenech is an executive committee member of Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party