Me and my shadow
Joseph Muscat has bothered to inform us that in two weeks time he will take a break from writing his VAT report for the European Commission to announce his shadow cabinet. He intends, he said, to have lots and lots of spokesmen for everything under the sun, including stuff which isn’t covered by the ministerial portfolios that these so-called shadow ministers are supposed to shadow.
Muscat demonstrates that he doesn’t know the difference between a shadow minister and an Opposition party spokesman on, say, the economy. Under Alfred Sant, Malta had no shadow cabinet because Sant too insisted on legions of spokesmen rather than actual shadow ministers. The result was chaos, with the electorate unable to make head or tail of Labour’s position. Now under Muscat there will again be no shadow cabinet – and please would The Times learn the difference? – because he is going to appoint an army of spokesmen instead (and call it shadow cabinet).
Making all or most of his MPs spokesmen means a total lack of transparency, because the electorate will not be able to see who will form Muscat’s actual cabinet if and when he becomes prime minister, and so the electorate will be asked to vote blindly for an unknown quantity. The Times and everyone else has missed this and swallowed Muscat’s spin – or rather, his uninformed comment, because I actually believe that not even he knows the difference.
So, for the benefit of The Times and of Malta’s future prime minister: a shadow cabinet is a parliamentary structure in which the leader of the Opposition is the shadow prime minister. It is not a gathering of mouthpieces who have been delegated to talk to the press about this subject or that one. Reno Bugeja brought up the matter briefly on Dissett, but too briefly and he allowed Muscat to gloss over it.
Muscat said that he can afford to have 30 ‘shadow ministers’ because he doesn’t have to pay them. Those aren’t shadow ministers. Those are spokesmen. A shadow minister is the person who will actually be the minister in charge of that particular portfolio if and when you become prime minister.
23 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Thank God for daphne, for telling us exactly what is going on!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This continues to show how weak a leader Joseph is, and the chaos that will shroud the island if heaven forbid, there will be people who will actually vote for a party without a leader
The shadow cabinet concept is a British one, used mainly by former Britsg colonies. Admittedly it is also used on and off in Italy and France. There is nothing binding in it. The Education shadow minister might be, but not necessarily, appointed eventually Education minister. The latest spin is that the electorate now has no idea who Joseph will appoint as ministers! But since the Mlp is heading to a sure defeat again, why should this be a problem? Some consistancy is called for.
Albert, our parliamentary structure is British. You can’t pick and choose and say you want to retain, for example, the whip and the speaker but not the shadow cabinet. The system is a highly developed one – in fact, the oldest one in Europe. You can’t compare our shadow cabinet system and Britain’s to Italy, France or Germany, because their political and parliamentary systems are very different to ours. They never know, because of their coalition complications, who is going to be in government. With Malta (and the UK) it’s either one of two parties. We have a government, and we have an opposition. The opposition is obliged to form a shadow cabinet so that before we vote for them, we can judge their ability as ministers through their track record in shadowing the actual minister. There is an actual purpose to it, and it is rooted in respect for the electorate. But I wouldn’t expect the Labour Party to know anything about that. After all, it treats its own delegates like headless chickens.
From Wikipedia,
“The Shadow Cabinet (also called the Shadow Front Bench) is a senior group of opposition spokespeople in the Westminster system of government who together under the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition (or the leader of other smaller opposition parties) form an alternative cabinet to the government’s, whose members shadow or mark each individual member of the government. Members of a shadow cabinet are often but not always appointed to a Cabinet post if and when their party gets into government. It is the Shadow Cabinet’s responsibility to pass criticism on the current government and its respective legislation, as well as offering alternative policies.
In the United Kingdom and Canada the major opposition party and specifically its shadow cabinet is often called Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition[1]. The adjective “loyal” is used because, while the role of the opposition is to oppose Her Majesty’s Government, it does not dispute Her Majesty’s right to the throne and therefore the legitimacy of the government. However in other countries that use the Westminster system (for example, Australia and New Zealand), the opposition is known simply as The Parliamentary Opposition.”
Thank you, eyesonlyonmalta. You’ve raised another point: even if he does appoint a true shadow cabinet rather than a gathering of 30 spokesmen, it won’t he HIS shadow cabinet but Charles Mangion’s.
Dear Ms Caruana Galizia
I really read your articles with great interest.
However, I must point out that you might be wrong (sorry for this) on the arguments you are putting forward in ‘Me and My Shadow’.
For example, if SUBJECT A does not feature under the portfolio of a minister or parliamentary secretary, it makes sense that somebody from the Opposition benches is ‘appointed’ as the main spokesperson on SUBJECT A. It would then be the prerogative of the Prime Minister to consider whether or not to continue ‘disregarding’ SUBJECT A. Obviously we are not talking of a petty subject here but of something which has national significance.
The list of issues which have been sort of ‘disregarded’ from any ministerial role is quite interesting. Probably many of us will get to know of these in a few days.
I would like to believe that the Labour Parliamentary Group will consist of a number of deputies who will ‘shadow’ the current ministerial portfolios, with the remaining deputies taking under their ‘care’ the ‘rest?’.
Bets Regards
K Caruana
(Note that I am an outsider to the MLP so I might be making the wrong assumptions as well.)
@ Kevin Caruana – if something is of national importance, then it is bound to be covered by a ministerial portfolio. The business of government is greater than the business of the opposition, so it follows that the opposition does not need more shadow ministers than the government needs ministers.
You got it wrong this time Daphne.
Gowzef is putting most of his mps in the shadow cabinet for one good reason, and one reason only., the very same reason
that Dom Mintoff had and whose example he is now following.
It is one very practical and effective way of keeping tabs on what his minions are up to behind his back.
One mp spys and keeps an eye on what the other mp in charge of the same portfolio is doing and reports back to the master .
Who gains the most brownie points gets the plum job ie the ministerial job, once safely installed at Castille.
What makes you think that shadow ministers will be ministers. In this legislation even former ministers are not ministers let alone shadow ministers.
Sybil, Your analysis is spot on. This is an attempt at retaining absolute power by diluting your colleagues’ importance and possibly also their ambitions and delusions of greatness . It is a way of making sure one is surrounded by yesmen. It also ensures there are no obvious successors.
Primus inter pares my foot.
The political history of absolute rulers and dictatorial regimes affords thousands of examples of such behaviour. As I have said before comparisons with the British parliamentary system are a source of great heartache for me because they do nothing but highlight our country’s political immaturity.
Ix-Xewka: It appears you haven’t understood the concept of a shadow cabinet. I predict you will vote MLP.
Why all this fuss? Labour are by now experts in shadows.
They have been chasing them since 1987 and I envisage they will continue doing so for quite a long time.
Besides that I think that DRJM is a shadow of AS.
They will have to also to do with the Shadow of Joe Debono Grech in parliament…and with that of his daughter in the B’Kara local council.
buon proseguimento…
Jahasra, Ix-Xewka, each time you write in you prove to me that you’re a Labour voter only because you can’t think rationally. Sorry, but I’m going to lose my temper and shout now; THE MINISTERS IN THIS CABINET COULD NOT BY ANY POSSIBLE MEANS HAVE BEEN SHADOW MINISTERS BECAUSE THE PARTY THAT FORMED THIS GOVERNMENT ALSO FORMED THE PREVIOUS ONE AND WAS NOT IN OPPOSITION.
What’s in a name….by which to call a pill if just as sour (with apologies to WS)They can be shadows, they can be spokepersons they can be whatever they want to be but for one thing; Ministers!
Ix-Xewka is not saying current ministers weren’t shadow ministers before this legislation. He/She/It is saying that former ministers have not been appointed shadow ministers in this government. Or maybe his keyboard’s missing a comma key as well as a question mark key.
I see that Sybil still thinks it is witty (though God knows why) to write Jospeh as Gowzef.
I suppoze that means we can write Zibil instead of Sybil
@Anthony;
It’s understandable to be tempted to say , “Well, let’s all give the new boy a chance to settle in”. Unfortunately this Gowzef’s first actions as MLP leader are starting to sound off the alarm bells for some.
After the much-publicized hugging and kissing of old Mintoffian ex-ministers associated with some of the darkest years in this country’s recent history, there was the well known Mintoffian tactic of appointing multiple yes-men in key shadow positions to consolidate absolute power on all that he surveys . Today, Gowzef and Gayzin trotted off to Tarxien to pay their respects to no less then THE Perit himself. Very reassuring and wise moves made to endear him to the over-forties floaters who make and break a general election result.
Who do you emply for PR ,Gowz?
I suppose Sybil has taken a spunt from L-orizzont and its rawdabawts (without the n sound).
Ganni Borg Thursday, 12 June 1934hrs
I see that Sybil still thinks it is witty (though God knows why) to write Jospeh as Gowzef.
I suppoze that means we can write Zibil instead of Sybil
If Football is translated as “futbol” and budget become “bagit”, what is so wrong with writing Joseph as “Gowzef”?
What is the Malteser version of J O S P E H, btw?
:)
[Moderator – Guzeppi.]
Sybil, you ask who Joseph uses for PR. The answer is his wife, Lil Din. She was Sant’s PR consultant, too….way to go.
[Moderator – Guzeppi.]
That would explain then, why this morning Super 1 radio was referring to some visit GUZI Muscat was attending or about to attend in Gozo.
Go GUZ, go!
@ Corinne As a matter of fact since I started reading this blog I have decided to vote PN.
Maybe my problem is that I studied under a PN government, maybe schools under Dr L Galea were not that efficient, in teaching us English. Now look at you, you were at school under Mintoff and see how good you are.
Xewka – Mintoff may have been in power at the time my siblings and I were children, but our education has certainly got nothing to do with him, seeing that we never attended government schools – not even when we were locked out of our own.