Malta has applied a system of local government for more than two decades now. It has been an experience which, by and large, can be considered a success. We have been able to adapt the system of local government to our needs and circumstances, with the last major set of reforms taking place a few years ago after wide-ranging public consultation. Whatever the changes, there is now consensus on the need to have a democratic system of local government.

The way we were

Before the advent of local councils, one person reigned supreme when it came to urban public space: whichever Minister happened to be responsible for public works and infrastructure. That one person wielded so much power was made infinitely worse by the fact that for almost Labour’s entire stint in government between 1971 and 1987 only one person held that post.

No wonder that priorities and the residents' interests and choices mattered little in decisions. It was the one Minister who decided where (often his own electoral constituency) and what. The Maltese idea of “local democracy” at the time (sadly it looks as if it’s coming back) was the long line of people, with a long list of grievances, waiting for their ten minutes with the Minister.

How things changed

Few events had an impact on Maltese political culture as did the introduction of local councils by a Nationalist government in the early 1990s. For the first time since the days of Napoleon, residents were to have a say in what got done in their localities through their elected representatives. Funds were to be distributed through a legally-established mathematical formula, thus making political manipulation almost impossible. The role of the central government was limited to that of oversight.

Quite a few people I know dismiss whatever goes on that’s related to local councils as ‘parish pump politics’. Sure, here we're talking about political life broken down to its atomic level. Yet, it’s as well to keep in mind that these are the building blocks of democratic life, not fancy ideologies or high-flown abstractions. The discussion on a minor street improvement has to follow the same rules of democratic engagement that you would expect in the debate on the national budget.

An important school

Many parliamentarians, myself included, cut their teeth in local government. It was the first time we were on the stump, the first elective public office we held, the first time we were entrusted with responsibility for public money which we were asked to put to good use in the interests of the people we represented. I believe we have lived up to the challenge and responsibilities entrusted to us and local councillors past and present can take credit for improved townscapes and, more importantly, a stronger civic spirit.

The ultimate recognition for the fundamental role of local councils came in 2001, when an article was entrenched in the Constitution establishing the principle of subsidiarity and democratic local government for good.

Labour's view

Still, we all had that nagging feeling that, while it paid lip-service to the initiative, Labour’s heart was never in local councils. From Mintoff’s abolition of the Gozo Civic Council in the 1970s to Sant slashing their funding to the point of rendering them dysfunctional in the mid-1990s, local councils do not exactly thrive when a Labour PM sits in Castille.

So it was no surprise, really, when it was announced that local government will get the Labour treatment: the next round of elections scheduled for 2016 will be cancelled. Why is this being done? The reasons given – in a very half-hearted fashion, I should add – are “too expensive”, “too much election fatigue” or “to coincide with European elections”.

The truth of the matter is that Labour still considers local government as something that stands in the way when it is in office. That is the only reason why. Residents who elected representatives with four-year mandates now find, retrospectively, that these have been extended by no less than another three years. Democracy implies elections that are not only free and secret but also regular. As far as local government goes, that means that Malta is a less democratic place than it was just over a year ago.