Faced with the public’s reaction to his decision to grant a 100-day amnesty to inmates at the Cordin Correctional Facility, the Home Affairs and National Security Minister sought refuge behind the fact that, 25 years ago, a PN government also granted amnesties.

That’s somewhat rich coming from someone who, in an interview given only in January last year, claimed that his decision to turn his back on the PN was due to the Party remaining “anchored to the past” and “using the past as a tactic to discourage disillusioned voters not to vote for Labour”.

But let’s not berate Minister Mallia for changing his political yardstick so soon. There is a far more serious issue at stake here. You see, granting amnesties a quarter of a century ago was not the only thing the PN did in this very sensitive sector. It transformed the whole philosophy behind incarceration. It introduced new policies and measures intended to rehabilitate, and it never lost sight of the fundamental values of fairness and compassion – and the need to balance the two. If the outcome was not as good as had been hoped, it was certainly not due to any sins of omission.

Maybe the Labour Government has some big policy ideas in the pipeline, but until it feels the need to share them with the rest of us, we are more than justified in thinking that this amnesty is no more than a pre-election promise, made in a very discreet and targeted way. Forget vision, long-term plans, the bigger picture … Labour’s strategy for correctional policy is election tactics.

This might not surprise some. If there’s anything we have learnt in these 100 days, it is how fast a government’s ethical standards can go to pot. But this amnesty is worse than that. As the Americans would say: it’s a case of giving candy to a diabetic. The government has yet to deny the claim that, thanks to the amnesty, a number of inmates have not completed the drug-rehabilitation programme they had been obliged to undertake. It has equally remained tight-lipped about more inmates who will now drop out of the same programme because their sentence is now shorter than the period for which the programme runs.

The people in question will be enjoying the taste of freedom earlier but anyone who has the vaguest idea of the effort and resolve needed to kick the drug habit will be left in no doubt that this amnesty was not, ultimately, in the best interests of these people.

Equally stunning was the largesse of this amnesty. The last time an amnesty was given for an election victory – that was by Labour in 1996, by the way – no blanket concession was given. This time only “paedophiles” were excluded (in quotes because it is not even a category in criminal law). Child abuse is abhorrent, but there are other serious crimes that are not made any less serious by the fact that the victims are the wrong side of 18.

Some days ago, Minister Mallia met with an NGO active in victim support. He probably felt that the line “the PN gave amnesties too” was not working well as a defence with the general public, let alone with the victims of crime. After all, at this point people are not wondering if the PN made the right choices in 1987 but if Labour can ably govern this country in 2013.

At his meeting with the NGO, the Minister made some reference to prison reform (of which he gave not even the vaguest details). He also asked the NGO to prepare reports on how to best support victims. That might sound great – until you reflect on the past 100 days and realise that it’s more likely a desperate cry for help from a government that’s totally clueless on the matter of governing.

Mr Puli is a Nationalist Member of Parliament