The ragtag coalition for change
Joseph Muscat is hard at work copying Barack Obama’s coalition for change. If there is a single original thought in that man’s head, somebody please tell me about it.
Obama’s coalition for change was positive and upbeat. Muscat’s coalition for change comes three years too early – he can’t keep talking about it for a whole four years – and it is negative. From what we can make out so far, it is a ragtag mess of strange bedfellows that range from the generally disaffected, to ‘staunch Nationalists’, fleeing AD voters, greens, liberals and now even the far right.
Apparently, he plans to be all things to all men. If you wish to fight racism, you will find your home with Joseph Muscat. And if you’d rather crack a black man’s skull, then you too will find your home with Joseph Muscat. Gay rights? Joseph Muscat. Hate gays and think they should be lynched? Joseph Muscat, he’s your man.
Muscat thought that a few hours after the death of a Sudanese immigrant, whose skull was cracked in Paceville, would be the perfect time to announce that he wants to ‘listen to’ people with far right sentiments and those who voted for far right parties in this election.
Perhaps he plans to convert them to progressive liberalism in his fascinating new coalition – or, as Maltstar put it, his collation.
The man who died was the very same one allegedly beaten up by the police last summer in an incident to which one of my sons was a witness, but Muscat, instead of condemning the attack like a real liberal would, said instead that the people who voted for Imperium Europa were soldiers and police officers. He wants to ‘listen to them’. So I guess he’s trying to form Europe’s first ever progressive liberal far right party with a small touch of the greens.
And when the policemen and the soldiers listen to Muscat after he has listened to them, what will they hear? Not the words of a true progressive liberal, that’s for sure. To draw them into his ragtag collation, he’ll morph into a mini Mussolini and suggest that he has every respect for Norman Lowell. The man is a used-car salesman, but of the less reputable type.
Muscat said a few days ago that the EP election result is a mandate for the Labour Party to do more than criticise: to offer solutions and work in the national interest. Funny how it took an election result to poke the Labour Party awake to the fact that this is its job. Coming from Super One, Muscat must have had a pretty skewed idea of what opposition parties do, so we can forgive him for that.
It’s not as though he’s had a long education in democracy, given that his primary education in politics was through a Mintoff-worshipping grandmother during the worst of the Mintoffian years. But let’s rush to forget that, because it isn’t convenient to remember.
His followers within the party compare him admiringly to Dom Mintoff. But he has embraced the Mintoffian element purely out of expediency, to add to the aggregate of potential votes. I used to have a money-box when I was a child, emblazoned with the legend ‘Every little makes more’, and that is Muscat’s operating principle.
The strategy he is using is the exact same one Alfred Sant used in 1996 – again, not an original thought in his head. We have the repetitive emphasis on ‘fresh, young and progressive’ – Sant used ‘modern’ – and ‘old, tired and stale.’ Muscat speaks of ‘il-politika tal-passat’; Sant spoke of ‘il-politika mmuffata’. Muscat speaks of ‘in-nies l-ewwel’; Sant spoke of ‘ic-cittadin l-ewwel’.
Muscat, like Sant with Fenech Adami in 1996, is positioning himself as the future and Gonzi as the past. He focuses on the age-gap, like Sant did. I still remember thinking how ridiculous Sant was portraying himself as young and fresh in his late 40s and wearing false hair.
Now Muscat is talking as though he represents a tidal wave of change, rather than a jumbled accumulation of different agendas, loosely tied together by virtue of expediency, here today and very possibly gone tomorrow.
The strategy might well work for Muscat as it did for Sant in 1996. But in that case, Muscat had best consider how to handle the situation when the greens, the liberals, the far rightists, the ‘staunch Nationalists’, the ones who want gay rights and the ones who hate gays, all come knocking for their pound of flesh once he’s in a position to give it to them – or rather, not.
And now he has another problem. Besides the €50 million that he will fork out in VAT on car registration tax refunds, he’s also going to have to heavily subsidise water and electricity for the entire population. That canny political strategist Jason Micallef gave his word on television that it would happen, talking over Louis Grech who tried to say that the Labour Party had promised no such thing.
It will only be a matter of time before Muscat moves into stage two: the deficit (il-hofra) and corruption (barunijiet). But then again, perhaps not, given that he’s trying to enlist as many ‘barunijiet’ as he can in his progressive collation for change, alongside the greens and the environmentalists. That should make for a jolly party.
Having correctly sensed the mood now to be roughly what it was in 1996, Muscat has gone to the drawer and brought out Sant’s manual. Sant had conducted a silent campaign, as well as his loud and public one, making inroads into the Nationalist Party’s voter-base by seeking out the weak and vulnerable or the merely bored and irritated and homing in on them. I use the word ‘weak’ very loosely, because I find that most times people who believe they are reaching their own conclusions based on careful analysis become upset if it is suggested otherwise. So I’ll let that go.
Back then, the Nationalist Party assumed that people of a certain socio-economic profile would vote PN, and the fact that they voted Labour took the party completely by surprise. It had missed Sant’s silent campaign completely. It can’t miss Muscat’s silent campaign now because it’s out in the open, thanks to this EP election.
So here’s the insider’s guide to how you can tell that ‘staunch Nationalists’ are going to vote Labour: they won’t discuss the election and will pretend it’s not happening. Oh, there’s an election? I hadn’t noticed. If they’re planning to vote Nationalist, they won’t talk of anything but the election and they’ll be on the phone every half an hour to people they think are ‘in the know’ to have their minds put at rest that Labour are not getting in.
Muscat told his crowds last Sunday that he has done something exceptional in persuading ‘people who have never voted Labour before’ to vote Labour now. He is being disingenuous, of course. Sant beat him to it, and he did it in a general election and not in an EP election when people are more likely to give themselves a thrill.
Indeed, if I know my crowd well enough, I would say that many of the ‘staunch Nationalists’ who voted Labour in this EP election also voted Labour in 1996, whatever they may have told Muscat or his ‘tal-pepe’ agents. Muscat of all people should know how very adept people can be at denying even to themselves the things they like least about their past.
Muscat doesn’t want us to remember that Sant’s was by far the greater coup, because it will weaken his self-portrayal as Moses leading the collation of change out of the desert.
This is nothing more than a copycat exercise. The fact that it works is a reflection on the truism that times change, but people really don’t.
This article is published in The Malta Independent on Sunday today.
74 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
I’m always amazed at how good your analyses are, and at how unbelievably one-sided they are too. Maltese politicians being everything to everyone? That’s hardly something new or exclusive to Joseph Muscat. How about the government’s stand on hunting (backed by Perici Calascione) as opposed to Edward Demicoli’s? How about the government’s stand on illegal immigration as opposed to Frank Portelli’s? How about the government’s position on the VAT refund as opposed to Metsola Tedesco Triccas’s? How about the government’s position on the Ghadira road as opposed to Deidun’s? I could go on and on…
And then you say: “Hate gays and think they should be lynched? Joseph Muscat, he’s your man.” Yeah, nice try. If there’s one thing on which the parties are clearly miles apart, it’s gay rights. Joseph Muscat has been vocal in his support of gay rights throughout the EP campaign, and he has his track record at the EP to prove it. The PN, on the other hand, as usual promises to “discuss” before the election, and then quickly reverts to its anti-gay policies soon after.
[Daphne – One can be vocal about anything. It’s action that counts. What is Muscat going to do about gay rights apart from be vocal about the matter? With divorce, he said he would give his MPs a free vote, which means the bill won’t go through. With same-sex marriage, which is the real right homosexuals want – understandably – he’s not even going to get that far. He knows that the minute he says he’s going to put a same-sex marriage bill before parliament, he’s finished. The Labour Party’s voter-base is ultra-conservative on this matter, the sort who think that calling a man a pufta is the ultimate insult and having a son who’s gay is a disgrace so it’s best to disown him or beat it out of him. Has he told you that he’s going to put forward a bill for same-sex marriage like he has said about divorce? No. Don’t die waiting. He can’t afford to lose the votes of old ladies and of pufta-haters in party clubs.]
Excellent reply! What happened in California proves this. The same day the Hispanics and blacks turned out in record numbers to vote Obama into office was precisely the same day the Proposition 8 referendum banning gay marriage in California was passed. Beating Proposition 8 would have been no problem if the turnout was low and only the typical liberal white Californians cast their ballots.
Obama knew this, and he was shrewd enough not to support gay marriage in order not to alienate his black and Hispanic voter base which is ultra-conservative on this issue.
Perhaps Joseph Muscat, our local version of Obama, knows this. So he will be shrewd enough to promise everything to all and give nothing in return.
Daphne,
Are you in favour of same sex marriage?
[Daphne – Yes. I can’t see the point in preventing anything that will only serve to bring happiness (or unhappiness, I suppose, depending on how jaded one is).]
If same sex marriage means one can adopt children I am totally against it. I don’t object to same sex unions.
Funny how married people want divorce and extramarital relations and gays want to get married.
I agree with Daphne.
There may be some people who don’t agree because they may say that then these people might want to adopt children. And I ask, what’s wrong with two people wishing to have a child through adoption? There are so many single mothers who bring up a child, so why not two?
Refreshing news!
Gay, happy with a child and not even married:
A ‘gay’ male penguin couple adopted a chick:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,628508,00.html
I am very sorry but we will severing all ties of morality here if we agree with same sex marriage which might lead to adoptive children. I am totally against it. Not against gays mind you, or gays happy enough to set up house together. It’s their affair and no one else’s, However we are becoming too permissive. This year alone, I know of about 18 young ladies – ages varying but not more than 19 years, having babies, out of wedlock of course. It’s as if it’s the IN thing to do nowadays – and yet I rarely see programmes or blogs addressing thiis new issue. The children are getting more permissive and the parents more submissive. I think we are heading for a head-dive if we keep on becoming so liberal.
I can’t see the coherence between ‘young girls having babies out of wedlock’ and a settled, mature homosexual pair, raising a child. And who defines the concept of morality anyway? Do adultery, domestic violence or incest in the name of the Holy Sacrament of marriage comply with a moral code? Maturity, responsibility and love are what counts.
C. Attard, you should visit any Labour Party Club anywhere and start discussing gay issues, gay rights, gay civil unions and gay marriage. You’ll certainly change your mind.
C. Attard let us say you are right saying “That’s hardly something new or exclusive to Joseph Muscat”. Wasn’t it Joseph Muscat who promised (amongst other futile promises) ‘stagun politiku gdid’?
Good analysis as always.
In this election the Labour Party also had the luxury of fielding very appealing candidates who “staunch Nationalists” could feel very comfortable voting for. I feel that many people (especially the floaters, for lack of a better word), voted for the candidates.
This is a luxury that the PL will not have come 2013.
This is definitely a wake-up call for Dr Gonzi. But when we speak of wake-up calls we have to be careful. The vox-pop on Xarabank was very telling. Many people seem to think that because they have a personal grudge or they did not get what they want, they are being ignored. Many seem to expect corruption to be done in their favour – that is the impression I got. Dr Gonzi should not give in to that.
What Dr Gonzi should do, and what I have been harping on for a long time, is to not let Joseph Muscat steal the liberal voters with what is in effect pseudo-liberalism. In this election, yes, Muscat won them over, because for the first time we have someone speaking seriously on divorce, gay rights etc, and we also have individual candidates doing the same thing. And the EP is a good place to discuss such issues since as we have seen there were a number of decisions taken over the past five years.
I think if Dr Gonzi takes note of such things and finds it in his heart to fully endorse things like divorce and gay marriage (rather than do what Muscat is doing and asking for a free vote on a civil right, as you put it so well), then 2013 will be another closely fought election. But if not, it’s very likely to be a walkover.
Again the liking to Barack Obama is very apt because Obama also spoke very positively about gay rights but is against gay marriage.
But like C. Attard said, vote-catching is nothing new. And the Nationalists played the same game in this election by fielding a “rainbow” of candidates who generally just criticised the government in different ways.
You’re not correct in saying that same-sex marriage is the only thing gays want. Actually, Muscat has been very specific in saying that he disagrees with same-sex marriage but favours registered partnerships for gay couples.
Apart from the recognition of couples, there is also the issue of anti-discrimination legislation in the provision of goods and services, on which there is a proposal for an EU Directive right now. The Labour MEPs voted in favour of it whereas the PN ones abstained (as usual).
Apart from that, being vocal about these issues is already an improvement when compared to the PN’s deafening silence. At least it contributes to bring about social change when leaders take a stand on these matters. I also disagree that it’s the Labour base which is ultra-conservative on this matter. I have loads of friends whose Labour families accepted them with open arms, as opposed to wealthy (and ambitious) PN families who thought their gay children were an obstacle (and an embarrassment) in their social climbing.
At university, the only prejudice I encountered as a gay man was from a couple of MZPN idiots whose views were more akin to a fascist party than to a centre-right one. To give credit where it’s due however, these individuals were eventually voted out of their positions specifically because of their extremist views.
This article brings out the pitiable situation which has existed in Malta these last 50 years. Alternative parties that cater for the ideological extremes are non-existent. Who should blame any of the only two parties for doing their utmost to corral extremists into their fold?
The fact that Joseph Muscat seems to be succeeding more than Lawrence Gonzi in winning over these voters, instead of letting them go to waste is irritating you too much, it seems.
I agree with you that the next general elections, whenever these will come, will be a repeat performance of those of 1996. Only this time, judging from the support Muscat has within his own ranks, you may rest assured that there won’t be another 1998.
Joseph Muscat is not winning anyone over, JoeM. Winning them over would mean convincing them of the PL’s principles, assuming such a thing exists. What Joseph Muscat is proposing is making racists suppose that the PL could be a racist party while liberals believe it to be a liberal party and conservatives think of it as a conservative party. Hunters ‘know’ they support a pro-hunting party, environmentalists imagine it to be green and so it goes. This is the KMB doctrine of changing the message according to the audience and was also adopted successfully by Alfred Sant in 1996. Thirteen years down the line it is wishful thinking to expect it to work again in general elections.
I am totally in favour of divorce in apt circumstances because this is a civil right and will give the right to numerous separated couples to start a new life, regularise their social position and to start legitimate new families.
I am in favour of gay rights but adamantly against same sex marriages. There was nothing more demeaning for me as a man to hear publicly on a Xarabank programme some months ago, a young man dressed in a white suit (presumably his equivalent of a bridal gown) telling his partner or shall I say same sex husbund “I will love you for ever”. What a load of codswallop!
I am totally against abortion, for whatever reason, although I do not really like that Vincenti guy and his motley crew of do-gooders.
Everyone has has own opinion and views on every issue, but as we have been seeing in the past year the PL seem to have a view and and opinion to suit everyone even promising the impossible or the impractical, for example Jason Micallef’s off the cuff promise that the PL will reduce the utility bills as soon as his party is elected to govern. This might have caused Joseph Muscata couple of sleepless nights.
Talking about coalitions, I think that Muscat is deluding himself.
It is true that all told, 109,000 voters did not vote for the PN (35,000 more voted for the PL and 74,000 did not vote or defaced their vote, same thing). This a very serious message to the prime minister to pull his socks up and to start delivering. My advice to him is very simple “do not do tomorrow what you can do today or what you should have done yesterday”. Get on with it Lawrence, there is no way that the majority really needs the PL to win the next election but if you and the PN do not start delivering immediately the above voters might once again castigate you in 2013.
Up to now all of the most urgent reforms have not been finalised or implemented and some such as the rent reform, the MEPA reform and the public transport reform have been cannibalised beyond recognition from their original text that it would be better for these not to be implemented as we might be stuck once again with a 70 year archaic law that will do absolutely no good to the nation.
Then, Muscat will have a field day once again, by stating that people have turned against the PN and Lawrence Gonzi, and like Don Quixote think that the flies that he swatted were three windmills, and and his case these will be his dreamed up coalition of individuals from all spheres of society. He might be right in some ways.
It is only for Lawrence not to give him this chance or to simply pull the carpet from under his feet. This needs action and guts.
Why exactly is it a load of codswallop? So you’re in favour of gays having rights, but you don’t believe that they can love each other?
Jean, as I said everyone has his own views and opinions on every subject. That happens to be mine. I do not wish to enter in a debate about this, as it might get to be unsuitable for printing.
Jean, it has already been said many times on this blog that marriage, as an institution, has nothing to do with love. It is all about legal and social implications, not sentimental ones.
Marriage has nothing to do with love? I got it all wrong then. Mamma mia, I really must be an idealistic person, almost a dreamer. Why not mix business with pleasure? And I am not talking about shallow pleasure: Love is hard work.
[Daphne – What Antoine means is that love is not a prerequisite or legal requirement for marriage. A marriage can be loveless but perfectly legal.]
Thank you, Daphne!
Well, he has already done a U-turn on water and electricity. I wonder how Jason Micallef feels?
Wait for the “VAT on new cars” one should they be in government when the case is finalised.
Joseph,
You only have one thing in common with Obama…your wife is also called Michelle…and ah, yes, I forgot, that you are also male. But you need to grow a pair: you are all bluster and bravado but you are not brave enough to go for it on your own. You are forever dangling on the coat-tails of your mentor-in-chief, Alfred Sant. So no, until you become a man and stand up for yourself you only have one thing in common with Obama.
“I still remember thinking how ridiculous Sant was portraying himself as young and fresh in his late 40s and wearing false hair”. Don’t we all?
Still, picture Joseph Muscat three or four years from now. By then there is a possibility that he too will be wearing false hair or, being who he is, will let his head shine.
Will he let his goatee compensate for the lack of hair elsewhere? Stay tuned.
Is Malta the only place in the world where candidates for PM are judged on the amount of hair on their heads?
With people like jomar42 around, it probably is.
(PS: Could Jomar42 give us a sample of his piercing analyse with regard to David Casa and/or Vince Farrugia?)
The little twerp could always let his eye brows grow and comb them back.
Josmar 42 ara veru bniedem li ma tarax hotobtok!. Ma tafx li kif raw lil Sant bil-‘false hair’ Vince Farugia u David Casa marru ghamlu bhalu?? U b’dawshekk x’fiha, daqs kemm hawn minn jissellef minn wara ghal quddiem.
ela hawn xi ligi kif u kome trid taghmel xaghrek?
Do you think that Sant is still pulling the strings or that Muscat is a very good pupil?
[Daphne – I don’t think Sant is pulling the strings. I think Muscat is wholly uncreative.]
@Charlie
An EPP-member party passing gay marriage legislation? You guys are simply incredible. You do ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING for power. The Religio et Patria party introducing gay marriage and divorce! And some talk about U-turns!
The gay community in the US feels deceived by Obama. they expected him to ‘do’ something and extend civil rights to gay couples. However the African American community, is adamantly anti gay rights, and they believe that civil rights issues should not extend beyond racial issues. 95% of African Americans voted for Obama, and hence they are quite vocal. Blacks are generally very conservative even though they vote Democrats.
The gay community cannot turn to the Republican Party, as it is becoming more socially conservative. Rather than focusing on fiscal conservatism, the Republicans are currently only interested in social issues such as abortion and gay marriages.
The gay community are financing their own campaigns through referendums and court cases. However they feel cheated by Obama.
Keep financing referendums and you’ll be playing the conservatives’ game because there is barely a single referendum won by the gay lobby in the whole world. Moreover conservatives are discovering that referendums are excellent weapons to overturn legislation. Even liberal Florida amended the constitution to ban gay marriage in that state. The other American states that have adopted gay marriage NEVER did that through the ballot papers.
Thus if you expect gay rights to be achieved through referendums then you can die waiting. All gay rights were achieved (others say imposed) by governments in power. The anti-gay sentiment is so strong at the popular level that no political party hungry to achieve or keep power would risk siding with a lobby that ultimately always radicalises its demands.
How exactly do gay people radicalise their demands?
I am one of the so called pufti, I know what my rights are and I do not need Muscat or Gonzi to fight for them. All I want them to do is to fight the discrimination gays face.
I would like to add that since Joe Muscat is calling his movement a coalition, I understand a fragmentation of parties joining together. I have no wish to vote for a coalition. In normal cases a coalition collapses after a little dispute. I am tired of politicians who stick to an idea. After being beaten, they clear the debris by saying ‘I was mistaken’, as in the case of the EU. If the Maltese or the Labour coalition supporter cannot see this, then I am really frightened to live in Malta.
You can easily go and live abroad now that you are in the EU. So many people were forced to do that in the 60s.
Mary, those who left Malta in the 1960s were the lucky ones. They settled in free democratic countries and, for the most part, made their fortunes there while the rest of us had to make do with Mintoff and KMB for a decade and a half.
I don’t think that either divorce or gay rights were the reason why the PN lost this election so let’s not get all worked up about them. To be honest, I think that the election results are being given more importance than they are due. The truth is that there was around 20% of the electorate who either did not collect the vote or did not cast it.
Probability is that a lot of these just couldn’t be bothered especially since we now vote almost every other year for something or other. As we saw in the last election a few votes can change the scenario completely and people vote on what happens in the last six months (as that is usually what is on their mind).
As Joseph Muscat seems to have noticed if I read him well in The Times interview, the road to the general election is a long one both for him and for the PN.
Do you vote every other year for something or other? Is it that boring, Claude? Does it take up such a huge chunk of your time?
No, I always vote, but it is amazing how many people do not think that way. I spoke with people I know who didn’t vote just because they were too busy, others were not at home when the police came around with the voting document and could not be bothered to go and pick it up.
My point was that many do not vote because they feel it is not so important, something which is reflected in many other European countries – some have turnouts below 50% and having an election every other year makes the campaigning and the voting less enticing – don’t you agree? So having a considerable chunk of people who did not vote during this election – and these will most probably go out to vote during a general election – means that any analysis of the situation is bound to be heavily skewed.
Are the thousands of voters who did not collect their vote saying they hate PN or that they hate PL even more would those who voted for PL still vote for them when it comes to trusting the country in their hands? I apologise if I gave the impression that I thought voting is boring but you’d be amazed how many people think voting inconsequential to their lives until the the wrong party gets elected.
Gonzi needs to get the situation under control ASAP. He gives the impression that he is risk averse and avoids personal conflicts.
He needs to challenge his detractors within the party face to face, both the backbenchers and also the cabinet minister who is fanning the current fire. Look how these people are moving on towards their next target – Simon Busuttil.
After all Eddie Fenech Adami faced similar challenges as well. At the appropriate time, he kicked out Josie Muscat and controlled Guido de Marco.
The whole issue of divorce is too embarrassing for Malta. This debate belonged to the 1960s and 1970s. At my place of work (not in Malta) my colleagues find it amusing (beyond astonishment) that there is no divorce law in Malta.
However, I have my doubts that the PN lost this election because of liberal issues. It’s much more than that.
@Albert Farrugia
I never said it will happen. In fact I’m 100% convinced it won’t. Gonzi will not be the man to introduce divorce in Malta. I’m just saying that’s one of the main reasons that come 2013 the liberals who felt comfortable voting for people like Louis Grech this year, will find it in their hearts to vote for the Labour Party come 2013.
This is not, as Daphne puts it, holding the country hostage for our whims. It is a good portion of the population saying “This is bullshit, it’s been 25 years and we’re still in the same situation. Even if we have to make sacrifices with other parts of government at least we’ll finally secure divorce.”
[Daphne – A vote for Joseph Muscat is not a vote to secure divorce. To secure divorce, you need a party in government committed to using the whip on a divorce-bill vote. Joseph Muscat’s promise to withdraw the whip – which, in typical fashion, he has presented as something good rather than as something bad – is a guarantee that the bill will fail. There are not enough MPs in favour of divorce on either side of the house to get it through. Once a divorce bill has failed, then there is even less chance of divorce being introduced than there is now, because politicians can argue: we tried, and it failed. Instead of admiring Muscat for promising a divorce bill, challenge him to use the whip.]
Eventually, just as Labour had to stop being anti-EU, PN will have to stop being anti-divorce. Gay rights will follow.
My point is that if Gonzi pulls a fast one on Joseph Muscat, things may become a little more interesting. Alas, it won’t happen.
This is why I also believe it will be Gonzi’s last election. They’re gonna need someone younger and more liberal to take on Joseph after 2013.
@ Claude
Divorce and gay rights are DEFINITELY NOT the reason PN lost this election. PN lost this election for a million and one reasons. But I am convinced that during this election many of the liberal voters (who used to vote AD, PN or abstain), are now voting Labour proudly and comfortably (mainly as a result of liberal Joseph replacing awkward and scary Alfred Sant).
And my argument is that this is a factor that can have a very determining impact on a general election. That being said, if by some strange act of god, all the liberals vote PN, the PN can still lose. The loss will be less great though.
Cannot but agree with Charlie. I am also of the opinion that Dr Gonzi shall not be the one to introduce divorce in Malta, nor shall it be the PN at all either.
Divorce is a civil right but a Christian wrong. Malta needs and requires divorce as otherwise we shall be stuck with a bottle neck in relation to other subsequent matters regarding Family Legislation for many more years to come. This with some quite cruel circumstances including, children being born out of wedlock and post separation and who cannot but be considered bastards, this definitely hinders on there human rights. Also to be further improved and developed is the current position of family members being victims of domestic violence or some other form of abuse including sexual or moral.
The PN was founded and is run on Christian Democratic principles and both Dr Gonzi as leader as well as Dr Tonio Borg are firm believers of this. Hence one cannot expect a u-turn in principles and introduce a civil “emergency exit” to a “no-turning-back” institution instilled by the originator of the fundamental principles to such a political party.
The only way out would be that of doing the necessary constitutional changes to the party with respect to the founded and present political lines of thought. Hence refresh the party whilst at it and prepare for the next crucial battle, i.e. 2013 in a true and full face-lift.
Until such time, divorce is a trump card in PL’s deck which even they have been hesitant to play, and this back from Alfred Sant’s days although they have tested the waters on many occasions.
Let us remember that about 2000 years ago, a wise guy said, “…give to Cæsar what’s to Cæsar and give to God what’s to God.” Hence the present standing of the PN.
Referring back to the Abubacker tragic death.
I have just realised from his pic that some weeks back I came across him in Paceville sitting in the street, with a head-bleed, and evidently drunk. A friend and I helped him into a bar toilet to straighten up.
It seems this person may have had quite a few incidents in Paceville getting drunk, and was obviously known to the bouncers.
This in no way justifies the bouncer’s behaviour, but again a bit of common sense does help. One does not try to enter ANY club when one is drunk.
On several occasions I have witnessed very aggressive behaviour by bouncers. On one occasion a foreign friend of mine almost got punched by a bouncer for removing his T-shirt at a club, and I reported the bouncer to the club owner. The authorities should regulate these bouncers, and an identification number be worn.
Hoteliers threatening to lay off workers should summer tourism droop – maltastar
And then the Maltastar journalist asked his questions in English during the press conference given by Lawrence Gonzi.
Do they do it on purpose? (Wanted to point this out – no need to publish my comment since it is out of subject)
Off-topic here but I think you discussed this somewhere before?
Makes me wonder who’s against who and what’s happening to our party.
Quoting http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/06/14/t1.html
WHAT THEY SAID
Nuggets from Tuesday’s PN meeting
Lawrence Gonzi ‘I assume responsibility for the defeat. It was my choice to focus the campaign on Europe and jobs’
Austin Gatt ‘I envisage two more years of recession. Now is the time to push reforms and ease the pressure in the years of economic turnaround. We could win the next election.’
Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando ‘It’s absurd to see government contribute to the recession rather than ease the burden on families. If you push with reforms, more families will go under.’
Edwin Vassallo ‘The lack of strategy in handling delicate reforms is making us the most hated group of men on the island.’
George Pullicino (To Austin Gatt) ‘You must calm down. People are comparing you to Joe Debono Grech.’
David Agius (Whip) ‘Gatt’s tariffs were not the sole problem that contributed to the defeat. There were far more serious internal issues to be addressed.’
Jean-Pierre Farrugia ‘The PM’s biggest mistake was to have a small Cabinet, creating super ministries and too powerful ministers, mostly absent from the island due to EU-related work, and out of touch with the people.’
Beppe Fenech Adami ‘I’ve been asking for an appointment with Alan Camilleri at Malta Enterprise for the past three weeks to enquire on constituents’ concerns and still am without acknowledgement or reply.’
[Daphne – I’m more interested in what they plan to do to weed out the person who’s leaking things to Malta Today. A parliamentary group meeting is somewhere people must be free to speak in full confidence knowing that what they say is not going any further. This is the equivalent of sitting on a board of directors, leaving the room, and calling a newspaper to report what your fellow directors have said. I don’t think people realise how serious it is. It is not the act of a whistleblower, but of a cowardly worm looking after his – and not the public’s – interests.]
No need of any considerable effort to guess who the cowardly worm is. We all know who Saviour Balzan works for, and consequently, who are the targets of Media Today.
He/she/they is not only talking to Malta Today, but to The Malta Independent as well.
[Daphne – Quite frankly, I don’t know what they hope to achieve, other than a rocket up their arses at the next election followed by a very long stint in opposition. But then maybe these individuals know that they’re going down and plan on taking the whole bloody ship with them. What is a good word that means the precise opposite of hero? I’m lost right now.]
anti-hero.
[Daphne – I thought of that, but no. An anti-hero is still a hero, but without the traditional qualities of one. What I am looking for here is a word that describes the human equivalent of those writhing, bloodless creatures found beneath stones.]
A spiv
Scoundrel, from the Latin condere “to hide”.
[Daphne – That’s my boy!]
No it doesn’t. It derives from the Old English “scunian” (to shun). The Latin word “condere”, on the other hand, means “to establish”, “to create” or “to build”.
Cheers
villain?
Yes these individuals are doomed, but they don’t care what happens to the PN. These three individuals (one minister and two backbenchers) are bloody rich anyway, so they don’t care if they are an MP on the government side or the opposition side. They are hungry for power but not for money.
It’s about time that the government starts to opt for technical ministers (if it is allowed by law). It would benefit both parties, since the MPs elected to parliament are in most cases ‘politikanti tal-kazini’ and nothing more. Look at the 65 MPs. The number of MPs who have the potential for becoming effective ministers is in the single digits between both parties put together.
You know what this means? Next time the MPs meet everyone is going to be extra careful what they say – what a great service to the party and the country this idiot has done. He/she is the equivalent of the idiot on the other side who used to leak all that Alfred Sant and his colleagues used to say in the glass house. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a RAT.
How about ‘villain’? And I love the Italian word ‘vigliacco’. [Daphne – You just reminded me: the Maltese word ‘viljakk’ describes this kind of person.] Hey D, I just thought of one.
Daphne, this is precisely why, in my humble opinion, the PN can never bring on “the fruitful soul-searching that should have taken place back in 2004 after EU membership”, while still in government. (quote from “1971,1996 and here we go again” blog contribution).
In my opinion, the PN badly needs this soul-searching exercise, but these reports simply do not help. Some will now shy away from saying anything in such meetings. Others will continue saying things which they want reported on the media. The end result …… nothing will change. [Daphne – Yes, I agree with you there.] Personally, I have given up…….. it’s a no win, no win situation.
Furthermore, if just opening your mouth in such meetings, risks being tagged as the possible “villian, scoundrel, vigliacco” ……….. then we lost all forms of dialogue at PN HQ. Pity.
[Daphne – The villains and scoundrels are those who leave meetings of the parliamentary group to report their colleagues to the newspapers, in exchange for protection from criticism themselves. These are deals, and nothing more: you become a source, and the newspaper protects its continued source of leaks by not criticising or otherwise upsetting that source – or keeping him happy by giving him exposure for his rants. You’ve got hold of the wrong end of the stick: yes, it is dangerous to have such people around, precisely because honest people without ulterior motives feel that they cannot speak freely around them. We are nto speaking of meetings at the party headquarters here, but of something far more important.]
The antonym for ‘hero’ is ‘loser’.
Wrong end of the stick ?
Agree – “shy away from saying anything” is another way of saying “feel they cannot speak freely”
Agree – parliamentary group meetings at PN HQ with PN in government are something more important than just meetings at PN HQ.
Latest brilliant idea from Toni Abela – turn the President into an ombudsman!
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090615/local/pl-deputy-leader-calls-for-talks-on-presidents-role
Monday, 15th June 2009 – 15:46CET
PL deputy leader calls for talks on President’s role
The deputy leader of the Labour Party, Toni Abela has called for a discussion on reforming the role of the President so that the people could be assisted by his Office to get what is theirs by right.
Dr Abela made his comment when he led the Labour Party administration in a courtesy call on President George Abela at the Palace in Valletta.
[Daphne – And people look favourably on Labour because it’s rubbed-up and shiny. Il-vera razza ta’ nies ta’ cacu: all that glistens is gold to us.]
This was perhaps another occasion when Joseph Muscat felt a driving compulsion to go eat a hamburger instead of attending to his official duties.
Know what? There is a saying in Maltese “Min jixtieq id-deni lil ghajru jigi f’daru”. Remember 10 years ago, when MLP meetings were reported verbatim in The Malta Independent and on In-Nazzjon? The splits within the MLP were fodder for PN and PN-friendly media every single day. And many were so happy at this.
[Daphne – Albert, we weren’t happy because of Schadenfreude. We were happy because it brought a glimmer of hope that we might join the European Union after all. Those of you to whom it meant nothing can never understand what it meant to the rest of us, or how devastated we were when the result of the 1996 election put an end – temporarily – to the prospect of getting there. This happiness you feel now, on the other hand, is little more than spite and gloating. It’s different.]
Perhaps many thought it could only happen to tal-lejber. Well, surprise surprise! Anything you can do, I can do better!
Daphne, I understand if you don’t upload this comment because it is a bit vulgar but in addition to your comment to Albert Farrugia, I would add the infamous Maltese saying ‘qeghdin tbossu b’sorm haddiehor’.
@Anna
I though only tal-lejber were vulgur.
@Albert
Now why would you think so?
They’ve coined a new phrase too – “a donkey blames its own tail” (il-hmar iwahhal f’denbhu). (“Already we have started seeing excuses, as the donkey blames its own tail for the electoral defeat they suffered.” – http://www.maltastar.com/pages/ms09dart.asp?a=2544)
There’s more: “cannot sit still and wait for the multiple crises’s …”; “consecution” for the Constitution, and on and on.
Why all these arguments, do you think that the Nationalist Party is going to be in government forever? I think the people have every right to change in a democratic country.
[Daphne – Of course. But this has nothing to do with rights and everything to do with commonsense; you might as well argue, with your undeveloped book-keeper’s mind, that the man who swaps a villa in Madliena for a flat in Fgura has every right to do so. He does, but that’s hardly the point, is it.]
Carm, the country needs alternation in government. The point is, however, that the PL is failing miserably to project itself as a serious and mature alternative. Joseph Muscat missed a great opportunity of building a strong and credible executive team. Maybe if we had many more Edward Sciclunas joining the fold, there could be hope. But they would have to refrain from making declarations that the PL is a credible party, and from participating in and supporting the antics of clowns like Toni Abela and Anglu Farrugia.
Imma ddahkuni! Hadd ma jara hottobtu! You seem hooked on Toni Abela and Anglu Farrugia because they got elected. Now look at this scenario, one year ago you elected your MPs. What has happened just one year after? Four to six of them are happily splitting your party with their comments and actions, making your prime minister a laughing stock.
[Daphne – OUR prime minister, Mary. He’s yours, too.]
Aren’t you failing miserably to project a serious and mature government? Are these people still credible? DEFINITELY NOT.
Far be it from me to find counterarguments, but why is no one asking the MLP to do its own “soul-searching”? They haven’t shifted an inch from their Mintoff days. They’re a bit like the Chinese Communist Party. All the trappings of change and modernity on the outside, but still unchanged on the inside.
That’s because the innate “hdura” is extremely hard to eradicate.
There’s more to it than that. The MLP believes that it holds the moral high ground, unlike the PN, which post-1960s believes it has the best policies. And that’s not quite the same thing. So admitting a mistake would be tantamount to the MLP suggesting that it should change its ideology.
Just an anecdote to illustrate my point. Around three years ago the local branch of the MLP insisting on erecting a monument to Kalcidon Agius, ex-Speaker of the House and ex-plumber, in Naxxar. And they insisted, against the local council’s PN members’ wishes, on putting the pre-1987 ‘coat-of-arms’ of the Republic of Malta on it, which they did, this being ‘ara-noholqu-l-firda’ Malta. Nice. Post-1987, post-EU and post-millennium, they still think the old North Korean pala tal-bollocks logo was better.
Of course Gonzi should do some soul-searching. He should make up his mind whether to take his country forward, stick to transparency, and piss off lots of PN supporters who are expecting special favours, or to hand out favours and try to win the election the old Maltese way.
Yes both parties should do their own ‘soul searching and let’s leave it at that. Daphne, I meant no disrespect to our prime minister but I feel that certain ministers or back-benchers whom the people trusted with their vote are being of a disservice to the very same people who elected them.
[Daphne – I couldn’t agree with you more on that.]