GSLP-Liberals losing ground, but what alternative? (And meanwhile, UK ringfences Defence interests) 

By Robert Vasquez 

The GSLP-Liberal Government’s unwarranted personalised political attack on the recently retired Principal Auditor, despite their praise of him just a few weeks ago, calls for a change of government.  

Additionally, there is growing discontent with the GSLP-Liberal Government anyway.   

However, the current GSD Opposition, whilst under the leadership of Keith Azopardi, are an uninspiring alternative lacking direction.  

Further, the UK do not act in the face of local political abuses save to protect their Defence interests in the Gibexit treaty from any future change in Gibraltar’s international status. 

CRITICISM ALWAYS FAVOURS OPPOSITION 

The Government accuses that Principal Auditor of bias favouring the GSD in his 2018/19 Report [Report] without basis. 

It has gone to the extent of proposing now a censure motion against him in Parliament, knowing that it cannot lose, nor can he defend himself.  

It is a cheap, disgraceful and a bullying stunt. The GSLP-Liberals are converting Parliament into a kangaroo court where the accused cannot appear to defend himself. It is constitutionally wrong and should be stopped by the Speaker. 

If the Speaker does not act, as is her duty, it calls for intervention by the Governor to protect an Officer of Parliament.  

Any public criticism of any government by anyone, especially an officer of Parliament, favours opposition parties. It is a reality of life.  

No sufficient checks and balances were included in the Gibraltar Constitution Order (2006) [Constitution] or in law to allow for a government to be defeated in Parliament, so our democratic system is deficient.  

A government, and so principally a Chief Minister, can do much as they, or he or she, pleases during their terms in office, except where Defence matters are engaged. 

The GSD motion of no confidence in the Chief Minister is bound to fail, due to the structure of Parliament. The point of it, however, is to allow debate and argument, which will bring everything to the fore and so to public attention. 

VALID CRITICISMS 

There are valid criticisms in the Report. The GSLP-Liberals play a game of attack and distract.  

Careful analysis of their attacks shows a lack of substance; substantive criticisms in the Report are ignored, that is aggravated by them not having made their points during the compilation of the Report.  

The GSLP-Liberals have failed, as shown by the flood of defensive and critical Government press releases.  

The GSLP-Liberals are showing, generally, that they are unfit to govern as demonstrated also by the Report’s criticisms.  

There is growing public discontent against them, which is spreading quickly. 

NO ALTERNATIVE- YET 

The problem is finding an alternative with clear policies and goals, including correcting what is wrong. 

The GSD, under Keith Azopardi, do not provide that. They are stale and do not come up with positive plans that encourage a vote in their favour. They sit on the fence, without being positive in their policies and interactions.  

There are many needed positive policies that can be publicised without alienating any voters, not least the need to improve democracy through electoral and parliamentary reforms, including a Public Accounts Committee. 

CREDIBLE ALTERNATIVE NEEDED 

Finding a credible alternative to the GSLP-Liberals and GSD is vital for Gibraltar to keep self-government with a British flag. 

A young and vibrant party with clear policies, aims and goals for the future within a Gibexit scenario should rise.  

Alternatively, the GSD need reinvigorating under new, younger, skilled and ambitious leadership with greater initiative, and more positive and clear policies, aims and goals.  

LEADERSHIP AND SYSTEMIC CHANGE 

The Gibexit treaty will require strong leadership to defend our separate identity, and our public and governmental institutions, and to reinforce them. None of the current political parties preach that.  

All incumbent governments from time to time are accused of misgovernment but still no needed systemic checks and balances are introduced in Gibraltar. There are many. One is a better electoral system; another is a separation of powers between the legislature and the executive. 

They do not suit those who look to govern us. They are on a quest for power and what comes with that. 

BAD GOVERNMENT MUST END 

The cycle of bad governance, with public accusations of favouritism, payments from public money, even corruption, and on many other fronts, being whispered by many, against whoever may be elected to government, must be ended.  

The problem seems institutionalised, and, to a degree, as being ‘eso es lo que hay’.  

It needs to be cleaned through neutral constitutional, democratic and governmental change, imposed by the UK, if necessary, but preferably introduced democratically by a new political force.  

CONSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED  

The main one is being able to defeat a government to force an election. Overthrowing a government is an impossibility now.  

The legislature (Parliament) and the executive government (the chief minister and ministers) are one and the same, in brief, there is no separation of powers just near absolute control.  

No minister will rebel and lose power, and so his or her lucrative salary, and the added social and other benefits the position brings.  

Parliament should be the oversight of and the control over the executive government.  

For that it needs reform, as now it hardly keeps the government in check, beyond the criticisms of the Opposition, who yield no power to defeat an incumbent government, save the possibility of forming government by winning a general election. 

Just look at the repercussions raining down from the GSLP-Liberal Government on the Principal Auditor, including an unconstitutional parliamentary censure motion that contravenes natural justice, simply because he shone a narrow torch onto deficiencies. 

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEEE  

There is no Public Accounts Committee to review how public (our) money is spent, and to uncover and control misspending.  

The Principal Auditor has been vilified for mentioning the need for one in the Report. He is right, there is a need for one. 

It is not a political issue. It is about good and prudent government; Gibraltar is the only British Overseas Territory without one. 

BENEFITS TO WIN 

A government can do much as it pleases throughout most of its term with little control; then just before an election, it can give out ‘sweeties’ to help it being re-elected, until, over time, it starts to drown in its own sewage swamp. 

The GSLP-Liberals seem to be in that place now. They look to be on their way out, with unpopularity growing daily.  

There is no clear replacement for them. A new political party, or a reformed GSD under inspiring leadership, is needed who will take the action required to clean up public life. 

Are we encouraging direct rule?  

Well probably, but that likely does not suit the UK’s plans for Gibraltar’s future, which is primarily Defence.  

NO OTHER UK ACTION  

Even with current misgovernment, there is no action from the UK, despite the evidence of lack of ‘peace, order and good government’. Those are constitutional limits on the Gibraltar Parliament and executive government.  

Further, ‘internal security’ is being diluted but the UK does not act. ‘Internal security’ is the constitutional responsibility of the UK, through the Governor. 

History shows that the Foreign Office will not interfere but rather act to avoid a constitutional issue. 

THE MILITARY 

Interestingly, the phrase ‘military autonomy’ is used in the EU Gibexit treaty. It refers to UK Defence presence. It’s use highlights the separation of those from civilian matters.  

The latter are administered by our elected representatives in exercise of ‘self-determination’, as devolved under the Constitution, so they can be messed up, as is happening.  

The Constitution places Defence in the exclusive hands of the Governor, therefore with the Ministry of Defence. 

The hope is that the use of the word ‘autonomy’ does not reflect any long-term protection for Defence installations, should sovereignty ever become a real issue needing resolution with Spain. 

The Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence are renowned for their long-term planning. 

‘DOUBLE LOCK’ VERSUS DEFENCE 

British sovereignty over civilian and military Gibraltar is protected now by the UK’s double lock political commitment. It is, not to change our sovereignty against our freely and democratically expressed wishes, and not to enter sovereignty negotiations without our approval. 

Defence interests and lands are protected now by British sovereignty; should that change, the word ‘autonomy’ defines military interests within any new civilian Gibraltar sovereignty status needing to be negotiated. 

 Robert Vasquez, KC, is a retired barrister and political commentator. He stood as an independent candidate at the last general election on a platform of democratic reform.