It is my firm belief that the Panama Papers Mizzi-Schembri scandal – the secret companies of Minister Konrad Mizzi and the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff Keith Schembri – represents a watershed moment for the development of our ‘national identity’. It is the propitious moment for Malta to grow out of being a ‘nationless state’ (to use Godfrey Baldacchino’s expression) and grow into a fully-fledged nation(al) state.
I think the time is ripe for Malta to emerge from its chrysalis because there is a serious political force in the country, led by somebody endowed with undisputed personal integrity – I am referring to Simon Busuttil – insisting on the need for clean, honest politics.
At the same time, there are high-profile Labour personalities also of undisputed personal integrity, like Alfred Sant, who are (wittingly or unwittingly) hinting at the need for such a development. During the Indepth interview with Stephen Calleja, Dr Sant admitted that there are “problems of governance” in Malta, but that there is also the need for a type of politics which believes in the nation.
Tellingly, Dr Sant defined himself as a ‘Mazzinian’. Unfortunately, we live in intellectually dry times, when attention spans are short. Intelligent broadcasts such as Indepth have to be short to conform to the dominant standards. Had the programme been longer, Mr Calleja would have had the opportunity to ask Dr Sant to explain what he meant by his self-definition as a ‘Mazzinian’.
Giuseppe Mazzini was an Italian republican politician of the 19th century who championed the working class. It makes a lot of sense to refer to the 19th century because liberalism was perhaps one of the two great ideas of that century, and we are now living in neo-liberal times. While liberalism was growing and coming of age, Mazzini and others felt the need to exhort the working class to stand its ground in the new, emerging circumstances. They were rightly convinced that liberalism would simply squeeze the working man and throw him away when there was nothing left to squeeze.
Mazzini wrote a small book in 1860 called The Duties of Man and Other Essays. Despite its 157 years, the book is still fresh – precisely because we live in neo-liberal times and the present government (Joseph Muscat’s Movement) is neo-liberal.
Mazzini’s didactic book was aimed at the Italian working-man. He tells him about his duties before opening his eyes to his rights. He explains to the workers their duties toward God, the law, humanity, the country, the family and oneself.
He then explains what liberty, education, and progress mean to the working class.
I own a 1919 edition of the English translation of the book, and feel a great emotion each time I leaf through its yellowing pages because it is so contemporary. It is almost a blueprint for the Blue Labour current taking life in Britain at the moment – that is, the belief that the working class needs family, faith, and flag: in other words, the belief that those who support the ideas of the left need not be liberal, but can be ‘conservative’. Somehow, when I read about Blue Labour I see many of the policies espoused by the Nationalist Party of Malta.
Dr Sant was characteristically precise in that interview. He qualified his Mazzinianism by saying that he was Mazzinian in his ideas about duty to the country (he used the word patrija). Clearly, he was leaving out the Mazzinian teachings about the working-man’s duty toward God (or faith or religion).
As usual, the problem with Alfred Sant is that few people understand his more subtle points, and even fewer are interested in explaining them, the reason being that politics is not made of subtleties but of direct messages easily understood by the entire spectrum of the electorate. It is made of sound bites and short messages meant more to fudge the issues than to explore and explain them. More or less, the electoral campaign of 2013, if you know what I mean.
But the point is that Alfred Sant was saying that we need to cultivate the ‘nation’ – or ‘country’ – and its interests. He was addressing the same issues raised by Godfrey Baldacchino when he called Malta a “nationless state”.
Which is why I firmly believe that the intellectuals should get moving and explain to the people what our current predicament is, and where we should be heading. It is the sacrosanct duty of the intellectuals to justify their existence by explaining complex matters in accessible ways to those who are engaged in other endeavours without which the country would come to a standstill.
I am not saying that there are no intellectuals responding to this call but that there should be more voices raised. It is immoral for so many intellectuals to keep their head below the parapet because they might be afraid of the government of the day.
Indeed, the present government, as Stephen Calleja rightly pointed out, seems not to have too much time for the workers. The impression I get is that the workers are for Joseph Muscat’s Movement – a herd of sheep bereft of any ability to think and therefore easily shepherded hither and thither, while two of his closest aides dabble in the arcane arts of secret companies in secretive jurisdictions.
What I am trying to say is that the time has come to create the Second Republic promised by Dr Muscat but never delivered. Following the Mizzi-Schembri scandal, I doubt whether Dr Muscat still has the moral authority even to begin the Second Republic project, let alone bring it to fruition.
Ironically, it is his counterpart who clearly has the integrity and moral authority to carry out the quiet revolution the country needs.
Simon Busuttil has been growing in stature over the years. He is still reserved and clearly disinterested in imitating the chutzpah with which we associate Dr Muscat. And yet, behind that façade of reserve, there is a steely determination, coupled with a warm humanity that shines through. I can clearly see him pushing forward a new agenda for the country, giving birth to a theory of government that makes us proud Maltese and proud Europeans.
I have just read his Party’s document called Nibnu Fiduċja Ġdida fil-Politika: Proposti għal Gvernar Tajjeb. I read it only recently and it impressed me, even though it is still a working document, meant for public consultation. I do not know who actually wrote it but, to my mind, whoever it was managed to identify the ingredients for the right recipe for the country’s development.
Dr Busuttil’s introduction to that document is a blueprint for the theory of government our country needs. He states that his party has to learn from the mistakes of the past. Equally important is his belief in a set of radical ideas intended to lead the country toward a new way of governance. In other words, I would add, towards a Maltese theory of government.
It goes without saying that Simon Busuttil’s vision appeals to traditional Nationalists. But in many ways it also appeals to voters who come from other backgrounds and who might have supported other political forces in the past.
The Mizzi-Schembri scandal has clearly shown that we need a break with the past and a bridge to the future. My assessment is that there is nobody better placed to succeed in that mission than Simon Busuttil.
Whether the people will understand by “March 2018” is another story. But for the people to understand, there must be certain individuals – the intellectuals – who have to start dissecting and explaining.
Dr Sammut, a former Labour candidate, is the author of the best-selling L-Aqwa fl-Ewropa: il-Panama Papers u l-Poter.