I am very confused of where JM stands, because he campaigned in a rightist kind of style, but then made some pretty leftist arguments. On the other side, GA was very clear he wanted to take MLP back to a socialist party, with centre-left principles. Some may think this is an artificial concern, but in my opinion it is a central issue that needs clarification in order to have the correct foundations for any political party.

I don’t think it’s only gay men who are attracted to Joseph Muscat though (despite his lovely rainbow-coloured tie when meeting Gonzi).

Even if you think I’m a knob for thinking so, I am as yet hopeful about the new MLP leader. Mostly I am hopeful because there isn’t anything else to be hopeful about Maltese politics. Yes I could be wrong. Joseph could actually make Sant look good. Heck, Alfred Sant made Mintoff look good, so stranger things have happened.

But what other hope does a liberl independent voter in a country ruled by GonziPN for decades (and I say this after having given PN my number 1 and number 2 votes)? My only hope is Joseph Muscat, and I would like to hold on to it until proven wrong.

I don’t care what his hair looks like, I don’t care if you think he’s a poodle, I don’t care if he talks funny or has a stupid smile – as long as he has the balls to speak about the things that matter to me and need speaking about, and as long as he puts together a party worth electing, I will be very happy.

U-Turn in Politics was started by Sir Edward Heath when he took some political decisions which went against what he had promised before the election and the English tabloids starting refering to such decisions as U-turns as is with driving. This buzz-word really took off a couple of years later when Margaret Thatcher was PM and the opposition was critising her for a decision she had taken and one member of the Labour Opposition accused her of making a U-Turn and to quote the exact words she said “The gentleman in the opposition can do as much turning as he wishes but I can assure him that the Lady is not for turning” amidst the laughter and the applause in the House.

Apologies if I won’t make any sense in this comment, but I just woke up, and having my 1st cup of tea and my 1st cigarette.

It is simple arithmetic.

I believe we all agree that what is important is how the individual MP’s vote in Parliament. The issue that was always brought up as an example of the ‘problem’ of a one-seat majority is that of pairing when PN ministers and MP’s are out of the country on business.

Before JDG’s resignation, PN ‘had control’ of 1 vote more than MLP; now, PN ‘has control’ of 2 votes more.

PN has a 2 seat majority if you assume that JDG will not toe the MLP party line when voting; that is, if you assume that JDG will either not vote or else will vote against the MLP party line.

But how can you assume that?

By th way – it’s “Trojan” not “Troyan” – but Daphne won’t point that out, cos you happen to be on her side.

As far as the majority goes, you are right – but ONLY in the initial stage, for calculating who got the most first count votes and who will form the Gov.

Once the members are seated, its how they vote that counts, not what they call themselves. And JDG is as likely to vote with the Gov as I am to be chosen as the next Mr Universe.