Shades of Franco Debono and JPO? No thanks. We’ve had enough.
He went to support his Fearless Leader at the debate last night, and sat with Kevin Drake. Nice going, Kevin. You really know how to choose them.
At yesterday’s debate between the party leaders, organised by The Times, Michael Briguglio was asked how an AD seat would affect parliament.
Briguglio’s reply: “If we’re in parliament, the other parties will have to listen to our proposals and queries – whether they like it or not”.
My God, the arrogance. Somebody with a single seat, representing at most 2,000 constituents, controlling the entire parliament through dog-in-the-manger tactics.
No bloody thank you. I think we’ve all had more than enough of that with the antics of Franco Debono and Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando. Even if the person who holds the AD seat is not as cracked and malicious, the modus operandi is still there, and it shows clearly in Briguglio’s answer, which boils down to: “We may have only one seat but we’ll be calling the shots – whether they like it or not.”
Maybe Briguglio forgets that all those other MPs actually represent constituents, and not themselves, and that the rest of us don’t take kindly to the immoral suggestion that somebody who represents just a tiny number of people will be pressing his or her agenda by using this kind of dishonest leverage.
As I said, we saw it happen graphically, for five long years, with those two ghastly men Jeffrey and Franco, and we really don’t need any more of that.
Labour were quite happy to collude with both of them, because it suited their interests, but even they are not going to want to deal with it on a daily basis when it’s happening to them.
A party with one seat should stay in its place, not force everyone to listen to it. I thought AD was liberal? Now here it is, talking about tyranny by a tiny minority: 2% of the vote controlling the other 98%.
Ma tarax.
52 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
To hell with AD. I don’t know who comes up with their electoral strategy but they seem to be doing their utmost to lose as many votes as possible.
Given that virtually all their voter base is composed of the disaffected middle-class, I don’t see how they plan on luring them over by promising NOT to lower their taxes.
And do they really think that they will get the votes of the lejburisti hodor by promising to increase the minimum wage? It’s so obvious that they are completely cut off from the real world.
The same old story, from one election to another. They say that they are happy to obtain one seat and claim that they would control parliament.
The simple result is that never gets anybody elected and only the foolish voters waste their vote on AD. Everytime they shoot themselves in the foot.
There I was wondering where the usual electoral doze of AD bashing had gone……..
It’s not AD bashing. It’s the voice of common sense and sanity.
There’s not enough of it that has a clear and immediate sensory reaction to things like this. I think you can call Daphne’s sensory reaction finely honed.
it’s dose – but doze actually works here!
Thank you Michael Briguglio for bringing me (and I hope others) to my senses.
Every single time I start to look at AD with some sympathy (nothing to do with giving them my vote), one of them opens his mouth to prove to me that my sympathy is being misplaced.
Such arrogance from AD when only yesterday evening Arnold Cassola was calling the main parties “di stampo mafioso”. Do the pot and the kettle come to mind?
I can’t stand it when he does that.
“representing at most 2,000 constituents”
To be fair, that’s only due to our flawed electoral law, because there are more Alternattiva voters than that. But yeah. The point of your article still stands.
To be honest I wouldn’t mind AD being in parlament AS LONG as the PN have more than 1 seat majority. In that case, the AD would not have enough power to stop anything while on the other hand may be able to contribute to the country.
[Daphne – Exactly why are we still talking about these hypotheses? Look at the numbers. A PN government with more than one seat majority and AD in parliament, indeed. What planet are we living on here.]
That scenario is virtually impossible.
And I wouldn’t mind it raining Mars bars and Snickers, as long as they are calorie free.
has anyone noticed that zrinzo azzopardi has disappeared into thin air?
Oh thin air. At first glance I though you wrote THIN HAIR.
On a lighter note, this is a must see :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypGkENRgXVk
Ghall-erwieh :)))
AD always meant problems and now ex AD who did their most to fight PN went into the PL skip and contesting local council elections. Being called mafiosi by AD should be the last straw which broke the camel’s back. And by what the AD leader said yesterday, should be more than an eye opener to those toying with voting for them, most of which were the real beneficiaries of all the wealth brought by PN governments.
Five good reasons to vote PN.
http://www.simonbusuttil.eu/Newsroom/281/Articles/20327/Five_good_reasons_to_vote_PN/#.US3uAku6R_o.facebook
People forget that the electoral boundaries were very much against PN in 2008, all thanks to Said Pullicino who voted for the (MLP) minority report.
So Labour ended up with a THREE SEAT majority in Parliament although polling less votes than PN. PN were then allocated an extra 4 seats, to get a 1 seat majority according to the constitutional amendement.
Had the electoral boundaries been those originally proposed, the result may have been a 3 seat majority for PN, which could have had different implications on the working of the last legislature.
Has JPO been audited already?
Until today, I thought Gonzi could win.
This morning I spoke to someone who is voting Labour ‘for the change’.
I said ‘oh what policies in particular do you like of Labour’s?’.
They said they don’t know any, hadn’t even read the ‘Manifest’.
Malta is truly F*CKED.
I had a similar experience. Met someone who claims that he is voting PL this time and who (as far as I know) has voted PN since 1987.
His reason was, “Imagine the level of arrogance the PN would have if they also win this time” and “It is good for democracy to have a change”. How can you reason with these people?
You can’t – the total lack of intelligence in such statements makes any chance of reason quite impossible.
Ask them to drink a pint of drain cleaner, after all, having their stomachs pumped out would make a change. (JOKE)
I suggest you tell them that Joey’s arrogance if he wins will be far far worse than anything Gonzi could muster.
Having said that, I agree that trying to reason is futile.
Come after the election if you come across them and PN wins they say that they changed their mind at the last moment. These kind of people are playing safe just in case Labour wins that way they can try to get anything from Labour.
How’s this for a quote from a Maltese in law. ‘I won’t vote for the PN this time, even if we have to live through five years of hell!’
You don’t have to reason, it’s just a fact.
To rub salt in the wound this people have children and are happy to betrays their children’s future to put a charlatan as prime minister.
MLP has been in opposition since 1998. They are as arrogant as ever.
The problem with PN isn’t arrogance, but pandering to wrong sorts of people (to Laburisti, social leeches, the lower classes and the unproductive).
AD is a Communist Party. I have masochistically followed their proposals for the past 4 years and they’re even worse than the MLP’s.
Having AD in Parliament will mean a progressive tax, where the more you work, the more you are taxed in order to feed the lazy.
Progressive, but in the very bad sense of the word.
If you read between the lines Labour is proposing progressive taxation – it is the only way that they will create a new middle class. Mintoff systematically eroded the gap between rich and poor by taking money from the rich rather than leaving the rich as is and trying to elevate the poor through economic and social reform.
Modern Labour policies amount to pretty much the same stuff.
Has John Dalli been granted “political refugee” status in Belgium ? How about getting a European Arrest Warrant out for him ? Or will he be returning in the week starting 11th March after a miraculous fall in hypertension ?
The police want to arraign him.
If they don’t, we know there will have been political interference, something I guess we are going to have to put up with.
How about solving the OIL FRAUD question ,before tackling the Dalli insinuations?
Not of course forgetting all about the (fake) Maltese clock.
The Dalli affair,is so petty, compared to the others, that nearly everybody seems to have forgotten about it.
W il-Hdura w il-kampanja Positiva tkompli fuq Maltastar.Com – you are headlines because for them you are the Partit Nazzjonalista.
Have you read the latest joke?
“Labour would not enter a mud-slinging contest and would not even get its hands dirty with mud” ( http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130226/local/Expect-worse-from-PN-Muscat-warns.459272 )
At yesterday’s debate, Joseph Muscat twice lied shamefacedly, as could be seen from the now-familiar “I’m lying” furrow which developed between his eyes.
The first time was when he invited reconciliation with Anglu Farrugia.
The second was when he replied “Assolutament iva” to the question about restricting the manufacture and use of fireworks.
“to listen to our proposals and queries”
Presenting proposals is completely different to controlling parliament.
It’s beyond ridiculous to compare AD to aggressive and arrogant people like Debono. The individuals involved in AD aren’t stupid and they know that its in their best interest, if they have a seat, to form a coalition without forcing any issues.
The only thing they could force the parties to do is discuss. Arnold Cassola said it himself, they know that if they are elected it’ll be by a small number of electorates and so they’ll only be playing a small role, but a role nonetheless. It would also significantly hurt their chances in the next election.
Not to mention the fact that if our system wasn’t regional they’d get a hell of a lot more than 2,000 votes.
The party’s name is Alternativa Demokratika. But they are not democratic at all.
Just watched TVHemm, Marthese Portelli, an Alex Sciberras from Labour and one of the twins from Alternattiva.
Both AD and Labour have issues with the drydocks.
If it were for AD, the PN should have tried harder until today. As if privatisation didn’t provide a feasible solution.
What’s wrong with these people?, are they for the protection of subsidised categories? Like all good lefties, they don’t distinguish between a job and work.
The same fellow seems to think that forming part of a team in charge of roadworks, maintenance and the quality required isn’t dignified enough.
I’ve done all sorts of stuff, It was crucial to understand what other people’s jobs are.
Why do I get the feeling that both AD and Labour are only interested in having their role justified?
Fine, let’s have AD go after Labour then.
I didn’t know the USA is communist, having the most progressive tax systems in the world.
It is an undisputed fact that Green parties are heavily left-leaning. Are you disputing that?
Heavy taxation is a feature of leftist economic theory too, but not necessarily the only feature.
US society is also one of the most unequal in the world, for that matter.
Bubu, I am not disputing the obvious fact that AD is leftist. I also did not even mention heavy taxation. My point was that, contrary to what Wayne Hewitt seems to be implying, progressive taxation is not necessarily communist.
And now that you mention it, the fact that US society is “one of the most unequal in the world” despite having the most progressive taxation in the world, is further proof that progressive taxation is not necessarily communist. A purely communist state (which is never possible in practice) would require economic equality and would abolish class altogether.
I’m arguing for facts, and not for any particular policy.
AD are clearly opposed to income tax reduction
If elected, the thing to do, would be to vote against the budget.
Given that both parties pledged to implement the budget, will they effectively vote to bring government down?
Ma nafux fejn qeghdin.
Ridiculous. If they get into parliament it’ll be by a small number of votes and they will use their influence accordingly, as they have plainly said. It would not be in their interest to ‘bring down’ the government, that is simply fear mongering.
[Daphne – It wasn’t in Jeffrey’s or Franco’s interest, either, and in fact they both kept going right until the end of the legislature, precisely because of the reasons you give. But bringing down the government isn’t what it’s about. It’s the insufferable behaviour in between.]
The solution is practicable, easy and evident for politicians genuinely interested in a true democracy of a rule by the majority with respect for minority rights.
The party that obtained an electoral majority should be allocated a workable majority of at least three (not one) seat. Otherwise government could be at the mercy of one single despicable blackmailer who could come from the governing party, from a sizeable party in opposition or a miniscule Alternativa Demokratika if it manages to return even one MP.
The nation does not need any more Franco Debonos or Jeffrey Pullicino Orlandos. Behind the scene haggling wheeling and dealing to patch up some form of a coalition is not truly democratic because the jigsaw programme would not have been chosen by the voters.
The Times has just uploaded a ‘behind the scenes’ video of yesterday evening’s ‘Big Debate’. In it, Mr. Briguglio expresses his satisfaction with the University and MCAST debates, both of which were conducted “on a level playing field” – his words.
To be fair to Briguglio, he’s actually making a simple statement of fact. Frankly, I have no problem with the prospect of 8,000 people (2.5%) having a representative in Parliament. On the contrary, 8,000 people NOT having a representative in parliament makes me feel rather uncomfortable (being the totally fair-minded woman that I am!).
I’m sorry but
“If we’re in parliament, the other parties will have to listen to our proposals and queries – whether they like it or not”
and
“If we’re in parliament, the other parties will have to accept our proposals and answer our queries – whether they like it or not”
are two different things.
[Daphne – No, they are not. AD doesn’t have to be in parliament to be listened to, but it has to be in parliament to be obeyed. We are already listening to AD now. What they’re upset about is that they’re not obeyed. Use your head: why would they be agitating for a seat in parliament if not to impose their agenda on the majority? Why bother otherwise? They might as well be out of parliament if, once in, they are not going to use their leverage to impose themselves on the rest of us. Minority rule – lovely.]
The big headline today is the hunters’ lobby’s rage over Lawrence Gonzi’s willingness to hold a referendum on hunting.
If we accept their assumption that the majority will vote to ban hunting – I don’t for a moment believe this will ever happen – then surely, AD’s agenda will have been carried out. Add a referendum on demolishing illegal boathouses and you’re done.
Yes they do need to be in parliament to be listened to. As they are, no one takes them seriously and many of the important issues they care about are not given the importance they deserve.
Again there is no way they’d expect the parties to simply obey them, it’s not in their interest and simply would not happen.
[Daphne – Really? How do you know? Remember that you’re talking to somebody who voted for Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando. You never know what a person really is until it comes to the crunch, though it’s true I should have read the signs.]
AD is against PN budget proposal to lower upper income tax rate from 35%ot 25%
They argue that low income earners will not benefit.
I am very disappointed. The middle class has been for years paying taxes to subsidise so called low income earners, subsidising their housing, their utility bills and everything on earth. A good part of these income tax earners are trades such as kahhala who declare only a minimum amount of their earnings in order to still benefit from maximum childrens allowance, utility rebates, housing and other social services
Tonio Fenech, rightly so, was the only finance minister to introduce measures in favour of middle class by reintroducing childrens allowance for all families and yearly increase in childrens allowance rate, by yearly increasing tax rebate for children attending private schools and childcare centres, by every year deceasing rate of income tax, by introducing a one year tax free salary for mothers returning after having a baby. At last middle class families are getting back part of the taxes they have been paying for others for years.
.
U le that’s not what he meant….
Neither PN nor PL want to touch certain issues, AD would bring these issues on the national agenda.
Anyway, if PL are in government why not have AD there too to disrupt them.