Oh for God’s sake, stick by your own people!
Right now, I’d like to have the entire Nationalist Party hierarchy shot at dawn. What is it that keeps them from learning how to handle people like Muscat?
It’s ruddy bad enough that they don’t do it naturally and need to have it explained to them. And still they can’t work it out.
There’s a big power station debate scheduled. We are all agog. The country is listening in on live-streaming and the press are there, iPads poised. We are all waiting for the Opposition to nail Konrat Mizzi and his boss Muscat on their failure to deliver and on the complex confusion of a power station project that hasn’t even begun yet, so much for being delayed.
This should have been like shooting fish in a barrel.
Instead Muscat uses his stooge Mizzi to play the oldest trick in the book: a red herring diversionary tactic. And the Opposition, instead of pinning those two back to the wall again and again on the subject of the power station, picks up their George Pullicino ball and runs down a side-road with it.
At this point, I just lie down and weep.
Muscat is one of the most predictable people possible. It was obvious that he would have a diversionary tactic to deflect the heat off himself. That should have been taken as read. Who cared what the diversionary tactic was going to be? The most important thing was to know up ahead that he would have one, and to DISCUSS UP AHEAD HOW TO DEAL WITH IT. That doesn’t mean dealing with the topic itself, but dealing with the diversionary tactic itself whatever it was going to be.
In these situations, you deal with diversionary tactics in one way only: you ignore them, you maintain a united front, and you keep pinning your opponent back to the wall. Every woman who has ever had an argument with a difficult man who tries to keep the heat off himself by blaming her for something totally different knows how to do this. Every employer with a particularly recalcitrant employee knows how to tackle it too. It’s a life skill, but in politics, it is the number-one skill of all.
And now to make matters worse, Simon Busuttil has played right into the Labour Party’s hands by continuing to feed the discussion about George Pullicino this morning instead of killing it.
And he does so in a great show of disloyalty to one of his own people.
The police? What on earth is he on about. The leader of any organisation should be able to decide for himself – based on his own enquiries – whether a situation involving one of his people merits calling in the police or not.
If he thinks it does, then he should sack that person immediately. And if he thinks it doesn’t, then he should stand by his man pending any new information that will force a change in his stance.
If the police are going to be called in anyway, he should still form his own opinion and act on it. Otherwise we are going to have a situation in which the government uses the police as an aggressor against the Opposition with a variety of trumped-up accusations and half-truths, while its own people get away with murder and John Dalli flaps free because any police commissioner who tries to investigate him knows he will be sacked.
The one thing a leader cannot do is pass the buck for a moral decision to the police. The police deal with crimes. Party leaders – any sort of leaders – deal in good judgement.
Busuttil and the Nationalist Party also need to learn the fine art of killing stories before they run amok. It’s not such a fine art in Malta where people are completely non-analytical, and still the PN gets it badly wrong. Look at the way Muscat stands by his people, if and when he wants to and if and when it is convenient for him, regardless of what they have said or done. And then when he doesn’t want to, he will get them out of the way and use public opinion as an excuse. He will ignore and shape the same public opinion when he wants to.
Toni Abela and his blokka silg? People stopped talking about it immediately, because Muscat refused to talk about it at all. The story died in its tracks. Cyrus Engerer and his two-year jail term? Muscat ignored that too, threw a sop to the electorate by telling him to pull out of the EP electoral race, and secretly promised him a job in Brussels and a chef de cabinet post for his boyfriend at Dar Malta.
Then a few months later, when people had stopped discussing the conviction, Cyrus and his boyfriend were invited into the VIP security area to meet Prince William before shipping out to Dar Malta.
No way am I suggesting that wrong-doers and convicted criminals should be backed and supported by the Nationalist Party. I am using this example to illustrate how agendas are set and how public discussion (which means private discussion) is shaped.
Exactly how is Busuttil helping himself or his party by feeding one of his own men to the lions on the prime minister’s instructions?
Muscat must be laughing all the way to bed. He gets Busuttil to back a Labour knave from the corrupt Golden Years of Mintoff for the EU Commissioner’s job and even gets PN MEPs to vote for that revolting and thoroughly useless scoundrel. And in return he accuses George Pullicino of corruption, to save his own skin, and Busuttil goes along with it.
Instead of hurling Muscat and Konrat Mizzi off a cliff in that power station debate, he ends up helping Muscat hurl one of his own people off.
I really don’t know why men find it so difficult to understand, interpret and handle the kind of bastard man that Muscat, Pullicino Orlando and Franco Debono are. You just can’t treat them as you would a standard person. You have to pin them to the wall and stamp on them hard. The minute they realise they can run circles round you or manipulate you in any way, you are finished. The only language those people understand is their own, and the only people they respect and fear are those who can outplay them at their own game, and who show no fear of them at all.
78 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Spot on, Daphne.
What Simon Busuttil did was commission the Acting Commissioner of Police Kugin Manuel Mallia to decide George Pullicino’s political future.
Because, you know, it’s Ray Zammit who is leading the PN now.
Gas down gol-hajt, Simon.
[Daphne – Damn right. If I were George Pullicino, at this stage I’d dump the PN and wouldn’t go back even if Busuttil and Said came crawling with roses up their butts. FIRST RULE OF LEADERSHIP: STAND BY YOUR MEN. Military service should be compulsory in this f**king country full of wusses. ]
Busuttil’s first mistake was appointing Pullicino to shadow his former ministry, exposing him completely to Muscat’s favourite game.
With some basic political foresight Busuttil should have predicted that the Energy Ministry would sooner or later be under the spotlight. So it would have made much more sense to appoint a new face to shadow it, someone with no past to defend in the sector.
Simon Busuttil has not yet got to grips with what the Labour Party does in its back rooms.
This will turn out to be another frame up.
The document Konrad showed is obviously a fake.
These are the same guys who got the police to put in a machine-gun inside a farm in Hal Safi to frame an innocent person for the killing of a young man inside a PN club.
Really and truly, vera wusses.
daphne while i agree with you that the mlp are trying to distract the real issue dr. busuttill is right in saying that whoever messed up has to be responsible weather pn or mlp . this country just cannot keep having scandles and no body pays so thumbs up SIMON
Simon Busuttil is trying to be holier than the pope, and he desires his party to be of the same valour. What he needs to understand is that when he would have thought that all the worms are out of the can, out comes another one, and another one, and then another.
He needs to understand that everyone’s got his fingers in the pie (and maybe all the family’s for that matter). So you might as well make do with what you’ve got, stand up and start fighting.
Simon Busuttil is walking a very thin line. Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.
However on this one he wanted to stress the fact that should anyone does the wrong thing. he or she must bear the political responsibility. He is right not to support any tainted politician whether (s)he comes from his own Party or the government’s.
I suspect that he may have consulted with George Pullicino before he made that statement.
Looking at it from a different angle, if no case is found against Pullicino, Simon and the NP would have won and if in the unlikelihood Pullicino is found guilty, then Simon would be right to have distanced himself from the errant MP, and then take appropriate action.
If hindsight is used to fashion one’s argument, then a little more time, in this case, will enhance hindsight at the emergence of the result of the police investigation.
My prediction is that sometime in the distant future a terse, ‘there was insufficient evidence to proceed against Pullicino’, will be forthcoming from the Acting Commissioner of Police.
In the meantime the suspicion will fester on and achieves Konrad’s goals. So the police are in no hurry to investigate, and it’s no wonder no one has spoken to Pullicino to-date.
[Daphne – Look at the way you consistently refer to “Simon” and “Pullicino”. The Opposition Leader by his Christian name, and the frontbencher by his surname: what does that tell you, and everyone else for that matter?]
Joseph Muscat would have hugged George Pullicino calling him a soldier of steel while getting a standing ovation.
Throwing George Pullicino into the lions’ den – is this what Busuttil thinks leadership is about? Incredible.
If i were George Pullicino I would initiate a leadership challenge to Busuttil.
I just can’t stomach it that a Super One reporter idahhlu u johorgu mil-but lill-avukat – and he does not even seem to realise it.
I’m sure Busuttil felt good about his closing speech at the convention.
This man is totally out if his depth. Frankly I would never use him as my legal counsel, let alone my prime minister.
Daphne, I thought you were going to miss out on this mighty screw up, when you were posting about light-hearted matters.
We need Rcc back at the helm.
I’m for radical reform and standard setting by RCC.
We need a deputation. I volunteer.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-26/local-news/Simon-Busuttil-takes-private-lessons-in-public-speaking-and-body-language-6736124402
This does not help Busuttil either. The fact is that he is not a seasoned politician and not leadership material. An expert in all that is EU related but not much more than that.
[Daphne – ALL party leaders take those lessons, all over the world, and in Malta too. And they should. It’s absolutely essential because these things do not come naturally to anyone, not in the media age. NOBODY goes on television or radio or faces the public without training. Eddie Fenech Adami was the first to get that sort of professional training in Malta. With Muscat, it’s constant, relentless. So why is it a problem with Busuttil? I’m glad he’s doing it.]
Quite honestly I do not know where the PN is headed but I refuse to have to keep voting for the lesser of the two evils, particularly when neither party deserves my confidence.
If Busuttil’s ship is so riddled with holes that his advisers bring the likes of Godfrey Grima anywhere near the party, and then, to add insult to injury leak information that makes him look like the weak and puny man that he is proving to be, then there is really no hope left for the party.
After a weak leader like Gonzi, we needed someone made of sterner stuff and not a man who refuses any form of confrontation.
At some point, Busuttil will eventually realise that relinquishing his hard-earned position as Malta’s best MEP was a major false move and that he, like Gonzi before him, must go. That however begs the question, who instead? Clearly, there is a vacuum that will not easily be filled.
My point was that the information should not have been leaked. God knows Busuttil needs all the help he can get and should get, but allowing the media to catch wind of this is only providing Muscat and Co to portray him as a weak person.
However, I stand by my assertion that his not being a seasoned politician and not being leadership material, is something that no amount of coaching can make up for. Malta does not, cannot, afford such a learning curve. The cost is way too high.
This is what happens when you start giving in to people like Godfrey Grima.
Godfrey Grima is another mistake/creation of Eddie Fenech Adami and his stupid rekonciljazzjoni.
Godfrey Grima stuck his neck out for the PN when the PN was still in opposition and that’s the early eighties.
It was a time when it would have certainly been more convenient for him to pin his fortune with the MLP considering his brother was a Minister.
Why he did that I am not too sure but I respected him for it at the time.
I have since lost that respect not because he’s back with the MLP but because of the MLP he’s back with.
[Daphne – Godfrey Grima did NOT stick his neck out for the PN in the early 1980s. Godfrey Grima’s problem was not with the Labour Party but with Dom Mintoff, and the reason for that was personal: Mintoff had him done for breach of privilege before parliament for some piece he had written for a British newspaper. That was a hugely traumatic experience for him (understandably), and he withdrew his support from Labour until Alfred Sant began to lead the party, whereupon he was instantly besotted by his ‘statesmanlike qualities’ and chose to ignore the fact that Sant was President of the Labour Party during the years he was at war with it. When I worked for Godfrey in 1984/1985, it was on a Malta Development Corporation publication which job he got, obviously, from the Labour government – though it may have been a matter of his having got it directly from his brother who was Minister of Industry at the time.]
I’m speaking around 1980 and he did help the PN at the time.
I have decided to take a step back from the Nationalist Party, not because I’m chickening out but because it’s very clear that this is no longer the party that embraces tact.
Simon Busuttil is an amateur but with the ego of a pro. We’re almost half way into the legislature and I’m still waiting for a trace of tact from this new leader.
And let’s not kid ourselves. What I’m saying is being said by most of those who were Ministers up until two years ago, and who felt offended when the Prime Minister had announced that he had found a solution to build bridges with the civil society and that solution was called Simon Busuttil.
By doing so Lawrence Gonzi discredited his Cabinet, anointed his successor and gave Labour 10+ years in government. Tonio Fenech would have made a more tactful leader.
[Daphne – I don’t understand what you mean by ‘tact’. Do you mean tactics, tactical strategy? ‘Tact’ would be sensitivity at a personal level, for example in breaking bad news to somebody or trying to let your wife know that a particular dress is all wrong for her. Please explain.]
Tact as in the right sensitivity and skill to deal with others, whether they are party members or adversaries.
[Daphne – Well, right, that isn’t tact. Tact is what a police officer needs when breaking the news to somebody that her husband has just been killed in a car crash. What you’re talking about is tactical competence, which is something else altogether.]
At this point, we should expect Franco Debono to be welcomed backed as a hero to the party. This is neither sarcastic nor a joke.
If an asshole like Muscat manages to wipe the floor with Simon Busuttil, what will he do if he ever becomes prime minister of Malta? Let any minister, civil servant, association, etc, get away with murder so that that we live in utopian peace and niceties.
Simon Busuttil needs to wake up (which I doubt he will ever do) and realize that politics is not a Pollyanna novel.
He is still stuck in the detached European Parliament mindset. His speeches are adequate for that chat house, but useless for real life outside that building.
It was clear all along that Simon Busuttil wasn’t going to cut the mustard. Now you’re lumped with him until after 2018 – unless the wheels fall off and he’s sent to grass before daybreak.
Note the looks on the faces of Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici and Mario Demarco. Not bemused, but definitely wondering: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20141026/local/pn-leader-promises-to-take-action-if-police-find-corruption-by-former-minister.541341
As for Joseph, dak Fortunato missa semmietu ommu.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed it, Kevin Ellul Bonici, but you’re lumped with him too.
The leader of any organisation should be able to decide for himself – based on his own enquiries – whether a situation involving one of his people merits calling in the police or not.
If he thinks it does, then he should sack that person immediately. And if he thinks it doesn’t, then he should stand by his man pending any new information that will force a change in his stance.
BRAVO.
THAT is the whole issue in a nutshell.
Dr Busuttil should have remained in Brussels. He is out of his depth in national politics.
Are 18,000 of those 36,000 switchers seriously going to vote for Muscat again?
There aren’t 36,000 switchers. Switchers are half that.
Please understand how it works.
I have 10 and you have 10. I give you one now I have 9 and you have eleven. You have two more then me but I only gave you 1.
Hope this clarifies things
Can I be Nationalist Party leader for a week? Call it a masterclass.
Darba ghamlu prime minister for a day tiftakarha?
Xarabank, was it? We could give it a go.
The Nationalist Party leadership are being fed a bunch of lies by a lot of stupid – rather than malicious – pundits.
When the post-electoral report laid part of the blame on Daphne Caruana Galizia – some feat, that – none of them thought to question it. They accepted it as the truth. It was written by Dottori and nies imlahhqa, ergo it must be true, QED.
That is the nub of the problem with the Nationalist Party. Its Malteseness. Labour does exactly the same thing, except it can afford to be stupid because it is in the winning position.
Listen up, all you midhlas tal-Istamperija: what Simon Busuttil and the Nationalist Party need is not an army of enthusiastic “helpers”, or even “zaghzagh”, but a few intelligent, quick-witted, analytical, articulate, critical thinkers and strategists.
Richard Cachia Caruana, bless him, had all these qualities. I suspect he left because he found his IQ evaporate in the soporific atmosphere of the Maltese boardroom. It happened to many. That’s why the best have left, and those who have stayed are driven to insanity.
Godfrey Grima is a nobody. You don’t listen to him, any more than you would read Malta Today to prepare for an anatomy exam.
Oliver Friggieri is a has-been and a complete nobody in the sphere of 21st century political thought. I can feel, even as I write this, a lot of Nazzjonalisti and Laburisti tensing up. How dare this Baxxter insult a national symbol, a Professur, no less?
I am not insulting anyone, my dear Lilliputians. I am stating fact. If Oliver Friggieri had anything useful to contribute to modern political thought, he’d be a fellow of some Continental think tank, not a professor at a university on a rock on the edge of Europe.
Ditto for Godfrey Grima.
Ditto for Marco Cremona. If he is so brilliant, why wasn’t he engaged by the USGS?
Astrid Vella, I shall pass.
Ditto for Andrew Azzopardi. A lecturer in sociology at the University of Malta? Gosh, how brilliant.
The Malta Labour Party engaged the services of real experts. Kenneth Zammit Tabona can tell you more about this. So can Tom Scholes-Fogg. We’re talking Saatchi & Saatchi.
Of course, Labour only hired experts for the election campaign, not for what came after March 2013, which is why the Labour government is such a shower of shite despite the massively successful election victory.
The Nationalist Party is doing neither. It is using enthusiastic amateurs to do the work of professionals. And it is using Tom, Dick and Harry to write its future policies.
As Novaspace put it, they are dancing into danger.
Baxxter, you can tell them until you’re blue in the face: it will go in one ear out the other. Intellectual fuzzies like Andrew Azzopardi – who perhaps not maliciously as you state, but ambitiously – will be back again and proposed to you on the back of a clear explanation as to why not.
Tactical competence yes. And also logical sequence.
If I have just delivered reasons for which a person was detrimental to Malta and his position in office in the past, why come back and repropose him in the same context with an unchanged attitude?
There is a disparity in how people dealt with others and information fed in to them and what they did with it to their internal reputation and standing.
@Baxxter – I’m in no doubt there is a substantial community of Maltese expats out there that would be happy to provide support in re-building the party, given an appropriate rallying point. How to start?
They can contact the Nationalist Party directly. But the physical separation means that everything will have to be done by email and such. One problem with the Policy Fora is that there’s no way of having any real interaction unless you’re there in person.
So it’s tricky.
An online forum would solve things nicely, as long as the content is edited and kept to the strict minimum. Or the user will get lost.
Baxxter, in tough environments, the best ones leave, the bad ones leave as well, and the ones who remain are those who excel in mediocrity.
Define tough.
Do you mean when the party you wish to support is in Opposition?
Or tough as in “environment which does not encourage individual initiative, creativity and critical thought”? This would be the whole of Malta.
I think the word I could substitute there is “unrewarding.” So it must be your second definition. You are right: the whole of Malta.
It’s just that there’s no notion of career development within Maltese politics: you either go in as a stamp-licker and remain so, or you go in as MP until you’re voted out or sent off to Dar Malta.
Out of the couple of hundred employed by the two main parties, how many have built a career in politics or related activities? Very few. At a pinch, you could say that Richard Cachia Caruana did, for a few years when he was leading EU membership negotiations. Now he’s doing something else altogether. But then he was always the exception, and exceptional.
This is 2014, not Sicily c. 1900. The world is not an oyster but a giant competitive job market. Unless you offer a clear and rewarding career path, you will never attract excellence. The results are there for all to see – in the abysmal level of Maltese politics here and abroad.
One reason for what you say, Baxxter, is that in Malta, entering politics is seen as the ultimate career path one can take – an end in itself – the achievement of status. And it is chosen by many who either have not pursued another career, or have failed in one. Silvio Parnis, Stefan Buontempo (Il-Konsulent tal-Hawsink), Silvio Schembri (tas-sebghat ihluq), Ian Borg (did he ever practice as a lawyer?), Joe Mizzi (tal-Autobusssisss) – what career achievements can they claim?
In reality, outside Malta, it is individuals who have led a successful career in private or public life who enter politics. They are the sort of individuals who have a choice, and they can afford to leave politics at any time because they can pursue something else successfully. RCC is probably in that class.
Unless the sophistication of the voters changes, things will not change. I get the impression that here in Malta voters do not want those in power to be more successful than themselves.
@ Wot the Hack
That is why in Malta we have an overload of lawyers in politics, and previously, doctors. The nature of their business meant that they could officially leave for five or ten years and then pick up again where they left off.
Businessmen, focused on results and market development and retention can’t afford to take a break and then return to the market expecting it to have remained static in their absence. Unless the stint is/ was aimed at creating better market conditions for oneself.
That leaves two sorts, and professional politicians, as Baxxter states, are the exception.
An exception to the point that they’re the first to be isolated and booted out, and an enigma to the rest.
Having a legal or medical mentality at the helm, means that diagnosis is the chief tool used: these are professions where recognition and labelling are the order of the day. No surprise therefore that situations are rigid. There is a box for everything. If something is new, there is no in-between box for it to fit in. One thing cannot fit in two boxes.
Where does that put you, in politics, then Baxxter? You are not this. You are not that. A label for you does not exist.
Instead of maximising and exploiting the different strengths in all the the professionals and other individuals willing to join the NP in this effort, what one absorbs is a reduction of all qualities to those already known and easily recognised in an effort to stay on the precise path, with the precise same people, and the precise same tactics. After a round of musical chairs.
The NP should be isolating qualities and focusing on how all these qualities can pool their resources and strengths to create a better product, and to communicate this in the best way possible.
The weakest point in all businesses, is many times not their perception of themselves, nor their product, but weak market perception where frustrated communication has not done a good job.
The decision to isolate and pool qualities in each and every resource coming forward to the NP can be done in under an hour.
Procrastination is delay and vice-cersa.
The thinking is not nearly “a vote a minute” as a goal.
The thinking is foggy and slow, fuddled and unsynchronised.
Time is being lost.
Tabatha, to any Maltese party, all individuals are equal and alike, ghax il-vot ta’ kullhadd l-istess.
So Helga Ellul was frittered away on speeches to housewives, zaghzagh, anzjani and familji, and Ray Bugeja too, just like the other MEP candidates. She also spoke to the white-collar segment, because they were on the “to do” list too. Just the other MEP candidates.
It’s like the parable of the farmer who grew cheap cabbages, and one rare, precious orchid. He only had five gallons of water so he just hosed down everything, cabbages n’ all. Half the cabbages died. The single orchid died too. He was ruined.
@ Osservatore . Please don’t benchmark Lawrence Gonzi with Simon Busuttil.
Gonzi steered this country through the most challenging economic times, with the Libya crisis which could have seriously impacted on our tourism industry, with a one-seat majority and three or four maverick MPs, whom he tried to appease.
The only alternative solution to that problem was calling an election, which would have been lost (albeit with a smaller loss). Gonzi held on, for fear of handing over to Muscat et al, handling the aforementioned problems.
One easily forgets that Gonzi triumphed in the 2008 elections, when it was almost a foregone conclusion that the election was lost. Indeed Gonzi’s first legislature is perceived to have been a successful one, as he did not face the constant threat of losing parliamentary majority.
Moreover, Gonzi is a great orator, and won debates hands down.
One major problem for Gonzi was the terrible way the party was managed by Paul Borg Olivier as secretary-general – and here Gonzi can be faulted as ultimately he was also responsible for the party as its leader, besides being prime minister of the country.
My goodness, you almost make Gonzi sound good.
I remember him more for his hardheadedness and reliance on a small circle of incompetent people who ensured, many but not all, involuntarily that the PN lost the election by the widest margin possible. Paul Borg Olivier was just the joker in the pack.
How many of you are at the PNHQ helping Simon Busuttil out or are you just a bunch of armchair critics who never lift a finger for the thing you believe in?
If Gonzi was such a stupendously good prime minister, then I suppose you people at PN HQ are trying to mould Simon Busuttil into the image of Gonzi.
Tell me then, why should I, not particularly enamoured of Gonzi, vote for Simon Busuttil?
Do you even realise what you sound like to anyone who is not a midhla tal-Istamperija? You sound like a sect of cognoscenti. You have become your own caricature – the confessional Nationalist Party. People don’t vote for sects unless they feel welcome. They vote for openness.
I am certainly NOT midhla ta’ l-istamperija and I assure you that I have a much bigger axe to grind then many of you here, but because I happen to know many of the players and have done so for a long, long time I have come to understand that not all agendas are leading to a common good and that is a change of government in the shortest time possible.
In this instance many of you are making the same mistake you blame Simon Busuttil for.
You say he should be talking about the issue of the power station not side issues and you are all right here. You therefore should be talking about the issue of the power station but by criticising Simon Busuttil instead you are all allowing yourselves to be led by Muscat’s agenda.
How patronising. Do we run the Nationalist Party?
Last time I checked, I didn’t own any newspapers, radio or TV stations, and I didn’t employ any journalists and such.
We don’t set the agenda – the parties do.
And the Nationalist Party isn’t made up of people, is it Baxxter.
I just cannot understand why you’re that sour at times.
Because I don’t like it when powerful people put the blame on us common folk.
Spot on! Criticizing every single move, every single statement Simon Busuttil makes, will certainly help the 18,000 ‘switchers’ clear their mind and decide to return to sanity next time round.
For the last years, when polls put the Labour Party ahead and we kept harping about the Nationalist Party losing the election, which they would have anyway, the self-fulfilling prophesy contributed to the size of the loss.
From several comments here and elsewhere, Nationalists seem to be cutting more slack for Muscat than ‘their’ own leader Busuttil.
Now let’s hear from the many who think I’m nuts.
Oh get off it. Yours sounds just like a eulogy, the sort written that describes shit as chocolate fudge.
Some triumph indeed. Gonzi simply inherited a government on the back of the Fenech Adami years and solely on the basis of the EU accession momentum. What Gonzi ever really did was to manage to alienate the electorate. So he had a couple of feathers in his cap when dealing with crisis. Should we pat him on the back for getting it right? The 2013 electoral defeat and the tattered state of the party speaks very much for his leadership, his legacy.
Gonzi’s leadership will be remembered for the unraveling of the PN which was left to run amok and to become counterproductive and a burden. He and his close circle of friends surrounded themselves by arrogant know-it-all advisers, who refused to heed what the real experts had to say.
He did not lead as much as he administered. Gonzi did not take us places. Fenech Adami did. Gonzi simply held the tiller until the wind died, after which he procrastinated and appeased. He tried his hand at playing strategy games and did all he could to serve his term to the last day, even when this was no longer in the party’s or the country’s interest. In doing so, he allowed himself to be outwitted by another master strategist, Muscat.
But even when Gonzi knew that all was lost, he made one final mistake, that will have far reaching consequences. He virtually anointed Simon Busuttil as his successor, foisting him on to the party and in doing so, he has ensured that the same party he supposedly led remains in opposition for longer than it should.
But I will also admit my own judgement of Gonzi was wrong. I remember a time when Fenech Adami had reached his sell-by date and I saw Gonzi and Gonzi alone as the successive leader. Yet by 2008, it was already clear that Gonzi was not going places. I reached a similar conclusion the moment Simon Busuttil stepped into the fray.
Could my conclusion be wrong? I hope so. But on the basis of all that I am seeing, I really do not think so.
Should the PN itself investigate this case?
There’s not much to investigate.
I can’t see any instance where Pulliicino could have been involved in the details of the tender.
So Simon Busuttil made the right challenge while speaking about the undelivered promised power station.
He did the right thing. The paper picked up what suited it.
[Daphne – No, no and no again! Politicians must ALWAYS, when they speak, be conscious of what the media will focus on and how they will focus on it, and the implications of that for other issues on the table. Before a politician opens his mouth in public, he must always be very focussed on what he wants the media to report and how he wants the media to report it, what prominence, and so on. The golden rule: never eclipse or displace or sabotage your own desired headline. In other words, if you want them to report X, don’t give them a better headline or story than X, because they will report that instead.
If you want the weekend media to be dominated by coverage of Labour’s utter catastrophe with its power supply roadmap, and how you’re pinning them to the wall about this, don’t be a ruddy ass and talk about George Pullicino and the police instead, because that is exactly what will dominate the media.
This is basic, elementary. There are people trained to advise on these matters if politicians do not have a natural instinct for it. The reason Muscat understands it is obvious, staring at you all in the face. He comes from the media, and more so, not from the independent media but from the political propaganda machine owned by the Labour Party. He had years and years of training on the ground, from the age of 18 into his 30s, in that machine. He knows exactly, and from the other side of the fence, the media itself, how the media function, how people’s attention works. He has simply taken his Super One propaganda training with him into the Prime Minister’s office.
Of course the media will always pick up what suits them – that’s the state of play. And that’s why politicians have to receive training in this kind of thing if they don’t understand it innately, which Simon Busuttil and the PN clearly do not but the Labour Party and Muscat do. It used to be the other way round: the PN used to be brilliant at this sort of thing and the Labour Party absolute rubbish at it.
Simon Busuttil should NOT have spoken about George Pullicino except to accuse the Labour government of bad faith and diversionary tactics. He should NOT have walked into their trap and taken the focus off the build-up to disaster in the power station debacle. He should NOT have brought in issues that are currently extraneous to the situation and that could have waited until a dead time in public debate. They need to learn how to keep their eyes on the fricking ball. They are not a newspaper, a media house or a website like this one, in which by our very nature we need to tackle different issues every day as they come up. They are a POLITICAL PARTY, and a political party has a single goal.]
If these allegations were to be proved true, they would be damaging to the PN? Therefore I think one needs to verify the facts first.
[Daphne – Kemm niehu pacenzja bik, David, jahasra. You are like the website pet.]
‘You are like the website pet,’
Did you drop the ‘s’ from that last word deliberately, Daphne?
Is “website pet” a euphemism for “village idiot” because he is certainly starting to sound like one. Whereas Daphne’s patience seems infinite at times, some of us have much shorter fuses.
It’s cute. I like that we have a little mascot. I can imagine you sighing every time you get a comment from him.
It does come across as there having been no communication whatsoever between the leader of the Opposition and his shadow minister.
I sincerely hope that Simon Busuttil reads this blog.
It has been almost two years since the last general elections and the Nationalist Party hasn’t yet put his best foot forward. This in itself is enough leeway for the Labour Party to shoot ahead once again.
And what about this headline here?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20141026/local/pn-convention-proposes-debate-on-abortion-and-euthanasia-tax-on-fast-food.541345
“PN convention proposes debate on abortion and euthanasia, tax on fast food”
These are the political priorities of the country right now, my friends: euthanasia, abortion and a tax on fast food.
Ciccio my thoughts exactly. They haven’t go a clue.
I have seen nowhere discussion on: where have our people gone? Why have we lost so much? How are we getting them back? What do we believe in?
Nowhere.
Who gives a damn about euthanasia and abortion when we have a vote haemorrage? Tax on fast food. That will make a party popular. Let the government deal with that, if Chris Fearne thinks obesity is such a problem. The PN is quickly finding way on how NOT to be re-elected.
Useless lot, the whole lot of them.
Cannot agree more! It is high time PN started being aggressive in their accusations. With people like most Labour candidates, being calm and collected and polite can only result in being taken for a ride. Stick to your guns but roll over the enemy. They have no problem rolling over you.
Bob-a -job . I feel I have to spell it out for David’s sake , that you are referring to an “s” before the “t” and not after.
Dear Daphne,
I thoroughly enjoy reading your blogs, but in this case I must admit that I totally disagree with your view.
Why have I always voted PN? The answer is simple, because the Party always had a vision for our Country. Be it Independence, negotiating with Mintoff our Constitution and Malta becoming a Republic, joining the EU and the Euro, the complete overhaul of our manufacturing industry, service industry in particular the Financial Services, the productive investment attracted to Malta, the diversification in our Tourism Market, the complete overhaul of our infrastructure. These are some of the reasons why I believe in the PN. I am proud to say that the little I achieved in life, was thanks to long hours of study and hard work. I never wanted or asked or even dreamt of asking any politician for help. This is the only way forward in this small but historically proud Country of ours, for politics to evolve. Call me politically naive, maybe.
Obviously, mistakes were made by PN administrations and yes it was time for the PN to be in opposition to regroup and update itself. Do you think that the PN would have remained in power for so long, if Alfred Sant had NOT embraced joing the EU or the Eurozone?
Do you really believe that all Ministers or advisors of Dr. Eddie Fenech Adami and Dr. Lawrence Gonzi were NOT to blame for the electoral defeat in 2013?
Do you really believe that having pursued your ideologically did not cause great resentment within the electorate? I do not consider that the vast majority of the switchers that voted PL, are party faithful. Some were pure lobbyists, I refer primarily to the developers and hunting community, that knew that the PN would lose the 2013 elections. The rest were CONNED by the PL and Joseph Muscat with all the false promises and words that appealed to their ears.
The PL downfall will be their own doing. They can fool some of the people some of the times, but they certainly cannot fool all the people all of the time. They are digging for themselves a deep hole, that eventually will be covered in dung. Action and results are louder than words.
I have absolutely NO MERCY, for ANY politician who in any shape or form have mismanaged willingly or unwillingly their portfolio. George Pullicino asked the police to investigate Konrad the so called expert was asked by the Speaker to withraw his allegations or present tangible proof. Well he did not and will have to face a breach of privilege complaint in front of the Parliamentary Committee. He will have to prove his allegations to the police, and if the investigations lead to Court proceedings, then he will have to face the justice of the Courts.
Simon Busuttil, was correct in saying that if found guilty GP, must also face Party consequences. But, if KM does not produce tangible proof, then he has to face political responsibility.
That the PN’s propaganda machine needs to be more investigative and expose and plaster all over this financially reckless, incompetent, corrupt and mismanaged government is a must. But us, the common individual must do our part. We need to encourage not demonise, either the Party leadership and it’s administration. We have a mountain to climb let us not put spokes in the Party’s efforts.
There is TWO things that I will always demand from the PN. Honesty and vision.
Thank you
No, thank YOU, Francis Said!
Simon Busuttil messed up on this one. An interview with George Pullicino and a statement by the former Permanent Secretary leave no doubt that there was no wrongdoing.
Procurement procedures were followed to the letter. At worse the Selection Committee of the Finance Ministry made a mistake by not adequately vetting the bidder’s bank guarantees.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-24/local-news/Chris-Ciantar-replies-to-Konrad-Mizzi-process-was-governed-by-Department-of-Contracts-6736124317
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-24/local-news/Photovoltaic-panel-contract-I-did-not-set-the-feed-in-tariff-rate-George-Pullicino-6736124310
With his statement, Busuttil played into Muscat’s hands and rewards PL’s dirty tactics. Incidentally, it was this comment which was made headlines in the printed media and not Busuttil’s other comment namely that Minister Mizzi should take political responsibility for making false accusations.
Some of the attention has been diverted away from the real issue namely that the new power station will not be ready in time and that the reduction in electricity bills will have to be financed from elsewhere.
I disagree with you on this.
First of all I must start by saying that Simon Busuttil’s delivery at the convention was very, very good.
He looked comfortable with what he was saying, he was relaxed and cool but did not overdo it and for the first time I felt that he was not trying to be any of his predecessors but himself – the person we know from the EU campaign.
[Daphne – The person we knew from the EU campaign will not win an election. The skill-set required as a party leader heading into a general election in that role for the first time is entirely different. Acquiring that skill-set is not impossible, not by a long shot, but the first step is acknowledging that it is indeed required. In this respect, comments like yours are unhelpful.]
Secondly one needs to recognise that Busuttil made his speech without the use of teleprompters or papers and also did away with a podium (which is not at all easy) making his delivery very effective.
On the part where he spoke about George Pullicino, I too was taken aback when he said that he would take action against him if he was found guilty but he immediately said that if that was not the case then he expected the PM to take action against his Minister.
This followed, or was followed by (I forgot the sequence) a strong statement about how Labour is known for its mud slinging tactics. So one needs to take the statement in context. I felt that this was a challenge to the PM to hold everyone accountable for what they do or say.
[Daphne – You see, this is exactly why I despair: failure to grasp the basics. Simon Busuttil was NOT addressing the people in that room. He was talking to the electorate via the various media. The room is just the stage-set where that happens, and the audience is there as part of that stage-set. The real audience is out here: the ones who were not in the room. So forget context and telling us that we have to take things in context or listen to the whole speech. The only thing that counts is what we heard or read. The rest just might as well not exist. The mistake you and Simon Busuttil and his advisers are making here is the classic one: focussing on the speech itself as delivered in the room rather than on the soundbites and messages that will be reported to the REAL audience outside.]
Now you said that a Leader should stand by his man (after he has checked things out and has taken a decision) no matter what, and on this I disagree. Whilst you should stand by your man as much as possible, you should not stand by your man if proof starts to emerge that that man is corrupt.
[Daphne – Please re-read what I wrote. Go on, read it again. I would be the last person on earth to say that any kind of leader should defend corruption or stand by somebody who is corrupt. But at his level, Busuttil should be capable of making an assessment of the situation and of Pullicino’s honesty and on that basis alone should decide whether to stand by him or let him go, changing his position if the facts change unexpectedly.]
So whilst it is important to show that you believe in your MPs you should also be clear that any wrongdoing is unacceptable to the Party and will not find its backing at all.
[Daphne – You have a really poor understanding of human psychology and leadership, I’m afraid to say. Right now, what people in the Nationalist Party (and outside it) perceive is that one of their own has been selected for trumped-up accusations by government leaders determined to save their own skin and to deflect attention from themselves. And that instead of being allowed to gather around him as is the first instinct with a team, their own leader has himself embarrassed and compromised him publicly and held him at bay. So now immediately in that team you will have division: those who go with the natural team spirit of sticking by Pullicino and those who are scared to be seen doing so and will act instead as though he is contaminated. In addition, Busuttil’s team of front and backbenchers will have read the real message here: that if they are targetted for attack by their political opponents, not even their own leader will stand by them and the party will hold them at bay. The result? A cannon-ball blast rips through team spirit, loyalty to the leader (well, if he’s not going to be loyal to them…) and the sense of security they need to stick their neck out and go for Labour’s throat, which will obviously provoke a targetted counter-attack on them.]
I think that in this the PN has a very unfortunate example with JPO who the party and the leader backed just before the election because they were really with their backs against the wall. Even if it would have costed the PN the election, I think that they would have been better off not backing JPO at all.
[Daphne – That’s a false comparison because Pullicino Orlando is a foul man and a lying scoundrel and was known to be such. Your failure to understand the difference between Pullicino Orlando and Pullicino, between the two different situations and cases, is the reason why you fail to understand what I have said.]
I hope that George Pullicino is cleared as soon as possible from the mud thrown at him by the PL (as these things usually take very long) as until then his name has been tarnished.
At the same time I think that it is good for Busuttil to show zero-tolerance towards corruption (he also had a whole section about this in his speech) and that he shows his MPs that they will not find the backing of the party if they intend any wrongdoing.
[Daphne – Well, I’m sorry to have to say this, but it really shows what sort of faith you and the party leader have in your own people if at the first sign of an accusation you assume that your man might be guilty. The assumption to make is that there is no way on earth he can be guilty, otherwise how can you possibly have known him so little over so many years?]
I agree totally with Daphne on this one.
Claude Sciberras, you need to look at the overall context. On the one hand you have Joseph Muscat who has zero morals and who will do anything to protect his skin. His propensity to lie is becoming increasingly evident. The power station delay is an acute embarrassment to him and to Konrad Mizzi so it is no surprise that they will do anything to divert attention.
On the other hand, you have clear explanations given as to what happened by the ex-Minister and by the ex-Permanent Secretary. Public procurement can be a very difficult process. Even if you have no experience or knowledge of public procurement, you could still understand the clear explanations given.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-24/local-news/Chris-Ciantar-replies-to-Konrad-Mizzi-process-was-governed-by-Department-of-Contracts-6736124317
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-24/local-news/Photovoltaic-panel-contract-I-did-not-set-the-feed-in-tariff-rate-George-Pullicino-6736124310
In this context, it is a colossal blunder for Simon Busuttil to cast doubt on the integrity of George Pullicino.
Of course, the PN leader is right in warning ALL PN deputies that wrong-doing will not be tolerated but that was certainly not the place to do it.
For the record i was in no way comparing George Pullicino with JPO. I was just saying that the PN backed JPO because of the election and I’m sure nobody will agree with hindsight that that was a good idea.
I don’t know what Lawrence Gonzi knew then about JPO and his dealings but I would hope that he would not have backed him up regardless.
With regard to faith in others unfortunately yes I have lost faith in most people being honest and gentlemanly. Unfortunately we live in a society where even those who are supposed to be the most honest and virtuous amongst us behave disgustingly (judges, priests, politicians, police Etc).
I understood your other points but I’m sure you will agree with me that its not always easy to be 100% confident in what others have or have not done. If I remember well you had said that you had actually voted for JPO at one point in time, I’m sure you regret giving him your confidence.
[Daphne – I didn’t know him from Adam, and made the mistake of assuming that if somebody was on the party ticket, then he would be sound. But I then got the measure of him pretty quickly. You can’t compare this to Simon Busuttil’s ability to assess George Pullicino. They have known each other and worked with each other for years.]
In fact Simon Busuttil was nowhere close to accusing George Pullicino of any wrong doing. He just repeated what previous party leaders have said before him and therefore that any corruption carried out by anyone, be it PN or PL, has to be punished. That is what the Nationalist Party creed has always been and I hope will be.
[Daphne – Please try very hard to understand this. What Simon Busuttil actually meant to say or what he said is irrelevant. The only thing that counts is what people hear.]
The people shouted out load the name of Mario de Marco as new leader for the PN. All surveys showed a landslide victory for de Marco however the party hierarchy have chosen otherwise.
History shows that in politics the people are always right and no party can impose on the people. the MEP election was the first big alarm bell. I hope for the good of this country and for the love of the party that Dr Busuttil manages to circle himself with intelligent people. By introducing new commissions things would not get any better except for Muscat whom is slowly becoming untouchable. Muscat is a time bomb if he manages to win big-time at the coming general elections then he will become untouchable and our democracy will go back 25/30 years.
[Daphne – Mario de Marco is a nice man but not what is required here. Stop going on about him. There would have been no difference had he been elected party leader instead, and he is even more unwilling to go for Labour’s throat than Busuttil is.]
Dr. Busuttil’s performance on stage yesterday lacked spontaneity. His continual strutting on stage was reminiscent of an American TV show.
He reminded me of some Evangelical pastor, but without the charisma. I think I’ve finally put my finger on what bothers me with Busuttil. He doesn’t give me the impression he is sure of what he wants.
Daphne, I beg to differ with you on this. I think that this is a win-win situation for Simon Busuttil and P.N. And on this, I will explain.
First of all, I am more than certain that this was a ploy by P.L. to divert attention on the real issue.
Secondly, I am more than certain that George Pullicino is innocent and that for this reason, he should have nothing to fear and will come out stronger.
[Daphne – He will not emerge stronger. He will be permanently tainted and damaged whatever the outcome. That is the result of these tactics and that, indeed, is their very purpose.
Unfortunately, the Nationalist Party is full of lawyers who think like lawyers, a mindset that drives me nuts. The Labour Party, on the other hand, is full of people who think like me, in terms of media/public perception. Lawyers think in terms of due process: accusation, trial, evidence, verdict, guilty, innocent. They don’t understand that you can be as pure as newly driven snow but once you are marked you are marked, no matter what the process and outcome are.
Also, it is many people’s experience in reality that guilty people escape conviction because of lack of evidence. So the fact that you are cleared does not translate, in people’s minds, into your innocence. It could also mean that you were guilty but got away with it.
How many people actually believe that Meinrad Calleja WASN’T involved in the conspiracy to kill the prime minister’s personal assistant, because a jury found him not guilty? Exactly. It’s an unfortunate comparison, because I happen to be one of those who believe he did it, whereas I believe Pullicino is straight up on this one, but I have to use a strong and familiar case to argue my point. ]
Moreover, if this wasn’t the case, Simon Busuttil would act as he said he would, in which case he would come out as the honest guy i.e. as one who will not tolerated any kind of misbehaviour.
[Daphne – Another classic error. People do not vote for you because you are honest. They vote for you if they perceive you to be sharp and capable. Honesty is, of course, a major bonus, but the other two take priority over it by far. Given a choice between somebody who is perceived to be honest but inept, and somebody who is perceived to be dishonest but on the ball, the electorate will choose the latter.
The outright winner in all cases will be the person who is perceived to be sharp, capable and honest. Exposing Joseph Muscat as thoroughly dishonest is not enough to shake people’s trust in him. It is when they being to perceive him as out of his depth, as somebody who has not quite got a handle on things, who is making a hash of it, that his trust rating will fall. Trust ratings are not linked to perception of honesty. They are linked to perception of ability.]
If George Pullicino is found to be innocent which he definitely is, then P.L. will have to see what to do with Konrad Mizzi who will come out of this as a manipulator of facts.
[Daphne – Oh glory be, what charming innocence. If the Labour Party/government are proved to have lied yet again, this time about George Pullicino, they will simply brazen it out and carry on regardless and the public will follow suit. Konrad Mizzi will escape unscathed and George Pullicino will be permanently damaged. The government has just rewarded with a job at Dar Malta in Brussels (and another one for his boyfriend, as chef de cabinet no less), one of its politicians who has a criminal conviction resulting in a two year prison sentence. And you think it would be bothered about a mere lie, when it knows it to be a lie already, executed with the collaboration and direction of the prime minister?]
If the police do not do their job as they should, I believe that Simon Busuttil knows what he should do. Besides the general public is not that stupid i.e. they will understand the situation and this will not do well to Manuel Mallia. For this reason I cannot see what all the fuss is about.
[Daphne – I hope you are not somebody who is giving advice to the Nationalist Party, because if you are, they are well and truly f**ked. No, Simon Busuttil clearly does not know what he should do and has to learn fast because time is running out. And yes, the general public is that stupid and what else does it take to convince you if not a 36,000 majority for a cheesy fraud and the fact that Alfred Sant almost won in 2008 or that almost half the population voted for the return of KMB as prime minister in 1992? Dreamers belong in bed.]
You’re missing an important point, Kevin. Muscat and Mizzi sat on that letter for three months.
They don’t really believe there’s anything wrong.
They just thought it would be useful to save it as a diversionary tactic once parliament reopened and they could no longer pretend that, come March, Malta will have the new power station they had promised to get into power.
The Opposition is dealing with a serious case of electoral fraud by hanging one of its own instead of laying siege to a lying prime minister.
How sweet this Kevin is. He might be good at giving strategic advise to some Scouts Group, but surely not to a major political party.
I wonder who Simon Busuttil has surrounded himself with. It’s crucial for a politician to pick the right people.
Had he a decent adviser, she/he would have picked out the blunder while going through the speech before the convention.
That’s what advisers are there for. But, yes, Simon Busuttil didn’t read out a speech (he didn’t want to do like Muscat and use a tele-prompter) but did an Ed Miliband instead, with the same consequences.
Time is running out indeed.
It is good to be genuine but not in politics. You have to be a makakk. Maybe Busuttil is still new to Maltese type of politics. Many will vote for you because you are a genuine person, but others will not vote for you because you are not sharp enough.
Come on, Simon, start playing the game. That is what we want of you.
I cannot understand where Simon Busuttil wants to take the party. That’s the problem. And something tells me he has no clue himself.
He has been saying for two years that he wants the PN to be Partit tan-Nies. What he means by that is still very much a mystery.
I was looking forward to this Ideat Convention, thinking I would learn a bit more of Busuttil’s vision. In his Nuremberg-esque “diskors importanti” (as described on Il-Mument in the morning) Busuttil said the PN is changing and gave proof of that.
“We had a black person, a mother of a gay person and a trans-sexual addressing this Convention! See, we are changing!” I was not in the audience but had I been I would have really wished I weren’t.
So, we are changing because we have a black, a gay’s mother and a transgender in our midst. Then, two years after losing the election and two years after winning the leadership race pledging, amongst others, a stronger presence online, you go on NET TV’s YouTube Page and all that has been available for the past three bloody months is a clip of the Bishop of Gozo saying mass at the Ta’ Pinu Sanctuary, reminding NET TV viewers that they can watch the mass every Sunday at lunchtime, when One TV would be streaming Joseph Muscat’s Sunday message.
Then you open the newspapers today and the headline on The Times is that the PN Convention proposes discussion on abortion and euthanasia.
I am very perplexed and so are so many people I speak to.