The Malta Independent
MLP`s Vigilance and Disciplinary Board took the unusual (to say the least) step of finding me guilty of making criticism which in their opinion damages the Party, without giving me any hearing, without indicating chapter and verse which part of my criticism they find objection to and why, and without in any way bringing any arguments to counter my criticism.
The media has been on to me seeking my views on the matter. This is as expected because the Vigilance Board made their action doubly unusual by releasing their decision to the Press Saturday lunchtime without even giving me time to raise an appeal as provided by the Party statute.
So far I gave the media a short no comment, which does not however mean I did the same to the Vigilance Board. On Monday morning I hand delivered to the Board and to the Party General Secretary my decision to resign from all positions within the MLP. I will not enter into further details, at least for the time being. But I never accept threats from anyone especially if the objective of such threats is to dissuade me from using my right to fair criticism. I could not stay within the MLP with such a threat on my head.
Knowing well how much I treasure my right to think freely and objectively I have enough grounds to suspect that the whole matter was engineered in a way to trigger my resignation by whoever was feeling uncomfortable with my criticism and could provide no real answer to it. It was also meant to deliver a warning to the internal critics lest they dare to carry their views beyond the internal boundaries where their faint waves of criticism uselessly wash the strong breakwater structures of grounded bureaucracy.
I most categorically deny that my criticism damages the MLP. On the contrary my criticism benefits the MLP by preserving the trust of those who lost faith in the Party, following its poor electoral performance and the strange way the leadership election contest was conducted. My criticism is meant to prod the party to do what all parties that lose consecutive elections do i.e. rather than simply demand accountability from others, bring accountability in-house.
I treasure my consistency and credibility much more than such attributes are appreciated currently within the MLP. I do look forward to the day when the MLP not only tolerates such attributes but embraces and promotes them. That would be an MLP I will gladly re-join because the sign of consistency is changing one`s mind in the face of changing circumstances.
Meanwhile if there is anyone damaging the MLP it is the Vigilance Board through the way they go about executing their function and the way they interpret and judge who is damaging the party, whether the `imbeciles` who selflessly criticise and demand accountability or those whose failings give rise to such criticism and use the bureaucracy to avoid being held accountable.
And it is just as well that this is being written on the 5th anniversary of the 1998 election. This was the day when the Samsons within Labour brought down the temple on all Labourites` heads and gave the government back on a silver platter to the PN. In the process they denied the country the essential alternation of power without which democracy will lack true substance.
The absence of a true post-1998 exercise of analysis and accountability led to an even more painful and damaging experience in 2003. It was truly a case of a giving the second consecutive election to the PN this time on a golden platter just when the majority was really in favour of a change of administration. Labour actually forced people not to vote it in power.
On this 5th anniversary of such infamous day should Labour not reflect whether it needs to suffer a third consecutive defeat before shaking off its lethargy. Neither Labour nor the country can afford that.
MLP`s Vigilance and Disciplinary Board took the unusual (to say the least) step of finding me guilty of making criticism which in their opinion damages the Party, without giving me any hearing, without indicating chapter and verse which part of my criticism they find objection to and why, and without in any way bringing any arguments to counter my criticism. The media has been on to me seeking my views on the matter. This is as expected because the Vigilance Board made their action doubly unusual by releasing their decision to the Press Saturday lunchtime without even giving me time to raise an appeal as provided by the Party statute.
So far I gave the media a short no comment, which does not however mean I did the same to the Vigilance Board. On Monday morning I hand delivered to the Board and to the Party General Secretary my decision to resign from all positions within the MLP. I will not enter into further details, at least for the time being. But I never accept threats from anyone especially if the objective of such threats is to dissuade me from using my right to fair criticism. I could not stay within the MLP with such a threat on my head.
Knowing well how much I treasure my right to think freely and objectively I have enough grounds to suspect that the whole matter was engineered in a way to trigger my resignation by whoever was feeling uncomfortable with my criticism and could provide no real answer to it. It was also meant to deliver a warning to the internal critics lest they dare to carry their views beyond the internal boundaries where their faint waves of criticism uselessly wash the strong breakwater structures of grounded bureaucracy.
I most categorically deny that my criticism damages the MLP. On the contrary my criticism benefits the MLP by preserving the trust of those who lost faith in the Party, following its poor electoral performance and the strange way the leadership election contest was conducted. My criticism is meant to prod the party to do what all parties that lose consecutive elections do i.e. rather than simply demand accountability from others, bring accountability in-house.
I treasure my consistency and credibility much more than such attributes are appreciated currently within the MLP. I do look forward to the day when the MLP not only tolerates such attributes but embraces and promotes them. That would be an MLP I will gladly re-join because the sign of consistency is changing one`s mind in the face of changing circumstances.
Meanwhile if there is anyone damaging the MLP it is the Vigilance Board through the way they go about executing their function and the way they interpret and judge who is damaging the party, whether the `imbeciles` who selflessly criticise and demand accountability or those whose failings give rise to such criticism and use the bureaucracy to avoid being held accountable.
And it is just as well that this is being written on the 5th anniversary of the 1998 election. This was the day when the Samsons within Labour brought down the temple on all Labourites` heads and gave the government back on a silver platter to the PN. In the process they denied the country the essential alternation of power without which democracy will lack true substance.
The absence of a true post-1998 exercise of analysis and accountability led to an even more painful and damaging experience in 2003. It was truly a case of a giving the second consecutive election to the PN this time on a golden platter just when the majority was really in favour of a change of administration. Labour actually forced people not to vote it in power.
On this 5th anniversary of such infamous day should Labour not reflect whether it needs to suffer a third consecutive defeat before shaking off its lethargy. Neither Labour nor the country can afford that.
No comments:
Post a Comment