Joseph (in a coat) announces a government project
Perhaps for his next project he'll tell us how he plans to generate the wealth for the refurbishment of social housing.
Wearing a most unflattering coat that he carried like a character from a Guy Ritchie film set among London’s East End gangsters, the leader of the Opposition went to Mosta yesterday to announce his government’s regeneration project for a social housing estate there.
That’s right. He’s the Opposition leader, but he’s announcing government projects – when he isn’t in government but only the Prattikament Prim Ministru.
On timesofmalta.com, yesterday:
A regeneration project at the Mlit Housing Estate in Mosta was this morning announced by Opposition leader Joseph Muscat.
The €700,000 project is meant to upgrade the standard of living of the families in the area by giving the housing estates a new lease of life.
It will be carried out in partnership between the government, the council and the private sector, the Opposition leader said.
Dr Muscat said that families and residents will be consulted and the council would have the possibility to eventually take ownership of the project if it so wanted.
——
And that aside, it is unfortunate for him that the first ‘government project’ he has announced is one which involves not wealth or job creation but yet another way of eating up the wealth created by the hard work of the few for the benefit of those who vote Labour because they think the world owes them a living.
38 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
There’s an apt expression in Maltese that fits this twit to a tee:
Ib**** b’s**** haddiehor.
Pardon my French.
Is this what Charles Buhagiar was doing? He does say it will be done in conjunction with the private sector. Parking has to be in the equation of course, it’s become Labour’s latest dogma for a better quality of life, do we need to ask where he’ll get the equipment?
Does he intend to issue a call for proposals from interested parties or is it a closed shop? This is so wrong.
What next, an old people’s residence in Qormi and another one in Zurrieq?
Told ya he’s happy with the way things are run.
This man has the cheek of the devil. No opportunity lost for him and his lackeys to get their picture on the paper.
Can he specify the meaning of partnership with the private sector?
That heavy to guess?
Bet it will be Charles Grabuhagiar & Co.
Partnership, l-ahjar ghazla! Tiftakruha dik il-kantaliena?
It means taking over the private sector and nationalising the “strategic assets” “in the national interest.”
“Strategic assets” will be defined as “any asset that makes profits.”
Can Joseph give us some details of job-creating projects?
He’s recruting Suldati tal-Azzar
Yep. Labour is going to build a steel industry in Malta.
More like steal a couple of industries – going by their record.
John. You are right. I correct my statement.
Yep. Labour is going to build a steal industry in Malta.
“The project, the Labour leader said, will include a general recreation area, a water catchment system a new communication system network, a child care centre and wi-fi hotspots.”
The recreation area mentioned is an existing derelict playground, left abandoned by the non-existent LP led council.
The design indicates that the playground will be lower than street level and will contain a water catchment system. The playground in question is situated on top of an existing water reservoir, so the reservoir is already in place. To lower the playground level, then the existing reservoir will have to be dismantled.
The plan also mentions a child-care centre, however the pictures only show the playground, an enlarged traffic island and what looks like a small room at the other end. Is this the child care centre or rather room?
Finally, the project will be carried out in partnership between the government, the council and the private sector, the Opposition leader said. The council would have the possibility to eventually take ownership of the project if it so wanted.
Have I missed an election while sleeping? The celebrating LP supporters must have been very quiet so as not to disturb me.
I am looking forward to the forthcoming council election. Five years of an LP-led council has been too detrimental for us Mosta residents. We deserve better.
Well, I guess his gist was meant to be that notwithstanding the abject failure of the Mosta local council, they did manage to get some work done after all.
(M)LP is beyond fixing!
And they have the gall of accusing the government of corruption? They are corrupt in Opposition, just imagine how ‘transparent’ they would be if elected to govern.
Karmenu forgot to declare imports and unloaded miles away from Customs, forgetting the rules his own government had set.
Ministers were enjoying colour TV sets while the peasants were not allowed to have one.
Taps were dry, electricity intermittent, but those were ‘the golden years’.
No 20 points, no parrinu, no minister approval – no university.
Charlie attacked the Pender Place project in Parliament while acting on behalf of the owners!
The other Charlie receives 70,000 euro and the people of Mosta are wondering what for since they saw no new projects in the last few years.
How, but how, the sub-literate let themselves be duped into sticking with the most corrupt party Malta has ever seen and continue to vote for its candidates at election time?
Are they such a hopeless bunch?
They are much more than a hopeless bunch. Have you ever heard about “in-naghag ta Bendu”?
My mum always warned me about men wearing coats.
http://metropolitician.blogs.com/scribblings_of_the_metrop/_zboard_data_note_hwang_doimoikr.jpg
This man delusional.
Is this guy for real? Is he trying to bribe the people of Mosta now that they have realised that the residents will not elect another Labour local council or years to come? Shameful.
His next plans will be for the Ta’ Xbiex Housing Estate – another famous estate converted into a Mintoffian strong-hold in the 80s. Joseph Muscat is concretely showing us how he will manage the country in the future: l-ewwel taghna, imbaghad lil taghna, u wara ghal taghna.
Daphne I think we found a missing link between below article and the above article.
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2012/02/charles-grabuhagiar/
Ah! But the best bit yesterday was their celebration of the 50th anniversary “tad-dnub il-mejjet”, where there were a variety of – ahem – distinguished guests present, including Moran, Yana Mintoff-Bland … and Fr Mark Montebello.
The latter gave a speech, which he delivered in a tone more suited to a church sermon. Most shocking of all, if I heard him right on television with the din in my living room, was his eulogy to Mintoff towards the end, where he said something like “infakkruh, u nibqu infakkruh, u nghidulu grazzi, ghax kont bil-guh u tmajtni!”
I am not particularly religious, but I found his quoting the bible to praise Mintoff utterly obscene, especially him being a priest.
Needless to say, he was given a standing ovation on leaving the stage. Shame on the bloody lot of them.
How can he say that when he stole the bread from the mouths of others who worked so hard for their earnings? It’s my dad’s 37th anniversary today, I wish he was still here with us, but 1973-1975 proved three years too taxing that his health waned and a massive heart attack took him away from us in 10 minutes whilst he was still in the prime of his life. That’s what I’ll thank the MLP and Mintoff for.
The stress of the Seventies proved too much for my late father as well. He suffered a massive stroke which led to his early death.
My mother died in 1981 at St Luke’s Hospital because of the sub-standard care offered during Mintoff’s time.
When she entered the hospital she said, ” Ser joqtluni” and was dead a week later. She was only fifty years old. My sister and I will never forget the Mintoff years.
The first thing that is necessary before one comments and criticises someone’s speech is make sure he hears it well, not say “if I heard him well”.
I found Fr Mark’s speech a very good presentation of what Malta and the Maltese were fifty years ago.
Can anyone doubt that fifty years ago social security was almost nonexistent?
Can anyone deny that we were serfs in our own country, but most of all can anyone deny that thanks to one of our own, many of our fathers had to undergo many injustices and to top it all end up their life by being thrown, yes literally thrown, in the Mizbla?
[Daphne – This business about the mizbla is highly over-rated. To hear the Labour Party tell it, you’d think bodies were hurled into a pit on top of each other, like a mass grave in Bosnia. It was just burial in unconsecrated ground, and quite frankly, who cares. They say they’re not religious, then they care about whether the burial ground was consecrated or not. Plenty of people end up buried in unconsecrated ground in emergency situations, or not buried at all. This is a basic conflict about rabid Laburisti that has long perplexed me: anti-clerical, anti-Catholic, but then so desperate to be accepted by the church.]
Maybe you are not old enough to know what this meant to people living in those days, when religion played a more importat part in thier life. Can anyone imagine what it meant to know that you father, mother, brother was buried in the MIzbla? You can’t even do it to a dog to-day.
[Daphne – An exaggeration, Silvio, and a deliberate one. Given the choice, I would much rather be buried in unconsecrated ground somewhere nice than in that urban jungle of a cemetery. As regards what it must have meant to people living in those times, let’s not champion ignorance or the inability to abide by your principles. If you decide to fight a political fight, see it all the way through. Worse things were done to the living by the Labout government of 1970 to 1987 than were done by the Catholic Church’s representatives in Malta to some of the Labour dead in the 1960s, so let’s keep a sense of perspective here. It was the Labour Party itself which argued for a hiving off of the Catholic Church from influence over their lives, so they should have stuck with it. Yes, it was wrong and unnecessary of the church authorities to do that, but let’s keep a sense of perspective here.]
All this was thanks not to the English, who were then our masters, but the the never forgotten Archbishop Gonzi, a fellow Maltese.
It is right that people like Fr. Mark should make sure that those day are never forgotten, neither that man whose name should be written down in history as the most hated man who ever lived in Malta and neither anyone who made sure and fought, so those things will never ever happen again in our country.
Yes, that is why Fr. Mark was given standing ovation, especialy by people of my age who lived those days, and like me are now feeling ashamed that we supported people like Mons Gonzi.
How exactly were the “English” your “masters” after 1964?
Silvio, what Mark Montebello, and the other bunch of leftist ‘intellectuals’ never discuss, is why Mintoff embraced the Warsaw Pact instead of opting for the way chosen by European left who refuted the totalitarian tactics of the former.
It’s not as if he wouldn’t have found support for a more moderate ideology. Italy’s Partito Communista remained a viable opposition when it declared itself against the growing oppression in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, placing itself outside the Soviet hegemony.
It did so, knowing that the Emilia Romagna and Toscana regions, albeit red, were also proud catholics and wouldn’t accept an ideological war of attrition with the Vatican.
The socialists did the same in Lombardy and the Veneto regions where the Democrazia Cristiana was much stronger.
The same, although to a lesser degree, happened in West Germany and France.
Labour’s history as written by these individuals, lacks a serious analysis of the International political scenario in which the local incidents occurred. Mintoff’s struggle was proved fatuous when Kruschev himself denounced Stalin’s horrors. Which is what Mintoff’s threats could have been perceived as amounting to. He was wrong.
What we see today is the justification of the Irriducibili’s anti-European stance. As if people were thrown into some ditch and dirt bulldozed on top.
I am ashamed of having given my approval to some of my generation who felt proud for having spat at the coffin carrying a Labourite to the mizbla.
I am ashamed when I think of one of my elder relatives boasting that he had refused to employ a father of four for being a Labourite, and telling him to ask Mintoff to feed his children.
I am ashamed for telling off a woman for knocking on our door asking for bread, because we were having lunch.
I am ashamed for having joined my friends in cleaning the Mile End with PURFUM after a Labour meeting.
I am ashamed for being assured that it was very difficut for children from Labourite families to be admitted to the college where I was enrolling my boys.
But most of all I am ashamed of having supported the man who sowed all this hate, and for thinking that he was a man of God.
[Daphne – If there is one thing you can’t accuse Archbishop Gonzi of, it’s lack of foresight. He could see what was coming next, and boy, was he ever right.]
Jozef, I think you’ve got it all wrong. If only Mintoff had been for the Warsaw Pact. At least we’d have become part of something, we’d have had a few cultural exchanges, and perhaps we’d have had our own cosmonaut. Besides which, we’d have joined a military alliance, which is better than nothing.
No. Mintoff was for the third way. The anti-colonialist chip-on-the-shoulder bloc. The Non-aligned Bloc in fact. Which we left, er, only when we joined the EU. So much for “biddilna lil Malta wara l-1987”. No cultural life. No exchange of technology. Nothing of interest. Mintoff was such a vile bastard that even the Soviets wouldn’t have him. So he rushed off to suck up to the likes of North Korea, China and Libya.
Yes, Mintoff turned to the NAM when he had to determine a foreign policy once in office, which was over a decade later.
Gaddafi made him do it.
Leader of the Opposition endorsing government – he’ll be voting PN next.
Sorry Daphne, I don’t agree with you. If that man had foresight he would have ingnored Mintoff and not given him all that importance that made him look a victim and a martyr.
All that Archbishop Gonzi had was ambition and sense of dictatorship; he couldn’t stand being contradicted and most of all he was a lackey of the British Crown.
What came next, as you say, was nothing but the fruit of the hatred he sowed.
[Daphne – No, Silvio, that’s not what I said. I said that what came next was inevitable – regardless of what Archbishop Gonzi said and did – and that Archbishop Gonzi had the foresight to see the inevitable consequences of having somebody as bitter and vengeful as Mintoff in power. It is fairly easy to predict what somebody will do with power by judging and assessing their personality and psychology before they become powerful. I trust you were one of those taken by surprise by Alfred Sant’s terrible performance as prime minister?]
I long for the day when you comment on what I write,by starting with a “Yes Silvio” up to now it has always been “No Silvio”You started with a NO when I said’
Gonzi is right to be cautious in dealing with the Libya crisis,
When I said that Stauss was being framed,
When I said that what Franco was suggesting as reforms,deserved being considered.
Funnily enough, even when I agree with you,you always start with a NO.
Now let’s see how you are going to start this.
No I never thought that Sant would make a good Prime minister,he is anything but a politician.
When I said that homosexuals should not be given too much air,as they will soon start dictating,
Funnily enough,even when I agree with you, you always start with a NO.
I wonder how long it’ll be before our very own Ed takes up Prescott’s advice:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17084965
I remember when lLabour supporters would go to mass but wouldn’t give any money for the collection. They hated the church so why all this fuss, and anyway, when you’re dead you’re dead, you’re dead. They could throw my body into the sea and I wouldn’t care less.