Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Rent referendum

Expand Messages
  • Ralph Cassar
    The Times 1/10/04 Rent referendum Harry Vassallo Sometimes I wonder which party is in government. Green pressure before the 2003 election put the issue of rent
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      The Times 1/10/04

      Rent referendum

      Harry Vassallo

      Sometimes I wonder which party is in government. Green pressure before the
      2003 election put the issue of rent law reform firmly on the political
      agenda but neither of the other political parties dared squeak about it in
      fear of losing a handful of votes. After the election the PN recognised the
      effect of Green pressure and in the President's speech at the opening of
      Parliament rent reform was listed along with many other matters as one of
      this government's targets.

      Just over one year later the Prime Minister has ruled out any change. He
      covered his tracks in a futile cat and mouse game with the opposition
      inviting the Leader of the Opposition to give a guarantee that the MLP would
      not resort to housing requisitions if it ever comes to office. No politician
      would ever give any such guarantee and the Prime Minister knows it.
      No government, not even a PN government, will ever give up its residual
      powers. In extremis it may be necessary to resort to requisition once more.
      What if the next Labour government faces a national emergency such as an
      earthquake? It would also be absurd to ask the MLP to promise not to abuse
      its legal powers. If it is likely to do so what would any promise be worth?
      Asking the opposition to give guarantees that cannot possibly be given or
      which would be patently worthless if given is just a game, a way to secure
      an excuse for the PN government to do nothing once more.

      Labour solved the dilemma by choosing paralysis. By saying nothing it does
      not confess that it recognises the urgency for reform and retains the
      loyalty of legally protected squatters and opportunistic tenants as well as
      the support of those who deserve assistance. Labour landlords are expendable
      in the MLP's calculation.
      The PN thesis is that the PN tried to reform the rent laws by liberalising
      rental contracts made on or after 1995. It has not worked. One of every four
      properties still lies vacant and the culture reversal towards home rental
      cannot begin. It is claimed that because landlords are afraid that a future
      Labour government would resort to requisitions they are reluctant to enter
      into rental agreements.

      This is simply an excuse. None of this has any bearing on the removal of the
      inheritance of leases. If the government had a shadow of a spine it could
      tomorrow amend the law to make it impossible to pass on a lease of a
      property to one's heirs. In this madhouse it is not the owners' heirs who
      effectively inherit the property but the tenants'.
      The Prime Minister does not care. He is happy to play cat and mouse with the
      opposition and do absolutely nothing. Having made an unequivocal statement
      that he does not intend to lift a finger on the issue, he imagines that the
      matter will die down once more and disappear.

      In reviving our rent reform campaign last year we called for an all party,
      all stakeholder discussion to address this major challenge. We looked
      forward to cooperation, to detailed data collection regarding the myriad
      situations created by the patchwork of legislation complicating the issue
      for the past 50 years. We hoped that our rivals would recognise how serious
      the situation is. Now it is clear that they prefer playing games.

      The Greens are not waiting for the nothingness of the PN and the MLP. In
      raising the issue we have bent over backwards to obtain their cooperation.
      Now it is clear that they have left the issue in our lap assuming that
      because they have kept us out of Parliament we will not be able to address
      such matters. They have miscalculated.
      We are now free to act unilaterally and to have the law abrogated in part or
      as a whole by legal means. Nobody needs to be in Parliament to invoke the
      Referendum Act which gives ordinary citizens rights over Parliament. We have
      tried consensus and we have been rejected. We are now free to show the
      thousands of people who have suffered unspeakable injustice for 50 years
      that they need not look to the other parties for relief. The understandable
      call by some columnists to keep the issue non-partisan has been rejected by
      the government and the opposition: they have chosen to keep abusing a
      significant part of the population in their self-centred tug-of-war. We are
      about to see what the answer will be.

      We would have preferred to have a discussion in order to ensure a deliberate
      and calculated change which would avoid any hardship to tenants unable to
      cope in a liberalised market. Now we will be obliged to achieve an
      abrogation of the existing laws in order to bring the other parties to the
      legal drawing board. We can and we will.
      There are many tens of thousands of properties subject to controlled rents.
      Each boasts a bevy of outraged owners. They are about to discover that they
      are not a negligible minority. It is more than possible to repeat the
      achievement of the alliance opposing the cement plant development, the
      Mnajdra landfill or the Verdala golf course development. Only this time it
      will be far more focused with tens of thousands of people signing up to
      claim their rights.

      On the issue of rent reform there are thousands of people who have been
      slapped in the face by this government and insolently neglected by the
      opposition. They are many thousands of reds, blues and greens who have had
      it to here with being cheated by their own government. They can and they
      will change the law whether the parties in Parliament like it or not.

      On this issue they can ally themselves with the Greens because it is the
      Greens alone who are willing to do anything at all about their plight. There
      are many thousands more who are disgusted by the situation without having a
      personal interest in the matter as tenants or as landlords. They can be
      expected to give their support also.

      This is not about supporting the Greens. It is the Greens working for
      everybody regardless of political belief once more. It is another
      cross-party alliance. It is transversal politics breaking up the stereotypes
      and breathing new life into our democracy, into our economy, into our social
      relationships and into our environment. It is about solidarity, social
      justice and commonsense. It is a rejection of stagnation.

      Stand up and be counted: get in touch.

      Dr Vassallo is chairman of Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.