The power that resists democratic change

Readers familiar with my writings would know that I often make the case that whilst the PL is a stand-alone political party, the PN is a political cell in a broad network of power.  Such network of power is spread across society, in business, in the media, in the Church, in the civil service, among the intelligentsia and wherever there is power that protects the rights of those who would much rather have an eternal PN government.

So when democracy shifts the political power from the PL to the PN there is total and absolute transfer of power in government and throughout society as those old enough witnessed in 1987.   The same could not happen in 1998 as in the less than two years of Dr Sant's Labour government  even political power largely remained intact in the PN's hands.

On the contrary when the democratic process shifts political power from the PN to the PL, it is only the political power that passes.   The rest of the power network is not affected by the political alternation.   And whilst the political network would act like a tailwind for the PN government, minimising its defects and magnifying its virtues,   it suddenly shifts to a headwind for a new PL government minimising its virtues and magnifying its defects or even inventing them even where none exists.

These past couple of days we had  a living example of such reality.  The NAO report about shenanigans in the Oil Procurement system within Enemalta between 2008 and 2011 cost taxpayers millions of euro and nobody claims responsibility.   The PN issued a pitiful statement  that the shortcomings were corrected in 2011 and those at fault were exposed and brought to justice in 2013.

Once they corrected the system in 2011 they must have known of the shenanigans and the PN should therefore explain why they waited until the media exposed the scandal in the election campaign of 2013 when their hands were forced to appear to be taking action.

Now compare that to the case of Minister Cardona who overruled the recommendations by a Unit within his Ministry for award of a rather small legal consultancy contract which is normally given by direct order in view of its relatively small size.   There is an evident ludicrous attempt to blow up this case to big scandal proportions even though the Minister had every right to reject the selection methodology proposed by the Unit concerned which neglected all qualitative aspects and instead used his discretion to include qualitative aspects in the adjudication. 

The two cases are incomparable in terms of their gravity and size.   Yet while the Enemalta scandal was basically buried by the media as soon as it saw the light, the case of Minister Cardona is being blown up to make a scandal where absolutely none has been proven.   

With elections only the political power passes.  The rest stays where it was resisting the democratic change that the people voted for.