And this is the prime minister's letter
I have never been averse to making odious comparisons. What the Labour Party doesn’t realise is that the devil is in the detail. People like me, offered a choice between voting for the man who wrote this letter and voting for the man who wrote that other one, will vote for the man who wrote this one. The Labour Party can’t understand this because matters like this are outside its cultural experience.
On paper headed ‘The Prime Minister, Malta’
Excellency,
On behalf of the Government and the people of Malta, I would like to extend my warmest congratulations and best wishes on your historic electoral victory.
I am confident that under your leadership, the traditionally excellent relations between our two countries will be further strengthened and that the warm ties of friendship will be further enhanced to the mutual benefit of our two peoples and for the furtherance of our common values and aspiratons.
Lawrence Gonzi
10 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Famously once Dom Mintoff told the head of department of protocol “Taf x’inhu protokoll? Nejk, u int il-kap tan-nejk”
I think this explains a lot of things
The PM’s letter is more properly written, that is true, given the circumstances. But did the PM have to send a letter so late in the day to give his congratulations? Especially in view of the fact that the above letter doesn’t even make a direct reference to Obama? It could have even been sent to McCain had he won the elections.
Also, does it make sense to call him “Excellency” when there’s still two months for him to be sworn in as President? Strictly speaking it’s still Bush who’s the “Excellency” right now. So I believe JM is right in referring to him as Senator Obama and not Excellency, though the general tone of the PMs letter is a whole lot better.
[Daphne – There is a standard format for these letters, just as there is a standard format for letters of acceptance written in response to invitations, and a standard format for many other things besides. Late in the day? It was sent on the same day. What is this – a race to the finish? Joseph Muscat was not correct in addressing him by name – not at all. The prime minister’s letter did mention Senator Obama by name, yes – at the bottom of the page, which is the correct position in formal letters of this nature: Senator Barack Obama, President-Elect of the United States of America. Incidentally, did you hear either McCain or Obama referring to each other as John and Barack during the speeches yesterday? Or to the president as George? The only first names being bandied about were those of Laura Bush and Michelle Muscat – by their husbands. As somebody pointed out in a comment: Mintoff once famously said to his Head of Protocol: ‘Taf x’inhu l-protocol? Nejk. U int il-Kap tan-Nejk.’ That’s why they’re still getting it wrong all these years down the line, and that’s why people like Josanne Cassar in The Malta Independent on Sunday thinks that it’s OK for the opposition leader to call the prime minister Lawrence on television even when the prime minister is calling him Dr Muscat – you know, because young people don’t bother about these things. That’s just the problem, Josanne – that Maltese young people are ignorant and ill-mannered, but then, of course, it depends which young people. Those I know thought he was uncouth.]
JM doesn’t address Obama as Barack. He only writes Senator Barack Obama as one would write Mr. John Borg when one is writing a letter. Otherwise, I agree that there are aspects of the letter which are cringeworthy, especially the “best regards” part which I would only use in emails/letters with people I have a bit of “kunfidenza”.
[Daphne – There is a standard format for these letters, just as there is a standard format for letters of acceptance written in response to invitations, and a standard format for many other things besides. Late in the day? It was sent on the same day. What is this – a race to the finish? ]
Of course it is a race, as far as Dr Muscat is concerned anyway.
Anyone remembers that old sixties or seventies Italian song by a certain Enzo Jannacci, “Vengo anch io.”? It went something like this,
” Vengo anch io.
No tu no!
Vengo anch io.
No tu no!
Vengo anch io.
No tu no!
Ma perche??
Perche NO!”
Boo hoo. Life aint fair.
Although I did not like the way the opposition leader addressed the Prime Minister,on the other hand we should not make an issue about this. There are far more important issues that we need to talk about and act upon.
[Daphne – A future prime minister with no manners? No thanks. We’ve had two of those already in living memory. Like I said, the devil is in the detail. It IS an important issue. An opposition leader who doesn’t know how to write a formal letter when the format is standard, and who doesn’t know that he can’t speak for Malta but only for his party is a REAL problem. If he doesn’t know even these things, then how likely is it that he doesn’t know anything at all about the ‘far more important issues’ you mention?]
Dear Daphne
If the Labour party in Malta is similar to Zapatero’s party and therefore liberal on moral & social issues, pro-market & business and at the same time works hard for the poor or the genuinely disadvantaged people, would you support that type of Labour party?
I might be wrong, but sometimes I do get that impression from your writings.
[Daphne – That is exactly the party I do support, but it’s not the Labour Party. As I say, repeatedly, political philosophy is not a label. It’s assessed on the basis of actions. The Labour Party in government – even Sant’s government – has a negative track record on all the issues you mention. It has yet to produce a convincing political programme which shows it has changed. I don’t believe people on the basis of what they say, but on the basis of what they do. Therefore, I am unable to support the Labour Party, because its track record and core philosophy go against all that I believe in. Even if the Labour Party were to put down on paper its plans to turn into the Nationalist Party with bells on, I would still not support it, because plans are not enough. I need to have confidence in the boss, in the man who will implement those plans. And I cannot have confidence in a man who is unable even to write a straightforward letter of congratulations. If he doesn’t see his need to take advice on writing a letter then he is not going to see his need to take advice on crucial matters to do with running the country. He doesn’t inspire confidence in me. He inspires derision, bordering on contempt.]
In my opinion, the problem with the Labour party is that many of its supporters and members have not yet come to terms with the fact that the way forward is New Labour, and to be fair with Dr. Sant, he did try to move Labour in that direction. However, there were many people from Labour that did not want this.
Similar problems occurred in the UK when Tony Blair started his project of moving Labour to the centre and committed his party to the free market system.
I believe that after 1998 Sant and Labour did not have any clue of what to do and maybe that is why they made so many political errors.
However the party you support is not liberal on moral and social issues at least officially; this is a known fact and you should not find it hard to admit.
I stand to be corrected but I remember our Prime Minister stating that he is against divorce and he is even quite against gay rights.
[Daphne – I am liberal in outlook to the point where I don’t give a damn what people do unless they are hurting or repressing others or hurting or repressing me. Not voting Nationalist because the party has taken ages to come round to the idea of divorce is, to me, tantamount to throwing out the baby with the bath-water. The party is, after all, a reflection of society. Malta itself has taken ages to adjust to the idea of divorce. The last time the prime minister spoke about divorce was on Xarabank, with Muscat calling him Lawrence – what, three weeks ago? He said this: “I am against divorce but I do not believe I should impose my views on others.” How much more categoric can you get than that? He is a fervent believer and a practising Catholic, so it is obvious that he can’t or won’t believe in divorce. But he is also increasingly liberal in outlook, immensely tolerant and decent, thinks very clearly, and so he knows that a religious objection to divorce does not mean he is obliged to impose his beliefs on others. Gay rights: I keep asking my gay co-workers and friends for more information on this, but never get a straight, clear answer that I can understand. How are rights specifically gay? Homosexuals have, or should have, exactly the same rights as heterosexuals. The fact that some of these rights may not be delivered upon, like the right to marry, does not make it a gay right. It is a right, full-stop. I can’t believe the way (some) gay people insist on ghettoising themselves long after society has ceased to care. Only the other day, I met a young gay male acquaintance who was upset because his new boyfriend never takes him out. I asked why, but knew what was coming next: baqa fil-closet (his words, not mine). He’s scared that if he comes out, his boss will sack him and his clients will dump him. I have yet to see evidence of this kind of thing happening. What I notice is the opposite – that people really don’t care. Women actually adore gay men because the heterosexual variety tends to be so boring with its penchant for retreating into caves and sheds and talking about work and car engines. I guess it’s all down to personal feelings of shame and embarrassment. Pity.]
I am heterosexual and happily married, however, I favour liberal policies such as more rights for gays and divorce becuase I strongly believe that the opposite of an open society is simply a hypocrital one and that people are free to choose the way they live as long as they do not harm others, pretty much similar to your reasoning.
Regarding the stand that the Prime Minister took on Xarabank, although I might not agree with his view on divorce, I fully agreed with his stand.
Thank you for your time, this was rather interesting.
Thinkng about it, I would just love to see what Joseph and Michelle Muscat’s wedding invitation looked like, and whether it included a little card with a poem asking for cash gifts … possibly with “visiting hours” thrown in for good measure.
Daphne – “A future prime minister with no manners? No thanks. We’ve had two of those already in living memory. Like I said, the devil is in the detail. It IS an important issue.”
Another interesting thing to see would be Joseph and Michelle Muscat’s table manners, the usual dead give-away. As DavidS once said, “HKLP” (holds knife like pen). Probably you betcha!