Why do people persist in believing that the prime minister is somehow different to Manuel Mallia?
Times of Malta’s good leading article today on the subject of Manuel Mallia is marred by the following:
Certainly, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat does not approve of such antics. Therefore, he ought to intervene and make sure they stop forthwith. He must also order his Home Affairs Minister to do what was promised to the people and publish the findings of the two inquiries without wasting any more time.
If Joseph Muscat did not approve of the sort of antics to which Manuel Mallia is prone, and quite clearly would be even more prone when given a minister’s power and authority, then he would not have recruited him to the Labour Party or appointed him to the cabinet of government in the first place.
Muscat relates to Manuel Mallia because they are cast from the same mould, the difference being that Manuel Mallia is a factory second because he lacks Muscat’s ability to tailor his false front to difference audiences, different individuals and different circumstances or situations.
Apart from that, they are exactly the same.
Of course Muscat approves of Manuel Mallia’s devious goals and intentions. What he does not approve of, quite possibly, is Mallia’s inability to pass off his behaviour as normal and his critics as abnormal and out of synch with the mainstream ‘positivity’.
20 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
I’m not so sure. I think the PM probably doesn’t approve of Police Minister’s antics, but is scared shitless to do anything about it. Seeing the circles the Police Minister hangs around in, it’s understandable why.
Wrong. It doesn’t have anything to do with whom the Police Minister hangs around.
You should ask what Manwel Mallia has on Muscat to make him untouchable. Everybody has his guesses but it is a fact that in ‘normal circumstances’ Manwel Mallia would have been sacked long ago given the many faux pas he has made.
An obvious challenge to Dr. Muscat.
I dare to say that Manuel Malia emulates Joseph Muscat’s devious tactics.
He was at them when Muscat was in his cradle.
Why do people persist in believing that Labour have the monopoly on villainy?
[Daphne – Because in the Labour Party, H.P., villainy is the entrenched modus operandi which includes the championing of villains, while in the Nationalist Party, it is generally a case of villains operating as individuals, and then working against that party either openly or overtly when they come up against a brick wall. The PN villains themselves recognise that the rewards they are given (wrongly) are nothing but an attempt at getting them to behave less villainously, and so they do not oblige, instead behaving more villainously and cooperating even more overtly with the Labour Party until they finally vote for it and join it.]
Do Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando & Franco Debono define the PN?
So what. Some fight with a stick and some fight with a pen. Its still wrong.
Thank you Scooter for your comment
I just want to reawaken public conscience, if it ever existed. So that the electors put enough pressure on the Nationalist Party until it:
1. Acknowledges all the acts of corruption and malpractice, big and small, over the last 25 years.
2. Condemns the condemnable, seeks justice where it can be sought, seeks legal action where it is actionable.
3. Jettisons and distances itself from all the individuals, important or not, powerful or not, who profited through their association with the party, or through its patronage, and who associated with villains like Nair. Things don’t have to be illegal for them to be wrong.
4. Expels any party member, including MPs, who associate with, sit on the same board as, or do business with villains, or profit by their acquaintance.
5. Puts a stop to the utter hypocrisy of party officials profiting by the immoral laws enacted by Labour, just because it is not illegal and it’s their job. They must choose. Politics, principles, and the people, or business, money and the inner circle.
Malta is as dirty and corrupt as ever. At least pre-1987 you had violence as a symptom, so some consciences were active. Now it’s all shady dealings in shiny boardrooms. They’ve cleaned up the act, but not backstage.
One basic fault in your line of reasoning HP.. principles have been all but entirely sifted out of politics – in Malta and it seems much of elsewhere.
Principles have been substituted by convenience. Adhering to principles means being ready to perhaps never be voted to power…and that, for most aspiring politicians, is not convenient. Gone are the days.
You have my support on this, Baxxter.
Why not acknowledge all the good that the Nationalist governments since 1987 have done for the country after the cesspit of corruption left by Labour? Why always try to equate them to Labour?
Dear god. I’m not equating anything. After all, like the meek little cretin that I am, I chose to vote for them at every election. But no one can deny their wrongdoings.
Baxter, can you mention a few examples where corruption was institutionalised?
I don’t think that the PN government was corrupt. Corruption permeates through our society; it’s our mentality where we want to siphon off money from any contract, sometimes hidden as commissions, and unfortunately people are reluctant to report such activities.
There should be a ‘corruption dept’ were one can report such things. I don’t think Fraud Squad has the will or know how. You need accountants for such investigations not police.
OK, don’t blame me if I get hauled away to prison for libel (or have my coffee spiked with polonium), but I see I need to spell things out for you lot.
On second thoughts, let me go gently. I have a lot of stuff to write before I die of polonium poisoning.
Consider Shiv Nair. Consider Nair’s partners in business. In Malta.
Anyone in the diplomatic corps is a civil servant, answerable to the government, ultimately answerable to the Prime Minister.
Consider government agencies. Consider their various CEOs. Consider their connections, and their CVs.
Consider public money. How was it spent? Consider salaries. Then consider the deliverables. Consider the results. Consider the return on investment.
Consider government tenders and direct orders. Consider building permits. Consider capital projects, touted to us common people as “investiment ghalik”. Consider the volume of concrete poured. Now compare and contrast with the interconnector cable.
Consider the quality of the tarmac poured on public roads.
This is a small country where everyone is either someone’s brother or sister or sleeping with them. But still.
Corruption doesn’t have to come in a bulging brown envelope. Villains don’t always come with a club foot and a hair lip, clutching a bottle marked POISON. Not being fit for the job is villainy. Using a public position to further private interests is villainy too.
Malta is swimming in money. Follow it, and you’ll find the truth.
Same car different driver!
Gonzi was ejected just like Muscat will be if he doesn’t do his job properly.
That explains the supermarket dash straight after the election.
There is no 2 party system in Malta
Some people surround themselves with talent to make them look good. Clearly Muscat thinks he will shine out if surrounded by shite.
Minister Mallia left the new police recruits waiting for over an hour in the heat of the sun at the Ta’ Kandja grounds, when they had the passing out parade. Some of them passed out.
My impression is that the editor’s comment mentioned was made in jest
To stick to the point at issue: if P.M. Muscat is not satisfied with the performance of Minister Mallia, he does not show it. On the contrary, Muscat’s inaction betrays agreement, tolerance or inability to act.
As to whether these two gentlemen are cast in the same (physical) mould, we will have to wait for a few more years before passing judgement.