It quacks like a duck but believe me, it’s not a duck

Published: January 21, 2010 at 6:40pm
Keep your spirits up! Only three years to go before we rid ourselves of that incompetent Gonzi and make Toni Abela the Number Two Boss Man.

Keep your spirits up! Only three years to go before we rid ourselves of that incompetent Gonzi and make Toni Abela the Number Two Boss Man.

The Labour Party’s deputy leaders are two of its greatest liabilities, but to hear them talk, they are its main assets.

Let’s take Toni Abela, and leave the elephant-rider out of it for now.

Abela gave an interview to The Sunday Times and said that it doesn’t matter if Labour moves to the right when this means it will get more votes.

That begs the question as to what he thinks a political party is.

He doesn’t appear to understand that a party first sets out what it stands for, what it believes in, and what it plans to do, and then attempts to persuade as many people as possible to vote for it.

The way Abela sees it – and the way his party leader sees it, too – is that first you conduct lots of market research as to what people want, and then you try to hit as many birds, with as many stones, as possible.

If it means veering to the right when you’re a Labour party and you sit with the Socialists in the European Parliament, then so be it. We shouldn’t be surprised. The Malta Labour Party stunned all its European socialist friends by fighting against EU membership, rather than for it.

I imagine the reason we haven’t yet had any policies from Labour, or discovered what Joseph Muscat plans to do and what his – deep breath here – Movement of Progressives and Moderates stands for, is because Labour hasn’t yet decided. It’s still researching the market and trying to square all those circles.

The party’s delegates, or so it was announced two days ago, are to hold a big pow-wow to discuss what it means to be moderate and progressive, and perhaps also liberal. It wants to work out how to attract those who think that way, rather than merely the embittered and resentful who believe they’re scoring points and paying back those who spurned them.

If Labour feels obliged to describe itself specifically as moderate, then I have to ask how it saw itself before now – as the party of extremists, one would think.

In that, it would be correct. Truly moderate political parties don’t feel the need to tell you they are moderate by stuffing the word into their job description and their name. You can deduce their moderateness from their policies and behaviour.

This is not so with Labour, which has to tell us it is moderate every time it appears in public or issues a statement, because it has a track record of dire extremism and now, no policies to prove otherwise.

We have to take Joseph Muscat’s word for it – but quite frankly, I’d rather not. Imagine if we had taken him at his word about voting No in the EU membership referendum and had swallowed all that tosh he fed us about fictitious partnership and becoming Switzerland in the Mediterranean.

We’re talking about the man who insisted, only a couple of years ago and just before becoming party leader, that Malta shouldn’t join the Eurozone and that we should stick with the Maltese lira.

He should have been sacked, not promoted.

And despite his cavilling, he was the first to go rushing off to Brussels within weeks of Malta joining the EU. I wouldn’t buy a used car from that man.

A secretary-general doesn’t make the tea and do the filing

Toni Abela said that the Labour Party can do without the post of secretary-general (well, he would say that, wouldn’t he?) because he, as deputy leader responsible for party affairs, and James Piscopo, Labour’s chief executive officer, can do the secretary-general’s job between them.

What a busy man Toni Abela is, what with his private legal office and all. He must be ever so harried.

James Piscopo has no such problems. He’s an Air Malta employee who has been given unlimited leave of absence from work to take up his appointment with the Labour Party. The Labour Party pays his salary – or at least, we hope it does – but Air Malta has guaranteed Piscopo’s job and seniority.

He can go back any time he likes. That’s nice for him, isn’t it?

I rather suspect that if Air Malta were to make the same arrangement in respect of the Nationalist Party, we would never hear the end of it on Super One and at cocktail parties, where all the chattering classes would delight in giving this as another reason for their plans to make Joseph Muscat prime minister.

Empty vessels vote for empty vessels, but anyway – the less said about that, the better.

Labour can do without Jason Micallef, but not without a real secretary-general

The Labour Party misunderstands the role of secretary-general, perhaps because its most recent secretaries-general have been quite inadequate. Instead of concluding that its secretaries-general were not up to par, Joseph Muscat and his panting acolytes have concluded that the post is redundant.

The historian and Labour Party veteran (though not in the Sant years) Dominic Fenech wrote a newspaper piece in which he said – quite curiously, I thought – that secretaries-general are much over-rated and that the Nationalist Party has had no significant one since Louis Galea.

I would say that this is not acutely observed and that every Nationalist Party secretary-general since Louis Galea has been significant, though the present one has yet to be tested.

The significance of the Nationalist Party’s secretary-general was particularly obvious in the last general election.

In the Nationalist Party, the secretary-general is the second most important and powerful person after the party leader. If the party leader is also the prime minister, then the secretary-general is effectively the most important and powerful party official.

Secretaries-general are instrumental in winning or losing general elections – again, as we saw in 2008 in both parties – because they micro-monitor public opinion, rally the vote, organise the campaign at all levels, raise funds, keep tabs on everything and everyone within the party, see to every detail, and are aware at every hour of every day where the vote is going and why.

Or at least, that is what they have done so far in the Nationalist Party, and never have in the Labour Party.

Labour’s main handicap since the party began trying to reinvent itself in 1992 is that it never had a sharp enough secretary-general, somebody who would act as a check on and balance for the party leader, somebody who could tell him where he was going wrong and why, with all the facts and statistics to hand.

When Labour’s secretary-general went on television in the aftermath of the last general election and gave a figure for new voters that was off by several thousands, we had one of the reasons why Labour managed to foul things up so badly. If Jason Micallef didn’t know how many new voters there were, then it is hardly surprising that he didn’t know they planned to vote Nationalist, and so he couldn’t tailor-make his party’s campaign to try and change their minds.

I can’t see Toni Abela and James Piscopo between them doing the sort of thing that Joe Saliba did for the Nationalist Party in general election terms. I suspect that they don’t even know or understand the full extent of what is expected of – and what has until now been delivered by – the PN secretary-general.

If Toni Abela thinks he is going to win the general election other than by default, he is deluded.

He is certainly not going to win it by such stratagems as writing mock letters from Barack Obama to Joseph Muscat (in Maltese) and reading them out at demonstrations, putting his hand down the cleavage of a lusty rubber puppet on a Super One show called Teletubi, or stomping around on another Super One show wearing extra-large pilot’s gloves and intoning ‘par idejn sodi’, which are but three of the moronic things I have seen him do.

Dan klapp ghall-partitarji biss

Toni Abela’s interviewer asked him how Labour’s core supporters feel about these attempts at luring ‘Nationalist’ voters over the fence. Toni Abela’s reply was so revealing of just how deep in the dark ages the Labour Party is that I strongly suggest he not be allowed to speak in public any longer lest he says something even more embarrassing.

The party has enough of a problem with the leader’s wife and her empty brown envelopes bl-arma tal-gvern.

“We’ve explained to them that if we want to grow it’s no use trying to keep the party to ourselves,” Abela said.

Keep the party to ourselves? What is it – a club of sorts, with decisions taken to blackball people? So much for the Movement of Progressives and Moderates.

Joseph Muscat appears to believe that if you dress it up like a duck, then it will walk like a duck, quack like a duck and might even become a duck.

Toni the Touchy Liberal who sues if you mock him

Toni Abela said in the same interview that he is a great respecter of freedom, believes in civic rights, and is a very liberal thinker. Would that be why he’s suing me for calling him a clown? Refer to that duck, above.

This article is published in The Malta Independent today.




14 Comments Comment

  1. David Buttigieg says:

    Well, some people say that one of the reasons for that shock in 1996 was that Austin Gatt did not concentrate enough on the party as he was contesting the elections at the same time.

    Having said that Gonzi was secretary general in 98, even though two years of Sant meant a PN victory was practically guaranteed!

  2. d sullivan says:

    What’s he wearing? UGH!

  3. Gahan says:

    I try hard to understand why Dr Toni Abela entered politics; probably not even he himself knows why he’s with Labour and not Alternattiva. I think he’s good at stirring shit.

    [Daphne – He’s with Labour because he wants what Alternattiva can’t give him: power and influence.]

    Like many lawyers he’s good at arguing endlessly but never arrives at a decision. He’s the shuttlecock of Maltese politics.

    So when I saw his interview I turned the page to some more serious reading and found Sylvanus to be more interesting and factual.

  4. Harry Purdie says:

    Wonder which idiot allowed this vacuous individual to be interviewed. Possibly the Supreme Leader? You know, the little twerp who grins-a-lot and comes from Camelot?

  5. Paul Bonnici says:

    You can watch TVM on his jacket!

  6. Matt says:

    Daphne, Dr.Toni Abela is childish to file a law suit against you or any one who calls him names. It is so beneath a deputy leader of a major political party. Only a man with a small mind would try to pick a school fight with anyone who criticizes or mocks him. In democratic countries mocking politicians or doodling their faces on our newspapers are fair play. We get a kick out of seeing our politicians made fun of whether we like or dislike them. Politics is not for the thin-skinned.

    Dr. Abela would receive better dividends if he were to channel his energy into laying out a strategy and telling us what the Labour Party plans to do when in office, rather than squandering time in his office laying a strategy to battle and win a legal argument against you.

  7. Edward says:

    hhmmm… you first say you are shocked (rightly so) that Toni Abela is driven by market research and does not mind moving right to win votes.

    In another paragraph you say that it is the secretary-general’s role to micro-monitor public opinion.

    Which one of these is your opinion?

    [Daphne – Trust you to misunderstand with intent, Edward. You know as well as I do that making policy is one thing and that selling it is another. Public opinion is monitored so as to sell the policies that are not selling so well, and to adjust the non-policy factors that are causing problems, if this is at all possible. Public opinion is not monitored so that the political party in question can decide whether it’s going to be extremist, moderate, left, right, or centre, whether it’s going to run with the hare, hunt with the hounds or try to do both at once. Those things come first.]

    • Edward Fenech says:

      Great Spin Daph! Masterly!

      [Daphne – Iva, Edward, shed that ruddy chip, f’gieh kemm hemm. Not to put too fine a point on it, it was the very politicians you most hate and despise who made it possible for you to live and work where you do now, in Britain. Mur arak x’kont taghmel b’passaport Malti fl-iSvizzera fil-Mediterranan ta’ Sant u Muscat.]

  8. Mark C says:

    Daphne I must admit, I’d rather have someone like Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, loved the way he handled the standoff with the italians.But If I were in the prime minister’s position I would have sent someone like Tonio Borg to Europe instead of John Dalli. The Pn does have good ministers but it rarely uses them properly.

    quote
    ‘they micro-monitor public opinion, rally the vote, organise the campaign at all levels, raise funds, keep tabs on everything and everyone within the party, see to every detail, and are aware at every hour of every day where the vote is going and why.’
    Haha so what does the prime minister do then. Sleep perhaps ?
    big pow-wow haha I must admit that was funny. And the Quack hehe

  9. Rita Camilleri says:

    Oh, I wish you’d used a picture of a duck instead.

  10. Dominic Fenech says:

    Re the following: ‘The historian and Labour Party veteran (though not in the Sant years) Dominic Fenech wrote a newspaper piece in which he said – quite curiously, I thought – that secretaries-general are much over-rated and that the Nationalist Party has had no significant one since Louis Galea.’

    Not quite that. I wrote:
    ‘I hold that the office carries more responsibility than power, however high an incumbent tries to raise his profile – and that applies not just to Labour … If the general secretary accumulates some power along the way, he does so at the pleasure (or the peril) of the party leader. The place of the general secretary is inside the engine room not strutting on the bridge or playing with the controls’.

    It is not about over-rated officials, but about officials over-rating themselves.

    Otherwise, on what the role SHOULD be, we are in agreement.

    With regards to PN general secretaries, my point was that, with the exception of Galea and contrary to appearance, they had no real power vis-a-vis the party leader, who possesses the real power. It was in the context of not confusing responsibility with power.

  11. Ronnie says:

    You definitely can’t fault his dress sense!

  12. Spiru says:

    Sorry to digress from the gist of such an interesting story (as usual), but “If the party leader is also the prime minister, then the secretary-general is effectively the most important and powerful party official”. Perhaps that’s why PN will lose the next election.

  13. Claude Sciberras says:

    Daphne, I think that the problem in the Labour Party structure is even more complex. If I understand correctly the Labour Party has a leader, then two deputies, the secretary general (now defunct) the CEO and then the rest of the structure.

    This means that there is a triumvirate at the helm (you see them holding hands usually on the stage at meetings) and then a general secretary and CEO (in the PN this is the same person). Obviously such a structure is top-heavy and if you have people in these positions who are more interested in pushing themselves than the party then obviously there will be trouble. I would suggest to anyone who can help the Labour Party solve its problems that the party is in dire need of restructuring, then of soul searching. then of policy building and at the very end, when their message has been sold to do the research and see if it is being understood and supported.

    I agree with you 100% here that the Labour Party bases its policy on market research – and the half-baked, non-committal policies are proof of this.

    If the post of secretary-general was not taken up by a competent person, then the party and its leader should start searching better and being careful who they promote within the ranks and maybe stop trying to elevate ignorance as ignorant people tend to remain so whatever post you give them (Mintoff has a lot to be blamed for here).

    If the structure was wrong, then change the structure but democratically and using the proper channels not single-handedly. Is the Labour leader so unsure that he will convince his people about what’s best for the party?

    Many might think that what the Labour Party does in its own house then it’s their business. But when you consider that this person might be your next prime minister then you should also consider that what he does in his party is a prelude to what he will do in government.

    Imagine if he deems the attorney general not to be doing his job and then decides he can do without him? Imagine what it would be like to wake up one morning and find that MEPA has suddenly been dismantled and that we are back to contacting the minister, his driver and his henchmen to get a permit.

    Imagine that these things happen not because there has been wide discussion and that is the way forward but because someone thinks that is the way to go and that’s it. I think that smacks of arrogance.

Leave a Comment