Mrs Robert Abela, please just flock off
Published:
January 23, 2013 at 8:48pm
Wait, wait! We’re flocking to Labour too!
The email sent out by the President of the Republic’s daughter-in-law, a Labour Party official, to various unsuspecting members of the public, makes enthusiastic use of the word ‘flocking’.
People of all sorts are flocking to Labour, she writes.
Therefore, it follows, we must flock to Labour too.
Like sheep. Ghax trid ikun ghandek mohh ta’ naghga biex tivvota ghal JosephMuscat.com.
Labour Party official and president’s daughter-in-law Mrs Robert Abela, far right, currently lurking in an email message near you.
31 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Mela ahna n-naghag ta’ Bendu?
What is the lady second from right wearing? It looks like she has a kinky rubber fetish.
Mhux bizzejjed tkun naghga; trid tkun wahda mitlufa biex tivvota Labour.
I like “Ghax trid ikun ghandek mohh ta’ naghga biex tivvota ghal JosephMuscat.com.”
Flock is a very apt verb here.
It also happens to be the collective noun that refers to people who are considering voting PL.
It has to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tjbRHOzoUg8
Brilliant.
Listening to the debate on TVM. The Labour guy (don’t know what his name is and frankly I’d rather keep it that way) is saying that we should vote for Labour to get the change we voted for in 1987.
Brass neck? No kidding dude.
Carmel Hili.
As of tonight it’s official:
The PN was irresponsible when it risked EU membership by refusing a coalition with AD.
This from Labour’s latest star candidate, Carmel Hili, sitting next to Toni Abela.
He implied he was one of those ‘li mhumiex komdi fil-Partit Laburista.’
I presume Toni represented the ones who are.
Cacopardo was speechless.
Excellent, the muviment is made up of Laburisti and Nazzjonalisti li ghandhom ghan-Nazzjonalisti.
Jozef,
Nonetheless, in my opinion, Carmel Hili’s statement, that the PN opted to risk EU membership rather than enter into an agreement with AD (to give 3rd parties a realistic chance to be elected), is unfortunately correct.
The system was a first past the post.
AD wouldn’t have made it in Sliema and their votes would have been lost.
The election was called four weeks after the referendum. AD wasn’t ready and panicked.
Cassola was rewarded with over 25,000 votes in the subsequent EP elections. I was one of those who voted for him. Why didn’t he remain here and work for that mandate outside parliament?
AD was at its best at that point. It was a moral victory and I was genuinely happy for them, but he threw it away.
baqar ahjar milli naghag
‘moghoz’ should be the better word.
[Daphne – English uses sheep, because that’s the more common animal there. Maltese uses goats, for the same reason. When you say, in English, ‘they’re like goats’, or ‘he’s an old goat’, it means something entirely different to ‘qishom moghoz’, which translates correctly (as distinct from literally) to ‘they’re like sheep’.]
U nahseb ha jkollna flocking jekk jitla il-Labour ta’ nies jirregistraw ghax-xoghol.
U kif qeghdin fuq is-suggett, Abela, it-tifel tal-president, diga qed jghix f’Malta taghna ilkoll ghax mid-dehra ma harigx ghall-elezzjoni ghax imhabbat hafna b’ kuntratt ta’ konsulenza li ha minghand il-MEPA, mela mhux kif jghid Muscat li il gid in-Nazzjonalisti biss jgawdu minnu taht GonziPN.
Don’t flocks end up getting sheared?
Or butchered.
And fleeced, too – leaving them almost naked, waiting for nature to bring back what they were robbed of.
Weird bunch indeed.
They have hung one of their own out to dry, that Sammut chap.
WTF?
A sacrificial lamb is needed to please and assure the gods of obedience and adoration.
Who said anything about mutton dressed as lamb?
Nice one Daphne, you make my day with your comments.
I’m already imagining people flocking – not to the Labour Party but to the labour office.
Daphne, I am curious, what is your opinion to voting AD?
[Daphne – If you look up everything I wrote about the subject in 2008, you’ll see. Basically, it’s insane. It’s just another way of putting Labour in government and making Muscat prime minister by default. Unless, of course, you choose to vote AD whereas normally you would vote Labour. Then just go right ahead. Otherwise, the bottom line is this. There is choice between Joseph Muscat leading a Labour government and Lawrence Gonzi leading a Nationalist government. Decide which one you prefer and vote for it. There is no third option, and once you are going to have a government whether you like it or not, you should choose the one you think is best. I think the Nationalist Party is best. This does not mean I think the Nationalist Party is ideal or perfect (that means something else). I think it is the best of the two options by a long, long, long shot. So I will vote for it.]
Great advice, Daphne. You don’t sing much praise to the PN. I can’t believe why the PL associate you with the PN.
For Labour, whoever is against them must be a PN fanatic by default.
Binary opposition is the simplest form of logic. It follows that it is Labour’s favoured line of thought.
Well, it is opportune to assess why we seem to always be denied any free choice…..of voting FOR rather than AGAINST.
The electoral law was devised by the PNPL and they have no intention to rectify it, so as to make it more democratic and representative. They are adamant to fend off any possibility of having a 3rd party denting their alternating absolute governments.
They are comfortable that as things stand, a 3rd party can only elect a candidate by garnering a quota in any one district – notwithstanding that on a national scale, it would had received first preference votes equating a quota.
AD has been calling for a national electoral threshold (without much sustained and focused strategy in my opinion), moreover decades ago, both the Galdes Commission and subsequently even Gonzi’s own Commission had recommended that some 5% threshold be enacted. Nonetheless, the PNPL ensured that any effective initiatives towards such change, were jeopardised and aborted due to a plethora of hollow excuses and convenient circumstances they both concocted.
As things stand, Franco Debono stands a relatively better chance to get elected from the 5th district (if he contests at all), than AD in 10th district or any other district. In 2008 we had GonziPN securing a Nationalist Cabinet, thanks to just 1500, whereas the 3800 voters who gave their first preference to AD remained unrepresented.
And please, let’s not bring the excuse of governability. A two party parliament faced governability crises as we well know, and we have coalition governments throughout Europe (even in small states). More importantly AD have proven time and again that they are objective and clear in their positions, and their input is positive (even if one may disagree), amongst the tribal unconstructive blame games and accusations the PNPL hurl at each other, and which are more often than not, irrelevant to the underlying long-term strategic issues at hand.
Personally I lost faith in Dr. Fenech Adami and the PN, when during the infamous 2003 elections, when our EU accession fate was to be sealed, the PN proved that it was ready to risk our EU membership simply to avoid having AD gaining any realistic chance of being elected in 2003 or even thereafter.
In a nutshell, I honestly believe, that the Labour Party prefers to have a totally Nationalist Cabinet and more so the Nationalist Party prefers to have a totally Labour Cabinet, rather than a 3rd party in parliament. Thus they can remain in blissful power for at least 5 years, without anyone posing their noses into the irresponsible and unaccountable way they operate. So long for the scaremongering campaigns and doom clips the PNPL try to put down people throats on a daily basis!
[Daphne – I think that the experience of the past four years has completely put off even the last few people who thought a coalition would make for better democracy. We discovered to our cost that it is an absolute nightmare and that so much energy and time and effort are consumed in negotiations to fend off blackmail and refusal to cooperate that it’s just not worth it and the whole country suffers. Thanks, but no thanks. Stability is PRECIOUS.]
Let’s try to be slightly more to the point.…
Which AD proposal would any PN or PL Prime Minister deem so unacceptable to warrant a rush to the polls, the Transparent Party Financing, the Whistleblower Act, Implementing the overdue Long-Term Energy Policy, the Environment, Curbing over urbanization, just to mention a few (and please let’s consider the overdue implemenation not just the drafting thereof)?
Likewise AD’s stance has always been consultative and inclusive towards reaching an objective consensus – which has nothing to do with blackmailing, thus implying that AD will ditch their support on a trivial matter is respectfully pretty far-fetched.
On the other-hand having a responsible coalition partner, assists governments to act objectively and openly discuss matters thoroughly – thus avoiding (at best) the perception of being arrogant, or seeking their party’s (lackeys’) short-term interests rather than the national long-term one.
A responsible coalition partner would be postive – but obviously it depends on the credibility and honesty of the (small) partner involved, OR more likely by our standards, how and to what extent the big partner really wants the coalition to work.
In all honesty, would a Cabinet with say, Carmel Cacopardo on, be a regressive or a significantly improved one?
“…when our EU accession fate was to be sealed, the PN proved that it was ready to risk our EU membership simply to avoid having AD gaining any realistic chance of being elected in 2003 or even thereafter.”
Not true. Get your facts straight. AD, to its credit, called on its supporters to give their first preference to PN and their second to AD, while PN called on its supporters to give their very last preference to AD.
In 2003, pro-Europeans needed every last vote and parliamentary seat, and if it meant sacrificing AD’s parliamentary dreams, then it was a small price to pay.
Is this why Cacopardo can’t commit to a definite judgement on Labour’s power station proposal?
No more waiting for Labour’s workings please, if he’s convinced it can’t be done in two years.
There’s no logic in that. Just looks very odd.
I call it political convenience at the expense of the country.
Cassola learnt his politichese very well under Prodi. The sure way to destroy faith in politics.
Jozef,
I trust you can appreciate that Cacopardo is a freelance architect (let’s not go into Pullicino/MEPA’s mess with its Audit Office), without the luxury of a fully fledged professional office team sustained by juicy government contracts. If Cacopardo fully committed himself/AD on one specific PNPL Energy ‘proposal’ on the basis of what has been disseminated to date, it would have been naïve at best.
I am surprised how AD committee members thanklessly strive to give their input, since they are not paid to do so, neither do they live off donations from businessmen, and less even public tenders or chairperson/board member remunerations. AD cannot resort to, so called ‘expert’ reports financed by the taxpayer, as unfortunately every government has done – albeit it can draw support from the opinion of knowledgable persons in the field within the European Greens.
Lastly you seem to have an issue with Cassola and the Italian parliament…..I think it would be in our island’s interest if somehow we manage to elect a Maltese national in every EU member state’s parliament – and I do not recall that Cassola did anything against our interests whilst serving in Italy – in fact, most issues he raised related to Malta.
Nonetheless, earlier on the point was about whether voters have an alternative choice – or more realistically whether the PNPL are allowing voters such free effective choice or not….
Dear Baxxter,
Come on, we are slightly more intelligent than that!
Yes Harry Vassallo did point out that EU membership would be served best if those voters who were considering voting for AD, should instead vote PN and then give 2nd preference to AD.
The logic here was EU accession would be safeguarded if, either 1) the PN gets more votes than the MLP, or 2) even if the MLP gets slightly more votes than the PN, an AD elected candidate would have saved the day, by avoiding the triggering of additional seats bonanza to the MLP.
In the light of the above, it is evident that the PN was very selfish to ‘instruct’ its supports to give the last rather than the 2nd preference vote to AD. By that it risked that although the PN might have initially got more seats – these would have been futile if the MLP would have registered a relative majority.
If such blatant fact is not an eye-opener , than I must be crazy!
The day after Robert Abela announced that he was not going to contest the election with Joseph Muscat’s Mintoffjan Party but to contribute from behind the scenes, he made a physical appearance at the MEPA.
Usually it is his subordinates who attend meetings at MEPA offices. Was it just a coincidence or something else?