Labour: never any regard for the human consequences
Joseph Muscat stands on a platform to speak to children and their mothers in the street.
The thing that has always impressed me (very negatively) about the Labour Party is that year on year, ever since I became politically aware as a child in the 1970s, its policies, actions, and behaviour have been completely detached from the human consequences.
When I became older I also became aware of the way this complete disregard for the individual, this total insensitivity towards people, was also habitually packaged and sold as the precise opposite.
“Mintoff cares about us because he gives us plots.”
“Mintoff cares about us because he gives us a cash allowance for our children.”
“Mintoff cares about us because he finds us jobs.”
But Mintoff stripped them off their basic dignity, their most fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to an education and to know what is going on even in their own country, let alone the rest of the world. He condemned them to life as a hamster in its cage, and they thanked him for it.
On to the present, and the Labour Party’s proposal yesterday that eight-year-olds will be given an iPad or some other tablet it has obviously agreed to buy from a friend.
My initial reaction, as somebody who raised three sons a year apart in age, was: “For God’s sake, wasn’t there a single person on their advisory team who could tell them what a bloody lousy idea this is? Aren’t Joseph and Michelle parents of TWO children themselves? Are they so ruddy thick or such lousy parents that it didn’t even occur to them for one split second to think of how Soleil would feel if Etoile was given a free iPad and she wasn’t? Of the difficult position Joseph and Michelle would then be in themselves, wondering how to deal with this situation?”
Then I remembered what sort of people would have written this brilliant piece of policy: sexagenarian leftie economists washed-up on the shores of 2013 from the 1970s, people who always did everything on paper with no regard for the human elements involved. Men who, because of their age and background, would never even stop and think about the psychology of child-rearing.
This hasn’t come up at all, so I’ll bring it up myself and hope that the prime minister, who is clearly a really good father and grandfather (which is why women with children warm to him so well), will bring it to wider attention.
Yes, it would have to be the Labour Party, which is invariably detached from the human element of its policies, not to understand the consequences/implications of giving a free iPad to just one child, leaving his/her siblings without.
This is not a trivial matter, because it puts parents in an impossible situation.
1. Had they bought the iPad themselves, they would have been able to insist that it is communal and shared by all siblings.
2. Because the iPad has been given to just the one child by the state as his/her own private property, they are torn between a) the parental wrong-doing of insisting that this child shares what is technically a personal possession, and b) the parental wrong-doing of allowing a situation in which the other siblings watch in envy and resentment while their brother/sister uses an iPad and they don’t have one too.
3. Those parents who can afford it will end up having to buy iPads for their other children who weren’t given one for free, as a way out of the moral maze in 2. above, to keep the peace, and because they know it is intrinsically wrong (and dangerous) to allow one child to be privileged over his or her siblings.
Bang on cue, the awfulness of Labour’s proposal was illustrated during a highly staged and very awkward visit which Joseph and Michelle (she armed with a giant handbag that entered the room before she did – shouldn’t she have left it outside with her driver?) paid to a family in Kalkara.
Michelle was really falsely sugary and stiff. Joseph was unbelievably awkward and lacking in warmth. It is obvious that he is about as good around children as he is around dogs.
Introduced to their two sons, aged 7 and 11, he stupidly turned to the 7-year-old and said ‘Is-sena d-diehla ikollok l-iPad.’ His brother’s face fell and he was visibly and audibly upset.
28 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130125/local/algerian-company-made-gas-proposal-to-enemalta-in-2004.454672
Damn I’m good. Damn I’m good.
Press Conference on NET TV about Education. Really good.
“Aren’t Joseph and Michelle parents of TWO children themselves? Are they so ruddy thick or such lousy parents that it didn’t even occur to them for one split second to think of how Soleil would feel if Etoile was given a free iPad and she wasn’t?”
No they would not have to deal with this problem Soleil and Etoile are twins
As well as the complete disregard to the aesthetics of the country and its inherent heritage.
Artefacts (Punic, if I recall well) given to friends as presents by Mintoff. I know because the friend was showing it off. I was shocked. Who knows how many other items were given away liberally in this manner.
A very valid point. Unfortunately, The Times described it as a light hearted moment.
Even the words used were awful. Any vague attempt at making the proposal look education oriented was immediately lost.
“Is-sena d-diehla jkollok iPad.”
He sounded more like Father Christmas than a prospective Perime Minister.
I totally agree with you, Daphne.
On the subject of Joseph’s visit to the Kalkara family. I wonder how they select these families to visit.
I’m sure that these are Labour supporters. In which case I didn’t see any evidence of ‘dal-gvern qeridna’ in their spanking-new kitchen with the coffee-machine in the background.
That is the ONLY thing that struck me, in the TV reports I have watched. Glad to know I was not the only one who noticed it.
The Kalkara tablet charade highlights the stupidity of whoever organised this PR stunt, the most basic tenet of which is to ensure a favourable outcome and avoid situations that highlight the inadequacies of your proposals.
I have two children aged 12 and 8. So far I have resisted persistent requests for an iPad (invariably made by the older one).
This is precisely the first thing that came to my mind. I loudly commented to my co-workers that now I surely am in trouble as I cannot have my 8 year old flaunting an iPad while my 12 year old jealously looks on.
Incidentally, the reason why I resisted an iPad so far was to avoid unnecessary confrontations when the device would be used in the privacy of my child’s room without my supervision.
Thank you Joseph for throwing my parental skills out the window and putting me in a quandary.
And another point worth bringing up is whether an iPad is even worth having in the classroom at that level of education.
A simple ebook reader to spare children the weight of books is fine, but an iPad has so many functions that can distract Year IV students quite as easily as it does University students.
But, then again, considering Labour’s relationship with education, I’m not surprised they didn’t consider what effect their gimmick would have on the classroom as well.
This tablet story will have dire consequences on parenting, academic education and basic social interaction.
Are we sure our kids should be as hopeless as a large number of kids in larger cities? This tablet story will remove the social flexibility which this country will require in the future.
It is good to invest in education but a lot of the investment is of the wrong type.
Are we sure we want to dish out lots of university students without a basic standard mesh? The quality of graduates in some fields is leaving a lot to be desired at present, are we sure this tablet story will not compound the problem?
“He condemned them to life as a hamster in its cage, and they thanked him for it.”
That reminds me of a Maltese taxi driver complaining about the stress of modern Malta, saying more or less something like:
“In Mintoff times we had nothing but we could at least be sure of that”.
What a menatlity.
You can also see that from where he leaves them standing in the middle of the road. Allahares jghaddi xi hadd bil-mutur, whilst he stays a safe distance away. No regard.
The father actually told Muscat: “Hloqtli problema ghax ha jiggieldu ghax lil wiehed biss tajtu” and they both laughed.
MLP proposal makes me want to ask, what if they break it, will they give them another one? Who will pay for repairs?
At least PN proposal is much better since the tablet will be on leasing, it can easily be replaced.
Owning an iPad is only the beginning.
One needs an internet account (which costs money), downloading of Apps (not all of which are free) etc.
Handled by a child the machine could suffer damage, hardware or software, and would need servicing. Can all families afford this?
PN’s proposal makes more sense, the machine comes loaded with all that the student needs. Even servicing to keep the system working smoothly is included.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that the government already had a pilot project on this idea, so this is the outcome of months of study.
Obviously the PL knew that the PN were going to do something and wanted to copy it. But they had no idea of how to go about it. As usual.
Yes, I believe that the St. Paul’s Bay government school children were given an iPad each a year or so ago.
The PL was always a party which created problems rather than solved them.
Malta taghna lkoll -so the iPad should be given to ALL children, so no child would feel discriminated against.
So, to reduce electricity bills, they’ll build a power station, and to hell with the residents
To improve female participation in the workforce they’ll build a strict business model which will look at the ones in question simply from a commercially convenient perspective. Public private partnerships you see.
To improve children’s learning skills they’ll hand some a prepackaged product. (I bet they haven’t included web filters).
Splendid, what next, transfer all public entities to Gozo, removing online facilities, to spike the island’s internal tourism numbers?
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/elections2013/AD-turns-to-political-parties-stop-your-electoral-gimmicks-20130125
Good to know Briguglio thinks the proposals are identical.
In keeping with the equidistant position. Why is he wearing a blue tie then?
Tell me about the bickering that ensues over a lollipop, let alone an Ipad.
This guy is an imbecile, who should ironically have an idea considering he has twins.
But yet again he may be looking at it selfishly he gets two at the same time.
He was so rude too, because he asked to sit down instead of being offered a seat by the host. Tal-misthija.
Labour’s only concerns with individuals is with themselves.
Why is it that they always manage to create division and hate with their policy making? It seems that now they intend to do so even between children, and within families.
Thank God that the Prime Minister has come in to solve this matter by promising that every child will benefit from access to a tablet as a tool for educational purposes.
Labour has always worked on the premise that its people benefit first and then throws tidbits to the rest “biex jaghlqu halqhom”.
Their 7 year old son is going to probably be even more dissappointed than his elder brother was when that moron told him that next year he will have the iPad because according to what is being said on “Bla Agenda” it is not advisable to introduce the tablet in schools before first giving the neccessary training to both the children and their teachers, meaning that it is highly likely that it would take much longer than 1 year.
Jinqdew b’nies vulnerabli biex jiksbu il-vantagg li ikunu kemm jista jkun malajr fil-poter.
Bla misthija f’wicchom.
It is very true that Joseph and Michelle are the parents of two children, however there would not be any issues between the siblings because they are both going to be in Year 4 at the same time, given that they are twins.
[Daphne – That was not my point. Please don’t be so literal.]
Soleil and Etoile are twins so Joseph himself will not have that problem as they will get an iPad at the same time.
Meaning he doesn’t give a toss about the problems he will cause other parents because he won’t have to face that problem himself
Did you notice Joseph asked the family to sit down in that video? Imagine someone comes into my house and asks me to ‘have a seat’.
Why doesn’t he realise that people see right through all his charades.
You only need to listen to Lawrence Gonzi’s speeches for a few minutes to feel inspired. Full of positive energy, that’s the right term.
Joseph Muscat sees himself as the special one and his body language and behaviour really point to this. He patronises people, talks down to them, and he puts himself above the level of the common citizen using a platform, box or podium even when there are only 10 people present.
Look at him in all events. He does not get down to the level of the people but he wants the people to look up at him. That is why he is always using the podium. These are tactics which are used in totalitarian countries to impress and to send a message of authority and imposition to the people.