Comments on: Gordon Pisani is the right choice

By: Jessie

Jessie — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:40:16 +0000

Jessie…

What a strange few weeks,do you think Obama can go all the way?…

By: Corinne Vella

Corinne Vella — Sat, 17 May 2008 16:06:04 +0000

Michael Debono: “at least he gave employment” For heaven’s sake, what employment could an unelected prime minister ‘give’, unless you mean illicit and unnecessary ’employment’ which translates into nothing more than a burdensome payroll for a largely unproductive workforce?

If that’s your idea of ‘love’, then I dread to think what your personal life must be like.

By: Michael.Debono

Michael.Debono — Thu, 15 May 2008 09:45:05 +0000

History means Goebels at the time of German Nazism not Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, a person with no equal for his love of others. At least he gave employment and not brought people from as far as the USA just to vote and win the elections. I know what I am saying. I have proof but will not make it public not to prejudice a realative a staunch PN who even contributes to local papers. He has not resided in Malta for the necessary period to be eligible to vote.
In Maltese we say “id-demm qatt ma jsir semm” if I am right in my Maltese spelling.

[Moderator – You either have proof or you don’t.]

By: andrew borg-cardona

andrew borg-cardona — Tue, 13 May 2008 06:04:12 +0000

@Michael.Debono – what you’ve described is precisely the way political appointees are employed and the way presumably Pisani was employed. It is perfectly within the law, unlike the thousands KMB had employed to try to win the ’87 election, since you mention history.

By: Michael.Debono

Michael.Debono — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:01:50 +0000

History is repeating itself.
It is agreed that gonzipn has made the right choice in nominating Mr.Gordon Pisani as the P.N. government spokesman. He is the right man for the job since there could be found no other person that incarnates better the P.N. or Gonzipn. His post (propaganda officer,secretary or what!) does not call for impartiality. In more simple words he is not a servant of the people but a servant of a political party in government such as someone else in a certain country some sixty years ago.
Will Mr. Gordon Pisani eventually (sic) vacate his post without expecting anything in return, such as a Government compensation that will run into thousands of Euros? If he will expect such compensation then his engagement is irregular because there was no call for application to fill the post even on a temporary basis. Being a political appointee he has no right to receive any compensation out of citizens’ taxes on termination of his let say political contract.
He could have been employed as a government adviser and that’s all. His employment could be terminated at any time without expecting anything in return from the government coffers. That is what hurts.

By: Jacques Rene Zammit

Jacques Rene Zammit — Sun, 11 May 2008 22:06:04 +0000

*breathes in*

*starts to breathe out and speak* “Gonzi Government” (pause) “Mintoff Government” *breathes in*

There. I’ve done it again. In the same breath. Not that difficult.
A few more irritating notes (depends on the perspective):

Gerrymandering: It’s all relative. The pre-1981 gerrymandering. Atrocious. Really. The post-1981 first agreement. A step forwards – which also consolidated two party politics. Last summmer’s electoral changes – atrocious. Just as atrocious as the pre-81 agreement if you look from outside the box. I can call it gerrymandering on a bipartisan level – but then you call it democracy. Which does not make you right.

The Nationalist Government: Is legitimate. Behind its existence lie a number of reasons. A law that forces people to consider “The Wasted Vote” is one of them. A relative majority – or a minority of votes cast (a fact not an opinion) is allowed to govern for the sake of governance. Is it moraly right? It is not a question of morals it is a question of governance … and it seems to work.

The Opposition: Weak right now. But still entitled to use the little weight it has. Pairing, and pushing the limits is part of the game which the nationalists agreed to play. Tough shit… no need to get all “moral” about it.

It all boils down to getting nationalist diehards off their high horse of being some defenders of the democratic values. The proof of the pie is in the eating… and not on past gains. If we let our guard down we risk being taken for granted. All of us.

Feel free to speculate about coalitions, third parties or otherwise … that remains speculation. What I am calling for is a civic society that maintains a control/pressure on its politicians and keeps them in their place. Whether it is Gonzi or Mintoff who is in the driving seat. There, ‘ve mentioned them in the same breath again.

By: my name is Leonard but my son calls me Joey

my name is Leonard but my son calls me Joey — Sat, 10 May 2008 18:10:20 +0000

@Peter Muscat, if you read this in time here’s the deal: tomorrow (Sunday) morning, Nevada Smith’s (3rd Ave between 11th & 12th Str.); your “political surprise” for all the beer you can drink. Just shout your name and “ta’ Daphne” as you walk in.

By: Pete

Pete — Sat, 10 May 2008 17:36:00 +0000

Mintoff`s 1981 government was legal since our constitution then simply spoke of a majority of parliamentary seats. However, try to remember the way the electoral districts were drawn up before the 1981 election, and try to remember that PN cried foul immediately the new districts were announced. Do you know anything about gerrymandering? It was then immediately clear and claimed by PN that MLP would clutch on to power with a minority of votes and a majority of seats. The electoral result of December 1981 proved the PN true.Does that make for a legitimate and democratic government?
The constitutional rules in 2008 are different from the 1981 ones, (although, again, the PN cried foul when the electoral districts were last drawn up. The new districts clearly favoured the MLP and again the electoral results proved the PN right). – There was no gerrymandering on the part of the PN, and with two parties represented in Parliament, the party having the biggest number of first count votes took on the role of Government. No, it`s no minority government; it`s a fully fledged government enjoying more popularity (read votes) than its opposition in Parliament.
In 1981, the gonernment side was clearly guilty of gerrymandering. In 2008 no similar accusations can be levelled against the (government) side which won most first count votes of the two sides in Parliament.
No, please, do not mention the Gonzi 2008 government and the Mintoff 1981 government in the same breath. Please.

By: Michael.Debono

Michael.Debono — Sat, 10 May 2008 15:45:52 +0000

Yes every country has or had a minister for propaganda.
Germany had Goebels.
Malta never had one. The MLP had Pellegrini a political appointee to administer the Department (not Ministry) of Information just like Mr. Gordon Pisani with the relevant difference that Pellegrini was a government employee (a Dept. of Education employee. If I remember well, a teacher)
Mr. Gordon Pisani was not a government employee. According to DFG he is the right person to manage the P.N. government propaganda. Nobody disagrees. He is the right person in the right place. But there is a hitch. Over half of his salary will come from those who voted MLP, A.D. A.N. and others.
Is it not an abuse to use taxes paid by Maltese citizens to finance a P.N. spokesman.
The former head of the DOI, the late Mr.E.Abela who had the full confidence of the P.N. not only of the government but also of the political party itself, was a civil servant of known political sentiments (a staunch P.N.)But at least he was a civil servant, unlike Mr. Gordon Pisani.
Mr. Gordon Pisani appointment from outside the establishment would therefore suggest that gonzipn has no one within the Civil servants that can be trusted 100 per cent. His appointment has even precluded a civil servant from being promoted to the post.
Whoever has some experience of the civil service knows that a promotion of a colleague creates a vacuum that will have to be filled by another public servant, hence a chain of promotions. Thanks to Mr. Gordon Pisani this chain reaction will not take place to the detriment of public servants.

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 10 May 2008 09:34:39 +0000

@Jacques

I do agree with you when you say, Both Gonzi’s government AND Mintoff’s are or were legitimate, because the legitimacy argument depends on the rules of the game. I guess this is your main argument, but then it seems like you are saying a lot and losing balance…

Now forget about the third party for a minute, actually they are irrelevant to date since they never got enough to elect a seat. In this last election, we had a situation where a party got more votes but fewer seats, with both failing to obtain a relative majority. Now can you please tell us who should lead the country, morally wise?

Finally, in my opinion you really go overboard when you claim – Having a weak, non-existent or blundering opposition is not an excuse. Which is probably why more rational objectors like myself are a bit more irritating… – I cannot understand how this is rational thinking.

Of course it depends a great deal on the opposition’s behaviour, if the opposition repeats its recent approach of asking stupid parliamentary questions, voting no to everything, not participating in very important discussions and then be the first to shoot down the proposals, and all the behaviour one would expect from a 10-year-old. How can you cooperate and be able to obtain results? How can you trust labour inclined people with important positions? When at the first occasion they will try to backstab the government given our political obsessions. Actually, I believe it is in the government’s duty not to do so, because its obligation is to deliver what the majority elected for. One, however, truly hopes that the new labour leader will change the opposition’s behaviour.