Oh fabulous. Now they’re ashamed to be Labour.
Yes, this is a Labour Party mass meeting
For years we watched in fascination as the Labour Party and its core supporters remained defiant and proud to be Labour even as Labour wrecked the country under Dom Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici.
We looked on enthralled as this pride and defiance continued when Alfred Sant made a right royal mess of his 22 months as premier, and then led Labour to three electoral defeats and the undoing at a referendum of the party’s main policy platform.
Now, just when Labour thought it had found its Moses to lead the party out of the desert, the top brass begin to behave like they’re ashamed to be Labour. First there’s a change of name from Malta Labour Party to Labour Party, which turns out to be pointless. The ‘Malta’ was always redundant. We never mistook it for the British Labour Party. It was always Il-Partit Laburista in Maltese and never Il-Partit Laburista ta’ Malta, and those who speak English always said ‘Labour’ (as I do) or ‘the Labour Party’, and are never going to say ‘the PL’ unless they wish to be thought pedantic and ever so slightly non-English-speaking.
Then Joseph Muscat promised to have the Labour emblem, a dread symbol to something like half the nation, redesigned. We have heard nothing of that plan since, and one imagines that he has thought better of it, or has been beaten down by those who know better.
Let’s put it this way: the Nationalist Party has evolved into something completely different to what it was in the 1930s (if it hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to identify with its policies, its thinking and its way of doing things) but its ‘maduma’ has stayed exactly the same. Nobody is ashamed of it, and nobody has proposed changing it. The Nationalist Party didn’t rebrand itself by changing its scarves.
It moved with the times and convinced the electorate with its policies and its credibility, and above all, with its leader.
Now the Labour Party has a leader who is so ashamed of the party he leads that he can’t even bring himself to pronounce its name. Instead of claiming to speak for Labour, instead of saying that he leads the Labour Party, he claims to speak on behalf of something called the National Coalition or the New Movement, which he leads.
But what is this national coalition, this new movement? He is the Labour leader, and not the nominated spokesman of a federation of unions and non-governmental organisations.
Because he cannot have the Labour emblem redesigned without risking a very real threat to his position, and because he cannot decree a purge on ‘torca’ scarves and dispatch the party’s Gestapo to supporters’ homes to root them out and burn them on a Great Night of the Burning Scarves, he has directed party clubs to put the word out that those scarves aren’t welcome at mass meetings.
Muscat can’t issue a proper ban on the carrying of Labour scarves. Where would that leave his claim of progressive leadership if he is seen to behave like an autocrat?
And so the ‘torca’ scarves ignore his edict and turn up to meetings with their owners all the same, both scarves and owners defiantly proud to be Labour. Here’s a man who is happy to walk at the head of a Gay Pride march, they probably think, and then he’s too embarrassed to be seen anywhere near a Labour scarf. He’s proud to be gay – or he would be if he were – but he’s ashamed to be Labour. And he leads the party.
He’s only there because he wants to become prime minister, and without the Labour Party as a vehicle he can’t do it. But he’d rather be leading the Nationalist Party, not because of its policies (because he doesn’t agree with them and doesn’t think policy is important) but because it’s much smarter and would do so much more for his image than the working-classes with whom he is constantly surrounded and on whose behalf he is expected to speak.
To compound the sense of shame and embarrassment at anything that might associate him with Labour, the party he leads but wishes to disown (except that he doesn’t), Muscat doesn’t appear anywhere near the Labour Party’s name or emblem. When he speaks in public, whether it’s a mass meeting, a conference at HQ or a little something down at the club, the backdrop gives no indication that this is a Labour Party meeting.
The backdrop designers raid the Pantone cards for every imaginable scale of deep pink to vermilion, but take great care to stay well away from bright red. Then they cover the thing with large words like ‘progressivi’ and ‘futur’ or ‘koalizzjoni nazzjonali’, and that’s about it.
One is left unsure as to whether Joseph Muscat is trying to wipe out Labour’s sense of identity or merely confuse it. Party supporters are now being bossed into turning up at mass meetings with Maltese flags and EU flags, but no Labour flags. Because few Labour supporters are likely to own an EU flag – after all, they voted No in the referendum and believed all they were told about the intrinsic ills of the Evil Empire – these flags are distributed with Chinese efficiency, to say nothing of a Chinese outlook on democracy and political management, at party clubs and departure points for the coaches on which people are bussed in.
They are given out free as Labour supporters wish not to spend their hard-earned cash on a flag of the Evil Empire, though they will obey party instructions and wave one around for a couple of hours if they have to spend nothing, and because they are told that their turn at the wheel will come faster if they forget everything they were told and mimic fervour for the European Union.
The idea behind the Maltese flags is that Labour mass meetings are not Labour mass meetings but gatherings of the National Coalition, hence the national flag. The Maltese flags are also handed out free and, like the EU flags, come ready-equipped with identical poles made of white plastic electrical piping.
Because all of it is stage-managed, the net result is that the forward part of the crowd looks about as spontaneous as the farmer-drummers doing their thing in Tiananmen Square earlier this month on the 60th anniversary of the birth of a great socialist nation: men, women and children standing there self-consciously, dying to let rip with their ‘torca’ flags, their football rattles and their ‘suffarelli’ while the symbol of the Evil Empire and the George Cross of the vile British kicked out by is-Salvatur ta’ Malta on Freedom Day bristle overhead in a thick, false forest instead.
And look, there on the stage the Labour leader and his wife were dressed to tone with the EU flag. He wears a yellow tie (truly ghastly) and his wife beside him wears a blue scarf (most unflattering for somebody of our complexion) – only Mrs Muscat can’t bring herself to match the Pantone shade of the true blue and plumps for something heading for Madonna blue instead.
Colour was a big thing down there in the stage-managed protesta nazzjonali at Haz- Zabbar. Party activists were organised into carrying banners made of red, green and blue – the colours of Malta’s three political parties, except that the red wasn’t, well, quite red.
The Labour Party thinks you are thick and felt it necessary to drive home the point that this is not the Labour Party but a Moviment Gdid Ghal Pajjiz Ahjar, as one of the banners put it. In other words, it is all three political parties rolled into one, with no idea of what it stands for.
Over the last few months, the Labour leader has shamelessly adopted as his own Fenech Adami’s famous battle-cry from the 1980s, paid handsomely for the scalp of a former PN apologist and flirted madly, and in some cases successfully, with a few silly people who wouldn’t know what policy is if it sat up and bit them in the rump.
But he’s not particularly bright, and because he’s got himself entirely the wrong girl, and hasn’t got a hope in hell of getting himself the right one, I’ll have to give him yet another piece of free advice from these pages. Branding is about building identity, and not about confusing it or wiping it out.
If you don’t have a clear identity, a clear brand, you are finished – even if you are a political party and not a cola drink, especially if you are a political party.
The Labour Party currently has no visible name, no visible emblem, no clear message and no policies which allow people to work out what it stands for. In branding terms, it is a no-hoper, but worse than that, the message being communicated to the electorate is that Labour’s top brass are ashamed to be Labour.
And if even they are ashamed to lay claim publicly to their party, then why in God’s name would anyone else be proud to vote for it, or wish to identify with it if they haven’t done so for all their adult lives already?
The answer doesn’t lie in changing the emblem or hiding it, in burying the party’s name or calling it a Moviment Gdid or a Koalizzjoni Nazzjonali when clearly it is nothing of the sort and looks very much more of the same to us down here. The answer lies in changing the old faces, getting hold of some policies, and building credibility through the things and the people that count.
At this stage, Labour can’t really do much about the choice of an inept leader who thinks he can solve economic problems by cutting the VAT rate on restaurant bills and setting up a price control commission. Nor can it do much about the spectral liability of its deputy leaders, though it can do a lot about the beige suits worn by one of them to mass meetings and the excruciatingly embarrassing behaviour of both. But it has to work with the mess and get something out of it.
The party’s top people have to start, though, by being proud to be Labour. When people head to the polls, the name they are going to see on the ballot sheet is not National Coalition or Moviment Gdid. It’s Partit Laburista.
The message ‘I’m ashamed of my party but I want you to vote for it’ really only works on half-wits. There may be a lot of them in this country, but that’s no reason why Labour should carry on with its decades-old approach of always aiming low, gunning for the lowest common denominator in anything and everything but the top prize of the boss-man’s chair in the Auberge de Castille.
This article is published in The Malta Independent today.
37 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Young people today see the torca as a symbol of a militant organisation and not of a viable political party. In the 1996 general election it was quite evident that the MLP strategists had advised Alfred Sant about this dilemma and he tried to use the socialist rose instead.
Somehow the red rose never caught on and was rejected. Joseph Muscat and company know very well that young people today do not identify with Labour. He and his party are stigmatised by their anti EU campaign and making themselves out to be the party of fear. People voted for Mintoff in 1971 and again 1976 not because they identified with him or the party but rather they wanted to see some social programmes. Sadly, Gorg Borg Olivier didn’t read the public sentiment then.
Eddie Fenech Adami, on the other hand, was wiser as he read the public well and he adopted all the social policies introduced by the MLP, strengthened them and added more. Consequently, the MLP lost its identity.
The old timers who voted for the MLP in 1971 because they truly identified with the party are gradually departing this earth. With their hardcore base dwindling and the open media educating the public, the MLP has found itself in a quandary. It has to change with modern ideas and not with symbols. Up to now the changes have been only cosmetic.
For the MLP to be a viable party it has to change radically. For starters, it needs to change its leaders. What it needs is not new emblems but serious, intelligent leaders with a vision of prosperity, who are politically centrist.
The 10 points that Joseph Muscat made last Sunday show his lack of vision. He just found a way to increase the deficit. As I recall, he is alarmed by the deficit, or at least that’s what he tells us. The 10 points do nothing to our future as a nation. We need to hear his vision.
What policies would the MLP implement to raise our standard of living? I would like Joseph Muscat to give us 10 points or perhaps just five points as to how he would raise our standard of living.
Excellent analysis of ‘Tal lejber’. Hey Joey, that’s what I call a consultation……..and it’s free.
“L-incertezza thedded ix-xoghol.” As well to hold up a placard saying “Il-Papa Kattoliku” or “L-orsijiet jahraw fil-foresti”. (all right, plagiarised from Private Eye).
kemm tiflah taqa fil-baxx u fil-hama. possibbli ticcensura kollox din ma ccensuratiex???
It’s an inside joke in Private Eye. I only translated it into Maltese.
Funny:
“… In other words, it is all three political parties rolled into one, with no idea of what it stands for.”
If the government budget is harsh (and in my opinion, also realistic) the bill-payer will consider our prime minister as the Evil GonziPN. The Labour ghost-powered coalition will stand against this ‘true evil.’ A good enough reason for the majority (I’d say) of the voters.
Happy Halloween.
When I’m at home on a nice weekend trying to do a bit of work that requires some mental concentration, our impish younger son starts walking all over the place chanting, “Viva l-Lejber, Viva l-Lejber, Hej! Hej! Viva l-Lejber, Viva l-Lejber, Hej! Hej! …”. Cue: “OK Mark, get the fishing rods.”
X’cuc hu l-waterboarding?
A couple of hours of that stuff and those Al Qaeda boys would be begging their CIA hosts to let them talk. Was there any of this chanting on Sunday? Has IDEAT rolled out something that isn’t quite beyond the pale?
Daphne, good article. You describe a joker, a no hoper. Bereft of new ideas, displaying his ineptitude daily, rejecting the people who placed him in his ‘exalted’ position. Three more years to consolidate his incompetence.
harry purdie – this no hoper might be your next prime minister and then i would like to see your face.
[Daphne – Harry is Canadian.]
Mr. Pillow, as Daphne kindly pointed out, I am Canadian, and proud of it. However, I have two dear Maltese grandchildren (and numerous investments on these wonderful islands) and shudder at the possibility of an embarrassing no-hoper imposing his thoughtless ‘policies’ on them (or my businesses) as the next PM.
I cannot believe that a majority of the Maltese electorate will not see through his charade. This inexperienced man-child has three more years to exhibit his incompetence. Let us meet after the next general election. You will be able to ‘see my smiling face’.
Fred, in that case we’ll get James Bond Purdie to deal with him….
Mr Debono, I doubt whether he will need any help to expose his inability to lead the nation, never mind the ‘red hoard’.
Mr Debono. Make that ‘horde’ not ‘hoard’, although your horde would hoard whatever they could receive without working for it.
Why pay Marisa when Labour can have all the advice it needs from Daphne’s articles?
Daphne
I cannot have you criticise the only thing Joe has done right, that is, changing the name of this political gathering.
I am told that a lot of research went into the process of selecting the new acronym. They wanted to bolster their roots by keeping the “partit” and “laburista”, but also wanted to incorporate Joe’ vision of “progressivi” so the P can also stand for that.
But the stroke of genius was that at the same time they wanted to respect their political predisposition of “pass lura”. A description of their political activity for decades!
Independence – pass lura
Infrastructure – pass lura
Freedom of speech – pass lura
Education – pass lura
Liberty – pass lura
Decent Foreign politics – pass lura
Trade Liberalisation – pass lura
Privatisation – pass lura
IT – pass lura
VAT – pass lura
Local Councils – pass lura
Hospital – pass lura
EU membership – pass lura
Euro – pass lura
And the list is endless! Did anyone tell them their might be a slight conflict with “progressivi”
“there” instead of “their” might be better!
You are wrong on almost every point. But I suppose listing gives you a buzz and makes them real to you.
Go figure.
Thinking about it I think you’re right!
Pass Lura means only one step back. Not even Passtejn Lura would be enough! Progress Lura is maybe better – its on a continuum, backwards, but a unidirectional continuum that does not restrict scale!
Thanks for pointing it out.
What a prejudiced lot in here, cm’on try to be objective will you ? I guess if it was for you we’ll have a one party government in here, the dear old nats. Let’s face it, we’re living in dreamland where our government never raise taxes, where corruption is practically non existant, where for every worker there are 5 jobs awaiting, where tourism is flourishing, hotels are always full up..etc etc. Why should we change government ? Yeh, yeh count our blessings ( now where did I hear that before ? ) Can’y you see that this government won the last election because there was A. Sant and not because the people really wanted it ? Let me ask you one simple question and pls try to be objective. Do you really think our standard of living improved in these last 10 years ? For me and many other like me it certainly did not. The fenech Adami administrations certainly raised it but not Gonzi PN, that is the truth. Nowadays we have to pay attention when or if we use the AC. We have to make sure we shut down the water heater and pay attention which bulbs are on.You call that progress ? 10 years ago i would not bother eating out twice a week, now i can barely go for a pizza every fortnight. This country badly needs a change in direction. This government is falling to pieces, he can’t clamp down on corruption, it has become its own worst enemy.
Eric, come to the UK. The situation here is much worse than it is in Malta. Most workers here are terrified of redundancy. All household bills have shot up by 25% in the last two years.
You cannot blame GonziPN for the current economic downturn in Malta. It is a global problem and tiny Malta cannot be immune from it.
Oh my, Eric – when your problems are bulbs and pizzas you definitely don’t have problems. Didn’t you realise that there is a global economic crisis outside your island?
And they have the cheek to wave the EU flag, are sewwa jghidu li “l-qahba mill li jkolla ittiek”.
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/10/28/t1.html
Great article Daphne.
Although Mr.Muscat is not focusing on changing important issues at the moment, I am sure that he has this in mind.
Considering the fact that generally speaking, the closed minded people of the “Lejber Partij” fear change in country policies (let alone that of their own party) more than they fear death, it is quite obvious that Mr.Muscat wants to change various aspects and policies of his party but fears the consequences of a radical change.
However, as you so clearly pointed out, the Labour Party is losing its identity, an identity, which I believe is very outdated and not fit for this country.
When will an honest Labour Party leader who does not act “wara il-kwinti” come along?
Mr. Muscat, come clean with your intentions, tell your people that the party needs to change for its own good and act on it, instead of playing silly mind games on your own people.
@ Harry
This is not about Joseph Muscat. We know his ilk – he is an opportunist par excellence. It is about the thousands of gullible followers who swallow all he spews. Maybe the government should offer free IQ-testing to these people, although I would find it difficult to believe that their majority would even know what IQ is all about.
The Labour Party does not only need rebranding; it needs a rebirth after ridding itself of the long-dead wood it continues to drag along for ‘old times’ sake.
jomar, I understand your point. However, until the Labour Party elects a leader (man or woman) who has the potential to unite the vast majority of the people, whatever their IQ level, this party will continue to flounder. This hollow liitle man, in my opinion, does not have that potential.
Have a look to at Joseph Muscat’s lack of originality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8f_bBw48pw
If I remember correctly Muscat said that the first challenge facing the Labour Party was to reform its internal organization and public image while simultaneously conducting a policy review and update so as to be ready to market itself to the public as a finished product in the two-year run up to the next general elections.
The Labour Party’s concern with updating its image is important from a marketing perspective and is no different from the image overhaul undertaken when Eddie Fenech Adami became leader of the PN in 1977 and Tony Blair took over the Labour Party in 1994.
I remember when the fascist-inspired ‘maduma’ kerchiefs started competing for attention with trendy blue flags at party meetings and the fascist-inspired anthem “Sbejha Patria” was drowned out by the catchy tune “We’re ready for Eddie”.
This marketing change was necessary to make the PN look like a modern party and move to the centre of the political spectrum. Similarly Blair softened the bright red ultra left shade of Old Labour, diluted the militant trade unions voting power at Labour Party conferences and adopted the red rose as a party symbol all in a successful attempt to appeal to the centre. So what’s wrong with Muscat doing the same with Labour?
[Daphne – The point I made is that he is not doing the same with Labour. What you speak of is rebranding. What Muscat is doing here is removing Labour’s old/negative brand and replacing it with nothing. He has left a vacuum. Perhaps his plan is to rebrand Labour slowly, rather than quickly like – to give you one example from the Maltese context – the changeover from MidMed to HSBC, which was really brilliant and so efficient that the general public forgot that there ever was something called MidMed almost immediately. But I don’t think so. My view is that he knows, as you say correctly, that the old Labour brand has to go. But he can’t think what to replace it with. With political parties, the brand is not just about quality as symbolised in a logo, behaviour, communication style, and so on. That brand also has to stand for something – policy. We knew and still know what the Nationalist Party stands for. We even knew what the Labour Party stood for, even though we didn’t like it; it had a clear brand. We have no idea now what Labour is. A coalition? Muscat misses the point that people don’t vote for coalitions. They vote for the party of their choice, and the policies of their choice, and then the coalition is formed, out of necessity, among those elected.]
Many people on the left distrusted Eddie when he appealed to the working class for support in 1977. Many people on the right, like yourself, distrust Muscat when he appeals to the middle class (yesterday’s working class).
[Daphne – I’m not on the right at all. My politics are liberal, and remember that it is not the US definition and has nothing to do with sexual relationships and their regulation. People who want to regulate relationships tend to be right of centre, not liberal.]
He’s made it clear that Malta’s membership of the European Union is not an issue for debate but a given, pushed serious candidates with independent appeal for office in the European elections and is reaching out to groups and taking on issues that have been ignored by a PN leadership that behind it’s “progressive” and “liberal” media image is still very old fashioned conservative.
Instead of deriding Muscat you should see Muscat’s move to the centre as a vindication of the PN’s policies of the last 20-odd years. Labour cannot hope to win the next or any other election on the old class warfare slogans of the 1970s and 1980s but must act like any other of its sister European Socialist and Labour Parties and become centre-left.
Anthony V Falzon
Joseph Muscat’s “changes” are only an opportunistic stratagem to attract votes and do not represent a genuine attempt to overhaul and regenerate the party.
Since Muscat’s modernisation is essentially a vote-catching exercise, it would be pointless to attract new voters but lose traditional ones (as happened to Alfred Sant) and this explains the contradictions and inconsistencies which can be seen daily. I think it was KMB who said something to the effect that Labour had to send different messages according to its audience.
Is the Labour Party’s policy review complete? I doubt it. So let’s all sit back, take a deep breath and wait and see. All Muscat has to do is do what Blair did in the UK. Have a sound pro business economic policy that will re-assure the middle class/business community that he is not going to stifle opportunity while reaching out to the party base by policy initiatives aimed at helping the most vulnerable and those who have been left behind in the boom years.
The key constituency is the new middle class – who are increasingly secular (the church alumni society) who are going to want to be reassured that he won’t touch their wallets and will also carry out progressive reforms that the PN would not touch with a barge pole – reform of the marriage laws being the most obvious.
At the end of the day if Muscat has to sound and act like a more socially progressive form of the PN to be elected – that is the best evidence that the country has moved beyond the immediate post colonial era with all the strife that brought. Nothing to fear, all very reassuring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8f_bBw48pw
What a catwalk politician. His less than pret-a-porter dressing is already his content.
A pansy and a prat …………..
Nimmagina diga’ beda bil-poppy fil-pavru.
I cannot understand why persons who play intelligent still live in the past. Such behaviour will not help us all to get out from the most difficult situation we are all living.
Our nation can never be considered ‘modern’ if we are stuck in the past. Our nation need new ideas of leadership new progressive policies and a stop to all kinds of abuses and corrupton at tax payers’ expense.We need political honesty and accountability.It seems that political responsability doesn’t apply to the present administration.
Are we not living a most shameful present that we should all condemn?
Steve, your point is well taken. However, you mention ‘political honesty’, That reminds me of a quote I read last week in The New York Times. “An honest politician is one who when he’s bought will stay bought”. Simon Cameron, 1799-1859. It appears that the past still has a message for the future.
Don’t think I’ve seen Barack Obama wearing a yellow tie; it seems his favourite colour is blue. However yellow was a favourite colour of King Louis XIV of France and he adopted it as a representation of his power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ximP4S9O9Vs&NR=1