I am the first person to admit that the biggest mistake ever committed by Alternattiva Demokratika was not to include the word “party” in its name. This hasn’t helped us combat the false perception our political adversaries like to propagate that AD is not a political party but just an environmental NGO. Many people still think that AD is not a political party; including people who until recently were within the party.

AD became a political party when it contested its first general election in 1992, in all electoral districts. This will be our fifth general election; again we will contest all 13 electoral districts. Throughout the last 19 years we have contested almost every local council election and nearly managed to elect an MEP in 2004. That alone makes us a political party. However some people believe that, while it is the role of AD to offer strong and convincing political opposition from one election to another and to stick up for the rights of residents all over Malta and Gozo, it should stop campaigning during a general election to make way for the big boys. No way. I am very surprised that this newspaper’s editorial (AD’s ‘secret’ revealed – TMID, 15 February) seems to share this same view, by claiming that somebody had blown our cover and revealed AD’s secret; the big secret being that we are working to win electoral support. Surprise! What else should a political party be doing, may I ask? The editorial also repeated the allegation, originally fabricated by the PN spin-doctors, that AD is “stealing” PN votes by being only critical of the government and not of the opposition. A newspaper of this calibre shouldn’t have any difficulty understanding that in a democracy, it is normal for opposition parties (AD is an opposition party) to levy criticism primarily at the government, while providing its views on the proposals of other opposition parties. AD was equally critical of the Labour party when it was in government between 1996 and 1998. Even the very idea that AD only criticises the government is incorrect. During this election campaign, The Malta Independent has attended almost every press conference we have held, and its journalists have reported us fairly. I simply cannot understand how the editor is under the impression that AD only criticises the PN. Since the start of the campaign, we have criticised (in no soft terms) Labour’s proposal to slash the surcharge by 50 per cent – we termed this proposal as “environmentally catastrophic” on more than one occasion.

We have accused Labour of deceiving the public by saying that it can re-open negotiations with the EU on the Drydocks. We have expressed serious doubt on the feasibility of the proposal to de-tax overtime. On several TV programmes, I have accused Labour of being financed by the building lobby, just like the Nationalist Party. I have consistently criticised Labour’s reluctance to embrace the EU. In a newspaper article in January, I accused Alfred Sant of criticising Malta’s adoption of the euro just one day after it was introduced; I also stated that the introduction of the euro was a success of the Nationalist government. Harry Vassallo will go down in history as the man to have coined the phrase that “Alfred Sant is Lawrence Gonzi’s biggest asset”.

It is true that we have been highly critical of the government’s record on the environment, but what’s new? We have been doing this for years; it is no secret. Those asserting that we have been too critical should recall that just last week, Prime Minister Gonzi effectively binned his environment minister. Were we right then? In the same press conference, Dr Gonzi adopted AD’s primary environmental policy of a reform of Mepa, albeit without specifying what his reform is to be. Is AD critical or constructive?

I find it rather baffling that the editor finds it difficult to understand how AD can still propose a coalition with political parties it criticises. The answer is simple – politics is the very art of compromise. It is the ability to work together in spite of differences. For example, it is no secret that AD and PN were very much in tune on Malta’s EU membership bid. A coalition was discussed in 2003 to secure membership. This does not mean that we have to agree with either of the parties on everything. If that were so, what use would it be having another party in the first place?

What the editor and the electorate have yet to understand is that it is the PN and the MLP who have an affliction towards working with other parties.

They are reluctant to accept the very idea of a coalition government with the Greens because they prefer their own grand coalition with the building industry. A coalition with the Greens in government after 8 March will give this country back to its people. For those seeking absolute power in a one-party government, that is probably the secret most worth guarding.

Edward Fenech is a candidate for Alternattiva Demokratika on the first and sixth districts