This Zolabyte is actually taken from an intervention by someone in a facebook thread discussing Anne Fenech’s reply to Minister Zammit Lewis’ allegations about her consultancy contracts with the government in the past. The discussion had veered out of point with people discussing whether Anne Fenech was right in opposing the citizenship program and law while working in a law firm where lawyers offered services under that law. Some observers claimed that Fenech had some cheek taking the “moral high ground” with Zammit Lewis. I was not impressed by this confusion of facts and opinions. The guest blogger intervened in the thread with this comment that I am reproducing with the commenter’s permission.
I find talk of moral high ground laughable in this context for a myriad of reasons:
1. It has sod all to do with the discussion at issue – I guess our dear Minister has forgotten that notwithstanding his role as a politician and his immunity in parliament, his utterances should bear some remote semblance to reality and less to slander;
2. Ann Fenech is a partner in the law firm she works in, she is in fact managing partner of that law firm. Any of you who have actually sampled life in a law firm which is made up of more than just a combo of father, son, daughter, uncle will realise that even as managing partner she is not in a position to influence unduly decisions of the firm, including the fields through which the firm generates revenue – it is a collective decision where she does not have a majority vote;
3. By her firm peddling assistance for citizenship she is assisting in relation to law … Not the subversion of a law. She fought that law before it became law. Now members of her law firm are providing services relating to that law. Now we’ll be talking about that lady in America refusing to issue a marriage licence to a gay couple … All for the sake of the moral high ground. This is a firm decision, it’s legal and its business. Grow up.
4. We now bring up the moral high ground every time Ann Fenech makes a statement. I see zero utterances about moral high ground when the current government calls the opposition “distruttiva”. The hypocrisy of that makes me gag. I recall all the constructive criticism PL indulged in while in opposition. Let’s start with the constructive criticism on EU membership shall we? And the moral high ground taken by this government with each application for EU funds or when our ministers and especially our Prime Minister smile gleefully at their own self-importance when they line up for photo ops in front of buildings they advocated against a decade ago. Oh the moral high ground there is so elevated I’m getting altitude sickness … Again … A certain amount of ageing (I’m trying to be polite here) is required.
If you don’t like the woman say so. I am not a particular fan. She is good at her profession (lawyering not politics) and she works a room in a manner most of us secretly admire but that smacks of being fake. In many ways she makes a pretty decent politician. But enough of the moral high ground bullshit. There’s plenty about her to criticise without indulging in those fallacies.
*****
Zolabytes is a rubrique on J’accuse – the name is a nod to the original J’accuser (Emile Zola) and a building block of the digital age (byte). Zolabytes is intended to be a collection of guest contributions in the spirit of discussion that has been promoted by J’accuse on the online Maltese political scene for 10 years.
Opinions expressed in zolabyte contributions are those of the author in question. Opinions appearing on zolabytes do not necessarily reflect the editorial line of J’accuse the blog.
***
