The Labour Party has things all sewn up, hasn’t it
I won’t bother distinguishing between party and government, as one is meant to do and I generally do, because clearly, the distinction now exists only on paper.
The Labour Party has things all sewn up: the police, the army, the Speaker of the House (who can rule over the behaviour of MPs), the civil service, state corporations and organisations, administrative departments, the works.
We no longer even have an army chief – we have Manuel Mallia instead. And the police commissioner is his mate, who planned a career of providing him with catering services before those plans were forcefully sat upon by public opinion.
The latest evidence was this evening, when the Speaker of the House ruled against the Leader of the Opposition for saying – IN PARLIAMENT, WHERE HE IS PROTECTED BY PRIVILEGE – that the prime minister had interfered in proceedings to save John Dalli from prosecution. He did so after the prime minister made a breach-of-privilege complaint.
The prime minister has turned things on their head. He didn’t protest or threaten people with libel when exactly the same statements were made in the media and to those things in parliament.
Parliament is where MPs are protected for precisely the reason that this is the place where such matters HAVE TO be discussed freely without fear or favour, otherwise they will not be discussed at all.
Yes, there is, of course, scope for breach of privilege complaints – for example, when a member of parliament stands up, rants and raves like a fixated maniac, and compares the prime minister to Adolf Hitler. That has been known to happen, but even then no breach of privilege complaint was made (though it should have been).
There should be no breach of privilege complaint when the Leader of the Opposition, as he is in duty bound to do, questions the removal of a police commissioner planning to prosecute a sacked EU Commissioner, and his replacement by another man – not even a policeman at the time – who favours Dalli and what is clearly the government’s agenda.
The prime minister’s claim that he did not interfere in matters surrounding Dalli would have been a whole lot more credible had he removed Police Commissioner Rizzo AFTER giving him time to arraign Dalli (he removed him five days after Dalli landed in Malta) and if he had not made a big show of calling Dalli to his Castille office, praising him profusely, and making him de facto health minister.
As for Anglu Farrugia, he is quite ridiculous. That he would be one grade up from that plasterer or whatever he was that the Mintoff government installed as Speaker was obvious from the outset. The prime minister revealed his contempt for institutions by appointing him to the role. A man he deemed unfit to be deputy leader of the Labour Party (or so he said) he then thought fit to be Speaker of the House. He put him there to save his back from all that Farrugia knows and can say – and now parliament and the country have to pay the price.
20 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
A typical Labour tactic: Make bold and disproportionate moves just to undercut and wrong-foot the rest and create a hurricane of bullshit that will never be resolved – again.
And all we will be left with is counter-hypothesis against counter hypothesis, everything going round in circles because Labour don’t want to do the right thing.
“Tista’ ma taqbilx maghna izda tista’ tahdem maghna”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt2cfK2GQ2w
John Rizzo zgur li ma tistghax tghid li kien Nazzjonalist, u zgur li qatt ma hares lejn ucuh, kien bla partit.
Imma xorta minn hemm ghadda. Muscat nehhieh. Ic-chairpersons tat-tribunali industrijali minn hemm ghaddew ukoll, kif ghadda l-kmandant tal-armata, is-segretarji permanenti intalbu jirrizenjaw.
Serrhu raskom ghax hemm Joseph jaqbez ghalikom, jew ahjar jaqbez fuqkom biex itellaqkom ‘il-barra.
Mhux bizzejjed li tkun newtrali, gust u efficjenti biex tkampa fil-Malta tal-lum. Fuq kollox trid tkun lghaqi, abjett, servili lejn l-allat tal-partit, ahdar u bla kuxjenza fil-konfront tal-Maltin hutek. Fi ftit kliem imniehrek irid ikun imcappas kannella ghax wiccek u x’imkien iehor l-istess.
Il-kontijiet isiru biss meta jkun tard wisq biex tissewwa l-hsara. Nittamaw li l-iswitchers huma fost dawk li jintlaqtu mill-aghar – forsi jitghallmu u darb’ ohra ma jkunux boloh u egojisti.
With regards to the “plasterer speaker”, I remember my flabbergasted grandmother remarking “Lil dan ghamlu speaker? Ghadu kemm bajjdilna l-kamra tal-bejt. U leee!”
As for Anglu Farrugia, I’m not even sure I’d consider him a step up from the plasterer (Remig I think his name was, right?). Hell, I believe my dog has a higher IQ than him, and a far more attractive personality.
Kalcidon Agius.
Bubu, the plasterer speaker’s name was Kalcidon Agius – you are confusing him with Remig Sacco.
Ah yes. That’s right. Thank you for the clarification.
Instead of shouting “Order Order” it was ” Haqq il-marija madonna” in the days of Kalc.
That was Mintoff’s way of humiliating and subjugating parliament.
The same way he debased the presidency and the judiciary.
Deja vu.
If I am not mistaken Kalcidon Agius served also as acting President, didn’t he?
Don’t forget Super Manwel’s Identity Agency which enables him to find out everything about you at the touch of a button.
What?
Set up on 10th September. Not even the Data Protection Commissioner knew about it. But don’t criticise them because that’s negative and you’ll isolate yourself.
http://maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/Data-protection-commissioner-not-informed-of-identity-super-agency-20130926
How did the speaker justify his ruling? He can’t even pronounce Erskine May correctly.
Actually her name was May.
Erskine was the family name.
The first name’s Thomas.
So the Government (and a drove of Labour elves on Simon Busuttil’s Facebook page) are actually trying to defend the Speaker’s ruling by citing the lack of evidence in Busuttil’s claim.
Hasn’t it dawned on these ignoramuses that the burden of proof is on Joseph Muscat to show that the Government isn’t neck deep in covering up an outrageous corruption scandal, in light of plenty of evidence to suggest just that? Let’s see…
I. Dalli not setting foot in Malta until soon before/after the election, after being forced to resign from the European Commission under corruption charges.
II. Installing Peter Paul Zammit as Commissioner of Police, who surreptitiously closed the case against Dalli despite there being sufficient evidence to arraign him.
Doesn’t that come across as even remotely suspicious? Not to your typical Labour voter it seems.
Is there any way we can hear exactly what was said in Parliament this evening?
I think not. Moreover what officially happens in Parliament is not what actually happened but what is recorded as having happened, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.
Click here:http://www.parlament.mt/home
Scroll down to ‘latest audio files’ and download the file labelled “Sessjoni Plenarja – S056 01.10.13 at 6.00pm” by clicking on ‘Nizzel”.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-10-01/news/speaker-finds-pn-leader-guilty-of-breach-of-privilege-2772140037/
Joe Mizzi thinks democracy can be abused. Especially by an opposition.
Let them to it, expose their misgiving about democratic government.
Muscat’s gloating offends only those who feel he can carry authority.