Time to Move On

Maltastar



This is an honest to God faithful account of a true personal experience. A and B are very close friends of mine. They are also very close friends of each other. They are slightly younger than me and very successful in their respective professions. They come from strong Labour families and whilst they both moved up the social ladder and would be classified at the top end of the A/B category, they remain strongly Labourites in their heart. They always voted Labour before April 12th. What they did on April 12th I am not sure. What I am sure of is that in the referendum they both voted `iva`. For their own particular reasons they have taken to the idea of Malta becoming an EU member. They never really considered that Partnership was feasible within a reasonable time-scale and did not give weight to the contention that EU membership could mean the end of our sovereignty. `it is more surprising that we got 47% of the electorate behind us rather than that we lost the election` In the election campaign I had several discussions with them and I felt that I had gained their commitment to vote Labour given that we belatedly promised to hold a fresh referendum and kept the door open for eventual membership. Indeed they were surprised that Labour finally adopted a strategy that I had been privately advocating for several months and I thought our mission to get back Labourites who voted `iva` was on the right track. I spoke to each of them separately several times during the campaign and each time I gained their commitment to vote Labour on April 12th in spite of their having voted `iva` in the referendum.



Late on Friday election eve, B called me to warn me that A was still wavering and seemed to be having second thoughts about voting Labour and going against the May 2004 deadline for EU membership. I thanked B, got his re-assurance that he will vote Labour the next day and made a mental note to speak to A the first thing on Saturday. I tried to do so but did not manage immediately, but at 10 am A called me to say he was just about entering the polling booth and in spite of his misgivings about our EU policy, he swore on his dearest he was definitely going to vote Labour as he had done all his life. But he warned me that B was prevaricating and that B admitted to A that same morning that B intended to cancel the vote. I immediately phoned B to inform him that A re-assured me that he will be voting Labour. B seemed pleased but unimpressed. I then told B what A had told me about his intentions to cancel the vote and B admitted that in truth he meant to do that. After another persuasion exercise B assured me that he was just going there and then to vote Labour to ensure that he will leave no room for more doubts. What A and B actually did I really do not know. But what struck me in this experience is a very odd feeling. Whilst each one of them, genuine and staunch labourites right down to the smallest bone in their body, was finding it difficult to vote Labour and seemed prepared to repeat the referendum experience of voting against their party policy, they were very worried that the other guy would not be voting Labour. I am no psychologist but the way I read it is that in their heart of hearts they wanted Labour to win the election but did not want the personal responsibility of missing the EU membership appointment in May 2004. `The EU is no longer an issue, but a reality that needs to be accepted and worked within its parameters.` If we could not convince two people like these to vote Labour, is it any wonder that we did not persuade the majority of the floating voters to vote for us. Playing back this experience I tend to conclude that it is more surprising that we got 47% of the electorate behind us rather than that we lost the election.



By packaging the EU issue with a general election we were shooting ourselves in the foot. We were forcing pro-EU Labourites to vote against us. The only thing that could be worse for Labour was a referendum just before the election. And bang the PN snapped it on us. This permitted the PN to use public funds to gain advantage through the referendum as a springboard for the ensuing general elections. By participating in such a referendum we gave the PN a walk-over. Our strategy should have been that although we felt that Partnership was better than membership we should have accepted straight away that the decision belonged to the people in a specific referendum to be held separately and at a distance from the general election. We should have accepted to be bound by the referendum result as the will of the people was superior to party policy. Then, rather than urging the packaging of the EU decision in a single general election contest, we should have applied our arguments and energies for the referendum to be held after the election. The moment accession slipped from Jan 2004 to May 2004 crossing the legislature`s divide, the argument for such an arrangement grew irresistible and we should have sought to bring public opinion behind it and should have lobbied Brussels to endorse such a deal. Then A and B would have had no problem voting Labour in an election knowing that a referendum would be held thereafter permitting a vote for EU membership and would have bound a new Labour government to be there on May 1st 2004. So where do we go from here` I definitely say that we should go forward. The EU is no longer an issue, but a reality that needs to be accepted and worked within its parameters. This is why Labour needs to put emotions aside and face the future logically and calmly and take decisions which would accelerate the return of the likes of A and B to our fold.

Konkrit

Il-Kullhadd



Mhux possibbli li f`demokrazija normali wara erbgha snin ta` tmexxija mill-aghar issir elezzjoni u l-gvern jigi konfermat bl-istess magguranza ta` qabel.` Meta jigri dan jista jfisser zewg affarijiet; jew li mhux tassew hemm demokrazija jew li kien hemm cirkustanzi specjali li gieghlu n-nies jivvutaw kontra r-rieda taghhom.

Facli nsibu soluzzjoni billi nghidu li fil-pajjiz m`hawnx demokrazija.` Nistghu noqghodu nwahhlu fil-kontroll tal-media u uzu tar-rizorsi pubblici ghal skop partiggjan. Ma nghidx li dan ma jkollux effett.` Izda ma nemminx li dan ikollu effett li jdawwar dik li kellha tkun magguranza laburista ghal telfa ta `l fuq minn tnax il- elf vot.

Biex inkunu sincieri maghna nfusna ma nistghux noqghodu niehdu konsolazzjoni mir-raguni tad-deficit demokratiku.` Irridu nharsu oltre. U ma tantx ghandna ghalfejn indumu ngharrxu. Ghax ir-raguni malajr issibha. Tmissha b`idejk u jghidelek kull min ihoss il-polz tal-poplu u jitkellem man-nies.

`Il-magguranza ma vvotatx biex tikkonferma lil Partit Nazzjonalista fil-gvern.` Il-magguranza vvutat ghal dak il-Partit li seta` joffrilha t-triq tas-shubija fl-UE b`mod car u definit.` Il-magguranza ma vvotatx biex tikkonferma lil Partit Nazzjonalista fil-gvern.` Il-magguranza vvutat ghal dak il-Partit li seta` joffrilha t-triq tas-shubija fl-UE b`mod car u definit.

Issa wiehed jista` joqghod jerga` jargumenta kemm il-proposta taghna kienet ahjar u aktar superjuri ghas-shubija u kemm konna nistghu noffru futur ahjar. Dak x`nhasbu ahna. Izda dan ma jghoddx la ma kkunvincejnix lill ohrajn.` Li jghodd hu li l-maggoranza harset lejn dak li konna qed noffru ahna u ghal raguni jew ghal ohra ghazlet li tmur fi triq tas-shubija bhala triq definita` milli triq tal-partnership li kienet triq li tenhtieg hafna negozjati.

L-opinjoni tan-nies li xtaqu jibdlu l-gvern izda li ivvutaw PN minhabba l-EU,` hija li tant raw problemi fil-pajjiz li ma riedux jiehdu riskju b`esperimentazzjoni.` Riedu dak li f`ghajnehom deher` car u zgur.` Hafna hasbu li dak li ppropejna ahna kien jaf ikarkar is-snin u li wara l-esperjenza tat-98 ahna ma ispirajnix fihom fiducja biex jemmnuna li konna kapaci li nwasslu ghal negozjati ahjar ma l-UE fi zmien accettabbli.

U meta ssir analizi serja trid tara il-haga mhux kif nahsbu li hi ahna izda kif kien qed jaraha il-poplu. Ghax huwa l-poplu li jmur jivvota u bil-magguranza jiddeciedi jekk ahna nkunux fil-gvern jew fl-oppozizzjoni.

Ghalhekk nahseb li zball kbir li ghamilna kienet insistenza kontinwa sa Jannar li ghadda` li kollox kellu jigi deciz b`elezzjoni. Din kienet strategija hazina ghax b`hekk ikkostringejna nies li kienu xebghu mil-gvern biex ikollhom kontra qalbhom jivvutaw PN. `Il-hsieb bhal konkrit.` Jekk thallih jidhol fil-mohh jiehu postu u jaqghad.`

L-istategija taghna messha kienet li ahna naqblu li decizjoni bhal din, li torbot mhux biss lil gvern li jmiss izda lil gvernijiet kollha ta wara, kienet decizjoni tal-poplu li tittiehed f`referendum specifiku. Imissna bla rezistenza ta` xejn u mall-ewwel accettajna li r- rieda tal-poplu, kif espressa f`referednum serju, tkun accettata minn gvern laburista u jimplementaha fl-isfond tal-kostituzzjoni tal-pajjiz.

Izda jmissna insistejna bis-sahha kollha taghna u bil-kuntatti kollha li ghandna fix-xena internazzjonali li referendum bhal dan kellu jsir wara l-elezzjoni u mhux qabel.` Qabel serva biss ghal skop partiggjan favur il-PN.` Permezz ta` referendum qabel l-elzzjoni dawn hadu ritratt car ta` dawk li ma vvutawx bi protesta u kull ma kellhom bzonn jaghmlu fil-kampanja elettorali kien li jduru lil dawn in-nies, jaqduhom f`dak li kellhom bzonn u mbaghad jizguraw li dawn johorgu jivvutaw nhar l-elezzjoni.` Mhux ta` b`xejn il-PN ziedu fl-elezzjoni fuq il-voti ta` l-IVA fir-referednum.

Kieku insistejna, kif ripetutament insistejt jien f`kitbieti, li r-referednum isir wara,` kieku l-istorja probabbli kienet tkun mod iehor ghax min xtaq jivvutalna kien jivvutalna meta jaf li ahna nkunu marbutin bir-referendum.

Veru li minn Jannar `l haw il-pozizzjoni taghna bdiet tinbidel tant li fl-ahhar ahna stess offrejna referendum iehor. Izda meta tkun ilek tghid tant li kollox jigi deciz f`elezzjoni decizjonijiet li jibdlu l-pozizzjoni fl-ahhar qajla jkollhom effett. Il-hsieb bhal konkrit.` Jekk thallih jidhol fil-mohh jiehu postu u jaqghad.` Imbaghad bhal konkrit xott lanqas b`jackhammer ma tkissru. Il-hsieb trid tinfilsah fil-mohh meta l-konkrit ikun ghadu frisk ha ttih il-forma li trid.

Issa jehtieg li nammettu fejn zbaljajna, nitghallmu u nimxi `l quddiem.

Neutrality in a new Reality

25^th April 2003

The Malta Independent - Friday Wisdom

 

 

 

Let there be no doubt that my claim to wisdom every Friday is subordinate to the unquestioned wisdom of the electorate every time it is called to choose its government.

 

No matter how much I continue to uphold my views, a right guaranteed by our democratic constitution, it is the will of the majority that prevails. The minority must choose whether to adjust its position in line with mainstream thinking or to hold firm to its views, hoping to persuade the majority to cross over to its viewpoint at the next asking.

But as the scenario around us keeps changing, the minority has to move forward too. Going back to the status quo is hardly ever a solution. Certain things that are done through the democratically expressed will of the people cannot be easily undone. The best course of action for the minority in Opposition is quite often to accept the new reality and present itself as a better alternative than the government, within the evolving parameters of such new reality.

“ The challenge ahead of Labour is to find congruence between these sacred principles and the new reality of EU membership”

This line of reasoning inevitably raises the point as to whether electoral defeats force the loser to sacrifice principles for convenience. In so doing, there is a risk that it could endear new friends whilst distancing itself from old ones.

To achieve an electoral majority through which it can democratically execute its principles and objectives, a political party must acquire the new without alienating the old.

I tackled this topic in an address I made in October 1990 at an event held to commemorate the 70th anniversary of Labour’s foundation, and I quote two paragraphs related to the identification of Labour’s true mission:

“The Labour Party has few sacred principles which remain evergreen. The first principle is that related to the freedom of our Island Republic from old style colonialism or neo-colonialism. Our country must never allow itself to be used as a military base for the service of any foreign country or block of countries. This principle may be extended to include all forms of association which may appear in the form of a partnership or membership, but which, given our minute size, could gradually transform themselves into a veiled version of neo-colonialism. To uphold this principle of preservation of our hard-earned freedom the Labour Party must continue to strive for peace in the Mediterranean as it is only against a background of stability in our region that we can continue to develop our economy so as to earn an ever improving standard of living without reverting to our war or defence values.

“Can Malta as an EU member rise to this occasion and give true practical meaning to its neutrality in the context of a EU membership”

“Our second basic evergreen principle is that the wealth we create has to be shared on valid principles of social justice so that without in any way stimulating inefficiencies or dampening the entrepreneurial flair, our country acts humanely and kindly with those of its citizens who genuinely need support. Furthermore, these principles of social justice must be practised in a background of strict democratic values where we ought to be prepared to sacrifice our self-interests to protect the right of our opponents to oppose us freely and without fear or recrimination, so long as they also stick to the rules of democracy. Our ideals are founded on democratic socialism where democracy is as sacred as socialism.”

 

The challenge ahead of Labour is to find congruence between these sacred principles and the new reality of EU membership. The government has assured and committed itself that EU membership will strengthen our sovereignty and our neutrality.

The people have listened to our reservations in this regard and gave the government the benefit of the doubt. The Opposition must not obstruct the government in the execution of its mandate. Indeed, it must help to ensure that the EU understands that, no matter what internal differences we may have, we are one nation intending to protect our nationhood, our sovereignty and our neutrality as enshrined in our Constitution. We must play in full our new role as members of an enlarged EU, aspiring to establish an identity which counter-balances the dangerous role that the US has been forced to adopt by the 9/11 events.

The EU can help to bring about a new world order, peace in the Mediterranean and an overdue and fair resolution to the Palestinian/Israeli problem. Can Malta as an EU member rise to this occasion and give true practical meaning to its neutrality in the context of a EU membership and a new order in a post-Saddam world?

A Wider Perspective

21^st April 2003

maltastar.com 

 

When crisis hits as it did following the result of the general election one must avoid the temptation to come to quick conclusions or suggest easy solutions. It is time for reflection and deliberation; time to raise oneself above the immediate events and look at things in a wider perspective.

 

 

At a party level the analysis has to go beyond the immediate election result. It must span the whole scenario since 1979 when the party achieved its milestone objective of freeing the country from military basis and adopt a foreign policy anchored on active neutrality.

Since then we have failed to get an absolute majority of votes in five of the six general elections contested. In the only election we managed a majority of votes, events proved that Labour could not manage such majority as it could not organise the whole party behind a post-1979 inspiration.

“If it were possible to rewind and replay time I would not do anything differently from what I did”

In looking towards the future we must above all analyse what objective will unite the whole party behind a new mission that will appeal to the majority of the electorate. We must take maximum opportunity from the fact that the PN will now be in the same position we were in 1979 and is likely to find difficulty in sustaining the inspiration in the post EU-membership phase. Labour must make it its mission to prove that it can do a better job in making the most of opportunities presented by EU membership whilst retaining the maximum possible of the national identity and sovereignty that such membership permits.

 

 

“I was equally emphatic on the need to separate the EU issue from the general election and subject it to a specific referendum”

On a personal level well-meaning friends say that I should be quite happy with the 3,000 first count votes I mastered over two districts in my first showing even though I was not elected to parliament. Impressive as this may sound it falls short of my minimum objectives and is therefore disappointing. If it were possible to rewind and replay time I would not do anything differently from what I did. What I could have done more to get elected was being more generous with promising all that was asked of me by the constituents. To remain at peace with my conscience I never promised anything beyond doing my best to perform in the interest of my constituents, my districts and my country.

What I think made a real difference between personal success and failure is probably more related to my natural characteristic to speak my mind in a degree of honesty untypical of aspiring politicians. This has exposed me to being branded by competing colleagues as representing a source of potential instability.

This is viciously dishonest and hurts more than the negative result itself. I am by nature an opinion shaper and will instinctively contribute my views up to the point when the organisation takes a formal majority decision. At that point, in spite of personal reservations about decisions taken which may not meet my full satisfaction, I am an active and loyal team player. I believe that in the longer term my own views would converge with those of the organisation whose higher order objectives I continue to uphold in spite of differences on particular issues.

But in instances where the organisation is still in the process of forming its policy on particular issues I was and still am never afraid to put across my viewpoints even when these go against the grain of mainstream opinion.

 

 

“It is against this background that I gain satisfaction from my personal performance at last elections even though I missed the parliamentary seat objective”

It has happened several times in the last legislature. On the need to retain VAT, I was the most emphatic after Labour declared it was reviewing its policy. I was equally emphatic on the need to separate the EU issue from the general election and subject it to a specific referendum. I was just as clear on the need for the referendum to be held in post-election mode and for it to be a truly national and binding decision and not a pre-election political tool. I was the only voice who dared suggest that Partnership did not win the referendum which at best could be labelled inconclusive.

In each and every instance I was proved right by subsequent events and I maintain that if Labour adopted my suggestions at the appropriate time rather than as a late pre-election policy after mind-sets had already concretised, we could have swung the election our way.

In speaking were others conveniently kept silent I saw my popularity growing among the undecided voters but exposed myself to disfavour among the grassroots exploited as these were by competing colleagues who dishonestly projected me as an intelligent rebel.

Now we are all wiser. Whilst my electoral contest attracted new votes to the party, those who were more responsible than I for attracting new votes did little more than protect their personal position by shifting away from me safe Labour votes I had worked for since I announced my contesting the elections in January 2002.

 

 

It is against this background that I gain satisfaction from my personal performance at last elections even though I missed the parliamentary seat objective. I sacrificed my interest for those of the party and can walk with my head up high knowing that I remained totally loyal by deed not just words to the ultimate objectives of the party and the grassroots that have been deceitfully alienated from me.

During this last week I have been inundated with calls from well-wishers urging me to continue with my work in favour of the Labour Party. Many have belatedly appreciated that in all cases I was accused of differing from mainstream opinion I was doing nothing more than trying, in the policy formation stage, to make the party electable.

I wish to re-assure my followers that I will continue to militate within Labour. I just need time to decide whether it is best to do so by remaining the public conscience of the Labour Party, abandoning all electoral ambitions, and using my stature to try to shape Labour’s policy into something more elect-able, or whether, given that the Leader has decided not to seek re-appointment, I would be more useful to the Labour Party in an official position within a new leadership formation. This is a personal decision that needs to be taken calmly, soberly and after deep reflection.

  

The People have Spoken

The Malta Independent on Sunday



Once the people have spoken may be it is time to shut up. However, life goes on and we must all learn from events, accept new realities as they emerge, and move forward hopefully becoming wiser and better.

In the circumstances and to keep a measure of consistency I quote from past contributions I had penned which had considered the possibility of the scenario which has now unfolded into a reality.

In an interview with the Times on 9th September 2001 I had said

`If we vote in an election and we decide either way... that is our decision. If the people elect the Nationalists, it means that Malta will become an EU member and there is no way of turning back. That`s democracy. It will be the final decision. We might not like the power station at Delimara but it`s there and nobody would dare take it down. If the people decide that Malta should join the EU and Malta joins, then we have to make the most of it. It is irreversible.`

Writing on Nov 22, 2002 in my Friday column in the Malta Independent I wrote:

`It is obvious that should Labour finish the next general election contest on the losing side its EU policy will have to change to making the most of membership rather than to continue resisting it.`

Clearly when something gets done it cannot be easily undone. And realism calls for Labour to get over its shock very quickly and re-compose itself as a strong and democratically active opposition whilst respecting the execution of the people`s majority choice.` Certainly there must not be a repeat of the VAT saga where it took 4 years for Labour to acknowledge the realism that good or bad VAT had to stay as this country cannot be subjected to regular shocks of changes to its major fiscal instruments.`

`The people have spoken also for the PN. They now have a responsibility to deliver all they promised ` But it is also time to reflect on the irony of the present situation. I have yet to meet serious honest people, of whatever political beliefs, who argue that the PN have won the election on their own merits. There is a widely subscribed view that the people did not vote for PN but voted for whoever could get them into the EU.

The irony of this situation is that it was Labour Party itself that contributed most to PN`s victory.` The more pungent and effective we were in our criticism of the PN`s` handling of our domestic affairs, the stronger the argument for EU membership became.

So in the process of making effective criticism on the many aspects of domestic matters, from the economy to social policy, from corruption to law & order, from the state of our roads to environmental monsters, the perception grew that these problems were beyond the solution of any local politician, from the left or from the right.` The inevitability of EU membership become firmly ingrained in the mind of that sector of the electorate that decides on which side the scale should tip.

The irony is that the major opponents to EU membership were through their solid opposition the major contributors to its success and to perpetuation of the PN`s overstay in power.

`Above all the government must ensure that the culture of favours and jobs for the boys must end and Labourites are no longer made to feel as children of a lesser god.` It is easy to be critical after the event and I do not mean to be so. But it is appropriate to analyse and learn. Maltese people are tired of the way politics is done locally.` They knew the country was doing badly and they could not believe that a simple change of government would bring about the necessary discipline.` I dare suggest that Labour`s offering of a temporary cash flow palliative was misinterpreted as a sign of weak leadership that would render unworkable the Partnership option. Clearly this option depended on strong leadership and very active and able negotiations to succeed and deliver within acceptable time frames.

The people have spoken also for the PN. They now have a responsibility to deliver all they promised.` We must now witness the promised influx of foreign direct investment. We must see much better value for our tax money. We must have better roads and all year round gardens on our roundabouts.

We must be satisfied that our public finance deficit is truly under control and no longer fudged through creative accounting. We must really give the economy a break from excessive taxation and must wind down the bureaucracy that is stifling private initiative.

We must make MEPA accountable to public opinion and have its decisions perceived as fair, transparent and consistent.

Above all the government must ensure that the culture of favours and jobs for the boys must end and Labourites are no longer made to feel as children of a lesser god.` Government appointments must be made on the basis of strict merit not party affiliation.

Easy as it is for government to be carried away into thinking it has a permanent hold on power, extra effort must be made to govern in the interest of the whole nation, in the knowledge that this victory is owed to Labourites just as much as it is owed to Nationalists.

The first task of the Labour Party is to protect the interest of its own 47%plus followers ensuring that the government treats them with the respect and dignity they deserve and that their party affiliation is a right which should not deprive them of any other right given to them in a real democracy. This and not turning the clock back is where Labour needs to devote its energies.

Qawmien

Il-Kullhadd



Illum jum l-Ghid il-Kbir.` Jum il-Qawmien.` It-Tifkira ta` meta Sidna Gesu Kristu qam mill-Imwiet u rebah fil-glorja.

L-analogija politika hija inevitabbli.` Meta ser jasal il-qawmien tal-Partit Laburista` Bit-telfa elettorali ta` nhar is-sibt 12 t`April 2003, il-Partit Laburista se jkun ilu fl-oppozizzjoni aktar min ghoxrin sena hlief ghal interval ckejken ta` bejn is- 96 u t-98.

Partit politku jista jilhaq l-objettivi tieghu biss jekk minn zmien ghal zmien ikun fil-gvern skond ir-regoli tad-demokrazija. Jekk jibqa fl-oppozizzjoni ghal zmien twil, u ghoxrin sena huwa zmien twil, twil hafna, allura partit poltilku jkun qed jirriskja li jrendu lilu nnifsu irrelevanti galadarba ma jistax iwettaq l-objettivi tieghu billi jmur fil-gvern.

Jista partit ikollu l-ahjar policies, l-ahjar nies u l-ahjar mezzi ghax ikun kollu ghal xejn jekk dawn ma jkunx jista` juzahom biex mil-gvern tassew jiddefendi l-interessi tan-nies li lilhom il-partit` ikun jirraprezenta.

`Inkunu qed nonqsu lill-Partit u lin-nies li jirraprezenta jekk nippretendu li ma gara xejn u li huwa normali li titlef elezzjoni wara `l ohra.` Ghalhekk is-sinjifikat tat-telfa elettorali li garrabna nhar is-sibt li ghadda ma ghandux jigi mcekken. Inkunu qed noqsu bl-ikrah jekk naghmlu dan.` Inkunu qed nonqsu lill-Partit u lin-nies li jirraprezenta jekk nippretendu li ma gara xejn u li huwa normali li titlef elezzjoni wara `l ohra.

Il-prestazzjoni tal-gvern nazzjonalista f`dawn l-ahhar erba snin u nofs tant kienet hazina li ghad irrid niltaqa ma xi hadd serju, nazzjonalist jew laburist, li jghid li l-gvern kien haqqu jigi konfermat. Hemm kunsens wiesgha li kien wasal zmien tal-bidla ghax il-gvern ma kien qed joffri xejn u l-arroganza u l-kompressi ta` zmien twil fil-poter kienu qed juru sew.

Biex f`cirkostanzi bhal dawn. Partit fl-oppozizzjoni mhux biss ma jirnexxilux jirbah izda jitlef l-elezzjoni bl-istess margni tan-92 u tan-98, allura bilfors tasal biex tirraguna li hemm xi haga kronikamanet hazina fil-Partit.

`Id-disfatta fiha innifisha fiha iz-zerriegha tas-success. U f`dawn ic-cirkostanzi il-partit Laburista ghandu bl-umilta kollha u b`sens ta` lejalta` lejn id-decizjoni tal-maggoranza,` jfittex biex isib iz-zeriegha tas-success fost it-tifrik tad-disfatta.` Ghax ir-rejalta` tibqa li n-nies ghalkemm mhumiex kuntenti bin-nazzjonalisti fil-gvern meta harsu lejna,` ma rawx fina alternattiva valida.` Allura ddecidew li l-issue ta` l-UE kienet superjuri ghal kollox u ghazlu lil dak il-partit li seta` jwassalhom hemm. In-nies tilfu l-fiducja fil-poltika maltija u ghazlu dixxiplina esterna f`forma ta` shubija fl-UE.

Naqblu jew ma naqblux, il-poplu dejjem ghandu ragun u jkun gwaj li nahsbu li ahna bravi u l-poplu iblah. Biex nibdew irridu li l-ewwel bl-umilta` kollha naghrfu d-decizjoni sovrana tal-poplu torbot lilna anke jekk ma naqblux maghha,` u filwaqt li nfasslu l-policies taghna fi sfond ta rejalizmu gdid li qed jizviluppa,` ma naghmlu xejn biex tigi ostakolata it-twettiq tar-rieda tal-magguranza dment li tibqa` fil-konfini tal-ligijiet legittimi tal-pajjiz.

Id-disfatta fiha innifisha fiha iz-zerriegha tas-success. U f`dawn ic-cirkostanzi il-partit Laburista ghandu bl-umilta kollha u b`sens ta` lejalta` lejn id-decizjoni tal-maggoranza,` jfittex biex isib iz-zeriegha tas-success fost it-tifrik tad-disfatta.

Din iz-zerriegha ma tinstabx billi noqghodu nippretendu li tort huwa tal-leaders biss u mhux taghna lkoll.` Ovvjament il-leadership iggorr responsabbilita` akbar izda ahna lkoll inhossuna parti mil-htija bhal ma konna nhossuna parti mis-success kieku l-folja kienet kontra. L-ingliz jghid success has many fathers but failure is an orphan. Is-success ghandhu hafna missieijiet izda d-disfatta hija orfni.` Dan mhux sew.

Jien l-ewwel wiehed nerfa` ir-responsabbilita tieghi, niprretendi li kulhadd jaghmel bhali, nikkundanna lil min hadem ghas-siggu persunali flok ghas-success tal-partit, u nwieghed li dment li l-partit jibqa` mmexxi min-nies li jispirawli fiducja jien lest biex inkun parti miz-zerriegha tas-success ikun x`ikun ir-rwol mixtieq minni.

A Vote for EU

Maltastar



I`ll be short and to the point.` Last Saturday Malta voted for the EU.

There is no way in a democracy that a government with a bad performance as that of the last four and half years would in normal circumstances be re-elected with the same majority.

The people had a choice. They had a choice of either becoming members of the EU on 1st May 2004 with all the discipline and opportunities this would provide, or to elect a Labour government to negotiate Partnership and give the country the strong leadership that it misses.

The people realised that Partnership requires much stronger internal leadership than membership to impose on ourselves the discipline to save us from self-destruction. They looked at Labour and its leadership and decided, in their own unquestioned wisdom, that we do not have what it takes to deliver the strong leadership that Labour`s option required in order to succeed.

The people thus chose the EU.` The people are always right and their decision needs to be respected.

No Losers in Democracy

11^th April 2003

The Malta Independent - Friday Wisdom

 

 

Images of monuments of Saddam being hammered and crashed to the ground mark the end of a regime, which had long outlived its function to provide the best for its citizens.

 

Much as one would question, as I do, the principle of going to war against any country without United Nations approval, few would argue that the world would be a better place without the likes of Saddam Hussein.

I had spent a few days in Baghdad some years back when Hussein was still in the good books of western governments while keeping busy at war with the revolutionary regime that had displaced the Shah in Iran.

“Democracy is the only system, imperfect as it may be, where power is transferred by the will of the people as expressed through the ballot and not through use of force, both physical as well as moral.”

“True democracy produces only winners where the will of the majority is executed within the legal structures of the country in full respect of the rights and opinion of the minority.”

Even then one could feel suffocated by the total grip that he had on the country where his images were peeping out from everywhere. His pictures were in the hotel room, in the hotel lobby, in every corner of every street, on each door of every residence, in every taxi as well as, I was told, in every private car. You could not help feeling that you were constantly being watched and that the interest of protecting the regime was superior to all others.

During this silent day preceding the general election, we have an added reason to treasure and enjoy our right to choose our leaders every few years to ensure that they do not get too comfortable with their seats of power. Democracy is the only system, imperfect as it may be, where power is transferred by the will of the people as expressed through the ballot and not through use of force, both physical as well as moral.

My appeal is therefore for people to be allowed to exercise their vote freely without undue interference. The right to vote is both personal and private, and one has a duty to use in the interest of himself, his family, his community, and his country.

Back to Saddam, now that he is gone, the United States and its allies must ensure that the country is managed in the interest of none but the people of Iraq. Only such unmistakably clear measures could give a post de facto legitimisation of the war without UN approval. It is vital for this precedent to be buried before it whets the appetite of other power seeking nations.

And back to Malta, let’s not forget that in a true democracy there are no winners and losers.

True democracy produces only winners where the will of the majority is executed within the legal structures of the country in full respect of the rights and opinion of the minority.

 

3 to 1 for PN

The Times of Malta   

10^th April 2003

 

 

This is the end of a long series of contributions meant to project Labour’s policies and principles so as to make Labour the choice of the majority at the next elections.

 

Basically I want to culminate this effort by giving all those who are still deliberating their decision three reasons why they should NOT vote PN and one reason why they should positively vote Labour.

 

“it is bad for democracy to have the same faces in power for a fourth legislature”

Reason No. 1 is that it is bad for democracy to have the same faces in power for a fourth legislature.   It is clear that they are fatigued and have lost touch with reality.   How else can one explain Eddie Fenech Adami’s declaration on April 7^th that our country’s economy has never been in such a good situation as it is today?  Clearly he is not hearing the moans coming up from the grassroots.  

 

How else could one think of a billboard proclaiming that public finances are on a sound footing when latest figures up to November 2002 show that the budget target for the whole year will be missed by some Lm30 million in spite of the Lm21 million quick fix by taking artificial revenue from the MIA deal as if it were regular recurring income?

 

The picture of a young boy sitting comfortably on his father’s shoulders is out of touch with reality.  It would be more factual to have the father’s weight burdening the young boy’s fragile shoulders just as our national debt, declared and hidden, is a burden legacy that a stale PN administration is leaving for our children.

 

A change and a breadth of fresh air in the country’s administration is overdue especially if we are ever to know the truth on such scandals as abusive presidential pardons, opaque sale of Mid-Med Bank without any competitive bidding, escape of drug barons from prisons and so on.

 

 

“it makes sense to give Labour the opportunity to negotiate their partnership and then decide on an informed basis.”

Reason No 2 is that even if you believe that our place is in the EU as full members, it makes sense to give Labour the opportunity to negotiate their partnership and then decide on an informed basis.   Few would argue against a claim that Labour can negotiate much better than a government headed by a Prime Minister who the first thing he did in foreign relations on talking office in 1987 was to inform accredited ambassadors  that Malta was no longer strategically important.

 

The argument of now or never, sort of last train to heaven, cuts no ice as EU enlargement is an ongoing process and the best ticket for entry is a sound and stable economy.   Taking the pressures of the single market when our economy is so soft will rip off our social fabric so painstakingly woven by past governments and for the first 10 years could make EU membership a visit to hell rather than salvation to heaven.

 

 

 

“if we re-elect people whose frame of mind is set on the notion that problems can be solved by simply throwing money aimlessly at them”

Reason No 3 is that if we re-elect people whose frame of mind is set on the notion that problems can be solved by simply throwing money aimlessly at them, we will just

 continue adding on to our deficit and debt while the underlying problems remain unaddressed.   For how long can our financial structures take the load of additional debt before cracking to bury us under their weight?

 

 

 

One reason for voting Labour is that Labour will just do it.  It will do what has to be done to re-structure our economy, bring sanity back to our public finance, reinforce the work ethics which have been eroded by government’s laissez-faire, and address the weaknesses and problem not simply by throwing money at them, but by devising action programmes aimed to solve the problems without spending one single cent more than is absolutely necessary but without false economies.

 

It is time to stop talking about the problems, time to stop writing report and studies leading to further studies, time to call a spade and spade and to start taking action in a determined but meaningful way; a way leading to small wins to be celebrated for morale boosting on the way so that as one nation we can modernise the country economically, physically and morally.

 

It is time for a bit of fresh air to let Labour get on with the job.   It is time to vote Labour. Time to just do it.

 

Isthi

10 ta’ April 2003

L-Orizzont

 

 

 

Sur Prim Minsitru tal-ftit jiem li fadal, isthi - jekk taf kif.   Imissek tisthi tikteb ittra bhal ma ktibt lill-impjegati ta’ l-HSBC kollha gideb u invenzjonijiet.  Ma nistax inhalliha ghaddejja bla risposta li tixraqlek.

 

Bdejt billi ghedt “Il-banek huma l-qalb ta’ kull ekonomija”.   Mela la taf dan kif int accettajt li bank li ghandu nofs il-qalb ta’ l-ekonomija maltija jghaddi bla kliem u bla sliem f’idejn il-baranin?   Ma tiddejjaqx tidher li thalli qalbna f’idejn il-barrani.  Mhux ta’ b’xejn ossessjonat bl-UE!

 

Ghedt li inti smajt lill-Kap ta’ l-Oppozizzjoni jghid li jekk ikun fil-gvern se jqaccat ir-rwol ta’ l-HSBC f’Malta.   Dan fejn smajtu?  Ma tisthix tigdeb sfaccatament?   Kull ma qal il-Partit Laburista huwa li skond il-prattika internazzjonali li tkattar il-kompetizzjoni u tillimita l-monopolji permezz ta’ pozizzjoni dominanti fis-suq, niehdu mizuri biex tigi rimedjata il-pozizzjoni fejn l-HSBC qed juza il-pozizzjoni dominanti li hallih jiehu il-gvern nazzjonalista bla ma jkun sensittiv ghal htigiet ta’ l-ekonomija taghna.

 

“Imissek tisthi tikteb ittra bhal ma ktibt lill-impjegati ta’ l-HSBC kollha gideb u invenzjonijiet.”

Int li tant temmen fl-UE li ghaliha il-kompetizzjoni vera f’suq liberu huwa kredu fundamentali, kif issa qed titfantas li l-gvern laburista jrid igib aktar kompetizzjoni fis-suq bankarju li spicca dominat mill-HSBC bla wisq sensittivita’ ta’ l-obbligi li ghandu biex jghin fit-tkabbir ta’ l-ekonomija Maltija?

 

Inti, Sur Prim Ministru ghedt ukoll li biex il-pajjiz jimxi ‘l quddiem hemm bzonn li ma jkunx hemm hemm agenda personali jew politici fil-banek.   Naqblu.  Izda allura kif hallejt dawn l-agendi ifestru fil-Bank of Valletta tant li twieled mostru bhal tad-Daewoo li tant iddejjaqt tinvestiga.

 

X’gost tiehu tigbed u taghmel hsara lil Malta billi tghid li gvern Laburista ma jaghtix garanzija li ma jdurx ghall-investiment tal-privat?   Il-Leader taghna ghamilha cara li mhux qed jara xejn hlief li jkattar il-kompetizzjoni fis-suq halli tigi agevolata l-ekonomija Maltija.  Min fejn gibtha din li se nduru ghall-investiment ta xi hadd?   Jew ga qed tittrenja biex mill-oppozizzjoni tibda tissabobtaggja l-interessi ta’ Malta?

 

Ktibt lill- haddiema wkoll li l-aghar haga li jista jigri issa hu li jghaddu minn snin ohra ta’ taqlib u ndhil mil-Gvern.   Indhil mil-gvern ghax irridu li l-HSBC jaghmlu dak li weghdu?   Indhil mill-gvern ghax irridu li l-pubbliku malti jkun moqdi sewwa mnn bank li ghandu pozizzjoni dominanti fis-suq u ghalhekk irid jerfa l-obbligi li pozizzjoni bhal din iggib maghha?

 

Mela issa hekk sirna f’dal pajjiz?  Min jiddefendi l-interessi ta’ Malta igib l-instabbilita u t-taqlib u min ibiegh l-affarijiet bir-ribass u jinnegozja kontra l-interessi ta’ pajjizna dak allura jgib l-istabbilita’.   Skuzi tafx izda b’dan l-argument l-akbar stabbilita hi dik ta’l-oqbra.

 

Fid-dinja dment li timxi man-normi accettati minn kulhadd internazzjonaliment hadd ma jlumek ghax tiddefedni l-interessi ta’ pajjizek.  Mhux kullhadd hekk jaghmel?   Kullhadd hlief Malta taht gvern nazzjonalista.

 

L-investiment jitgerrex meta jsiru gazibi bhal bejgh tal-Mid-Med bla ma hargu offerti.  Meta jsiru affarijiet li jgibuna nixbhu lil banana republics fejn id-dittaturi jaghmlu li jridu bla ma jghatu rendikont t’ghemilhom.   Fejn ikollok Prim Ministru li jghid li Lm10 miljuni ‘l hemm jew ‘l hawn ma jimpurtax wisq!

“L-HSBC huwa bank serju u la jsibu s-serjeta’ minn naha ta’ gvern labursta jirrispondu bis-serjeta’ minn naha taghhom halli l-monopolju perikoluz ta’ Fenech Adami ma jkomplix jherri l-ekonomija.”

 

Qalilna li l-ghazla hi bejn it-taqlib u l-inkwiet li jgibu maghhom Dr Alfred Sant u ta madwara jew is-serhan tal-mohh tal-gvern nazzjonalista.

 

Bhala cittadin Malti zgur ma serrahtx mohhi nara l-pajjizi jbiegh bank bir-ribass, bla trasparaenza u jtellef lil pajjiz xi Lm70 miljun lira.   Issa ghax gvern laburista jrid li mil-mitluf jiehu li jista’ u jgieghel l-HSBC jkunu sensittivi lejn l-interessi nazzjonali u jkattar il-kompetizzjoni fil-qasam bankarji skond normi accettati minn kulhadd inkluz l-UE, minn fuq qed jaqta’ qalb il-haddiema bi scaremongering oxxen u rresponsabbli.

 

Is-serhan tal-mohh ghan-nazzjonalisti huwa li jbieghui l-interessi ta’ pajjizna b’irhis lill-barrani kif ghamlu wkoll fit-trattivi ghas-shubija fl-UE.   Ghax ahna niddefednu l-interessi tal-poplu li lejh u lejh biss ahna nhossuna obbligati, il-Prim Minsitru jiskandalizza ruhu u jhedded li b’daqshekk qed ingibu l-instabbilita’.   X’ipokresija!

 

Lil haddiema ta’ l-HSBC nghidilhom li l-pozizzjoni taghhom hija garantita ghax gvern laburista jinnegozja u jasal ma l-HSBC li ghandhom kull interess li jaslu maghna wkoll.  Meta jsibu d-dghajjef ma nlumx l-HSBC li jiehdu walkover.  Meta jsibu is-sod jammirawk u jaslu ghax hekk ikun jaghmel sens ghat-tnejn.  Mil-banda ‘l ohra jekk tizdied il-kompettizzjoni fil-qasam bankarju jizdiedu u jitkattru l-impjiegi u tigi agevolata l-ekonomija fl-interess ta’ kullhadd.

 

L-istess jghodd ghad-depozitanti u ghax-shareholders tal-bank.  L-HSBC huwa bank serju u la jsibu s-serjeta’ minn naha ta’ gvern labursta jirrispondu bis-serjeta’ minn naha taghhom halli l-monopolju perikoluz ta’ Fenech Adami ma jkomplix jherri l-ekonomija. Fl-ahhar mill-ahhar huwa fl-interess ta’ l-HSBC li joperaw fostna f’ambjent ta’ serjeta’ u ekonomija stabbli u soda.

 

Sur Primistru, dan l-att ta’ disperazzjoni juri bic-car li qed tipprova taqbad ma kull tibna anke fejn ma jezistix tiben.