Alternattiva Demokratika will be contesting the election for the fifth time. Since their first participation, the percentage of votes obtained has steadily become smaller. Yet, AD believe that this time round they will be able to elect one or more of their candidates. Bernard Busuttil speaks to AD chairman Harry Vassallo to find out why the party is so confident

Alternattiva Demokratika elected a few local councillors and did well in the European Parliament election, although your candidate was not elected. But its record in general elections has shown a downward trend. How do you think the party will fare this time?

The June 2004 EP election has shown that people make a marked distinction between the different types of election.

On the day that the EP election was held at the same time with local council elections, AD garnered 23,000 votes or 9.4 per cent of the votes cast in the EP election, while an average of 6.2 per cent of the electorate voted for an AD councillors in the local elections.

This means that the electorate makes certain distinctions according to individual candidates and circumstances. Local elections have helped AD learn that it could fare well if it presents a valid candidate. In fact there were councils where we attracted 33 per cent of votes cast. This means that it is possible for us to achieve a good result when we make direct contact with people.

Our target is to attract 2,500 out of 23,000 votes available in electoral districts. These are roughly grouped in 8,000 households.

What arguments do you use to convince people to vote for AD?

We ask people what they think about us, as I believe that door-to-door canvassing is all about listening to the people rather than making speeches. Given the response we are receiving in the last months, the question we put forth tends to be “what do you want us to do when we will be in parliament?”

And what do the Maltese want?

The Maltese want honesty, stability and certainty. They want everyone to be treated equally, with less arrogance and more respect, and above all, the Maltese want a lessening of the pique between the MLP and the PN. The Maltese also want an environment where technical issues are discussed with objective reasoning rather than with partisanship.

What do you think of an opposition that is preaching honesty, less arrogance and more respect?

The people know that we have sustained our arguments through unflinching commitment throughout our 18 years. We have a clear policy and have never made a single U-turn. Surely, the MLP cannot boast of such things.

Most people want the third party in parliament. After 16 years of MLP and 20 of PN governments, people have learnt that an unaccountable one-party government is our biggest political problem.

We did have two-party governments in Malta, for example the Constitutional Party and Labour Party coalition of 1927 to 1930 and the 1951-1955 PN and Malta Workers Party government. The minor parties in the coalition were not successful. How would AD be successful in a new coalition?

One cannot compare the 2000s with the 1950s. We have been independent for 43 years and are an EU member and have ambitions to achieve economic, democratic and cultural levels equal to those of the best EU countries.

These targets cannot be fulfilled through a system of a one-party government and a duopoly in parliament.

How is AD proposing to achieve the targets you have mentioned?

We have been proposing crucial changes since 1992. These are laws regulating information, a whistleblower act and a party financing act. These would coerce governments into becoming transparent and accountable as the media would be able to get all the information it needs.

A whistleblower act would address corruption.

The law regulating party financing will for the first time release the other parties from the stranglehold of financiers and the country from permanent distortion of such vital rules such as those regarding planning and public spending. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi is promising these developments in 2008 to take effect after the election.

AD has posted the workings of the PN fiscal proposals on its website. Can you explain why there is such a gap between the PN’s projections and your findings?

We are constantly under scrutiny to be correct. We justify and give costing for every proposal and the government is able to ignore vast questions such as a 53,000 housing surplus, the absurdity of controlled rent, absence of divorce, the sad situation in public broadcasting, and the shameful constitutional changes implemented in October 2007.

The government seems to be free and unaccountable in all its boasts and promises. We do not feel to be irresponsible simply because it happens to be the pre-election season.

What is AD proposing with regard to housing?

We have 28 per cent of all housing units in Malta which are vacant, 60 per cent of which are in a good state of repair or require no repair. At the same time, the government has actively increased the surplus.

In 2006, this went to the extreme of extending development zones in violation of EU law. In previous years it had relaxed height limitations, rendering many newly-settled areas into building sites once again.

It is unimaginable that such surplus can ever be put to use since it would require an increase in population of 100,000 people or more and the provision of water and electricity services on a level we cannot dare to contemplate.

What about high rises?

In this context, high rises become a monument and symbol of this government’s commitment to speculation and neglect of the interests of private citizens.

The Floor Area Ratio policy was introduced in violation of Maltese and EU policy laws in 2006. The damage and loss of value to surrounding and remote properties which will have to compete unfairly in a market with the high rise properties is glibly dismissed by the government.

The penthouse of the tower at Xemxija, having a view of Gozo over the top of Mellieha will, undoubtedly sell at a very hefty price as well as apartments in many of the other high rises. This only means that thousands upon thousands of other properties, some very recently built will never be sold or if sold, will do so at a loss.

Do you think that the premise of nearby buildings gaining in value is just a bubble that will burst?

The bubble will not burst as long as people are willing to believe that it will not burst. It is simply a matter of belief and confidence that the value of property will continue to rise forever in the future.

There is absolutely no concrete foundation for any such belief. The facts documented authoritatively in the 2005 census make it mandatory for any responsible government to take out insurance against a possible economic catastrophe affecting hundreds of thousands of home-owners and the country’s economic structure.

Easing the pressure on the property market should be the country’s number one priority. This appears to be too much of a challenge for the PN and MLP who have traditionally been unable to take any action, even if only mildly distasteful to even a fraction of the electorate and certainly not to the speculating community in the building industry.

What are you proposing to ease such a pressure?

Creating a free rental market reflecting the massive over supply would give new homeowners and many others several new and much cheaper options making the need to buy a property ancient history.

In this way the price of property cannot continue to sky rocket and it will be clear to us all that we should invest in other sectors leading to a more reliable return.

In this scenario the first step has to be a just reform on rent laws and the removal of controlled rent in the face of massive alternative availability.

How does AD evaluate the other parties’ harbour generation projects?

We certainly do not have objections to the regeneration of harbour areas which have been neglected for decades.

However we have grown sceptical about quick fixes through construction in view of the dismal record of projects such as the Manoel Island Tigné project or the Cottonera Waterfront project to kick start the economy or to have perceptible effects on the economy comparable to the pre-electoral boasts which accompanied their inaugurations.

Which other areas do you think has been neglected by the government?

We have seen this government disappoint the country on its promise to make the environment its third policy pillar, it has continued to drag its feet on its EU commitments to defy the EU on matters such as hunting, and to fulfil its obligations at the least rate possible and only if under pressure.

The country has come to realise that serious environmental commitment is vital to ensure a decent quality of life.

Thirty-five per cent of children under the age of 16 years suffer from asthma and allergies and nothing is done to address the contact increase.

How was AD affected by the constitutional changes?

In the October 2007 constitutional change the position of AD was left unchanged. The PN and MLP simply agreed to improve their own positions and only if just two parties are elected to parliament.

They have effectively created a two-tier democracy for the first time in our history which is a complete disgrace to anybody with the slightest democratic sentiment. The difficulty otherwise which AD faces to acquire representation in our country’s parliament remains unchanged and we are confident that our preparations since 2003 with the present rules will produce a truly multi party democracy in 2008.

If in government, which ministry would AD like to take on?

It seems to be the popular consent that AD has a peculiar contribution to make regarding the environment and planning. However, it is up to our future prime minister and subject to coalition negotiations to determine the next cabinet.

What will be Harry Vassallo’s fate, whether AD lands a seat in parliament or not?

I have served my country through AD for the past 18 years. I have always considered it a duty to do so. I hope that I would be able to continue to serve in whatever role the electorate chooses to assign.