Author: Jacques René Zammit

Categories
Politics Uncategorized

I.M. Jack : An embarrassment to democracy

In this latest round up of commentaries on recent events J’accuse takes a look at a number of issues that have been hot in the past week. Unfortunately due to other commitments posting on this blog has not been as regular as I would have hoped. Here then is a look at why J’accuse finds that this Labour government is becoming more and more of an embarrassment to democracy. Let’s see a few of the last weeks’ events:

I. Doublespeak

Once again I join other observers who have by now noticed that in dealing with the press and media this government opts for half-truths or prevarication.

Joseph Muscat’s replies about Air Malta’s restructuring – a boomerang deviated onto Tonio Fenech’s lap in what Muscat believes to be a sly move – is just one example of our government still thinking in opposition mode. In this case we have a clear indicator that this Labour government is either unaware of, or unwilling to take on, the Responsibilities of Government (my capitals). So what if Tonio Fenech or whoever else had appointed a team for Air Malta’s restructuring? Is it not the responsibility of this government to look into the plans and see whether (a) it agrees with them and therefore gives them its go-ahead, or (b) any of these plans need re-directing in the sense of vision and goals.

Muscat prefers to play the three monkeys with the whole business – this is a typical corollary of his behaviour when in opposition. It clearly demonstrates that he has no clue about alternatives (or as he would call them “roadmaps”) and so prefers to keep the opposition-hat on just in case the restructuring is a failure: in which case he will obviously blame the previous government. But that is not the business of government is it? The chain of responsibility necessitates a different type of answer – if, for example, Air Malta’s plans include a possibility of privatisation you’d expect the Prime Minister to know.

It’s not just Muscat. Manuel Mallia has chimed in with Muscat and introduced a new term in Maltese language “inveritiera“. What’s that exactly? Are they trying to be politically correct about the word “lie”? Mallia’s remit is quite the mess right now and the performance of the (outgoing) Brigadier in an interview about his resignation and future left much to be desired. Another one having difficultes coping with double speak is Konrad Mizzi. The way he screened the questions from journalists about his wife’s appointment is absolute balderdash. The hot potato is thrown here and there while nobody (NOBODY) in the Labour government assumes responsibility.

If this were not the party that had busted everyone’s balls whinging about political responsibility when it was in opposition we’d not be so interested in this so very sudden volte-face. 

II: Bad Company

The topic of the John Dalli and Shiv Nair appointments are being dealt with perfectly well on Daphne Caruana Galizia’s blog. There’s no denying that when the resources available to that blog are put to good news it can trump any amount of excuses for journalism that our decrepit excuse for a fourth estate has become. Glaringly Shiv Nair’s closeness to the Labour government (and his evident hand in deals from China to North Africa) goes directly against Joseph Muscat’s 15 points to combat corruption when in government. Nair’s wheeling and dealing may be convenient for the likes of the dupes that populate our government benches – at least they may SEEM like to have a plan – but in partnering with the devil to fulfil their hapless electoral promises they are only (slightly) postponing the inevitable implosion.

Whether one is black listed by the World Bank or whether his recent dealings raise huge question marks (from Bahamas to OLAF) the fact of the matter remains that this government has no qualms dealing with persons who cause many an eyebrow to be raised. Worse still is the unshamefaced approach with which such cavorting takes place – and the replies that are given in response to any questions are preposterously bereft of any semblance of accountability.

It is becoming tougher and tougher for this government to speak of any form of accountability. Take Anton Refalo who still got away with his incredible declaration of assets. His performance in the Gozo channel Call-Back Saga would suffice to get him the boot in any other government worth its name. Not this one of course. (The Sunday Times is the latest to call for his resignation). At no point will these matters be tackled – no sir – as there is always a scapegoat reply (such as look at what the others did). Anton Refalo is also responsible for retaining the services of the disgraced Joseph Grech who has now been found suspiciously wanting in another scandal relating to the fraudulent use of funds by the Gozo Action Group.

It never ends does it? Varist blames “people working behind his back” for the stipend flop this week (remember the calls for Giovanna Debono’s head when some funds were lost thanks to hopeless action by people under her responsibility?). Bad company and a shameless approach to accountability : the assault on democratic representation is not about to begin … it is in full swing.

III. Neutralising Simon

There was another farce in parliament. With Joseph Muscat choosing to use (abuse?) of his parliamentary privilege to shut Simon Busuttil up. Busuttil’s line of questioning fits in clearly with the notion of responsibility and in any case parliament is not about concrete proof. The merest suspicion can be voiced in parliament and it is up to the MP voicing it to bear the consequences – should he lie then it is his credibility as a politician that is at stake. Muscat chose to refer to his speaker who came up with a magnificent interpretation that made a mess of the whole history of parliamentary privilege (that dates back to the mid 1500s).

We have a Prime Minister that is unable to face truths, deviously slips out of uncomfortable situations and who prefers to grandstand on the international stage while secretly hoping that his investment in a band of shady characters might help him pull off the greatest escape ever. Joseph Muscat and his party spent opposition signing cheques that would obviously bounce. The great unwashed loved his parading and swallowed his populistic approach to the hilt. Once in government the free for all in appointments was soon to be followed by an incredible demonstration of ineptness. It would not be so bad if the long term effect would not be the complete and utter erosion of our institutions.

The Malta Labour Party’s Taghna Lkoll has managed to prove that it is what we suspected all along: Small ideas for small people.

“What the medicine is to disease, the law is to public affairs” – Justinian.

Categories
Arts

Move back

Dedikata lit-tlett mitt ruħ li tilfu ħajjithom qrib Lampedusa, fejn il-Gżira tal-Fniek. 

“Move back”, serra snienu
Idejh imdawra ggranfati ma’ l-istering.

Ħsibijietu,

bejn it-traffiku infern quddiemu
taħt sema’ jnixxi ilmijiet
li lanqas Noe ma qatt ra bħalhom,
id-dlam li jagħma kesa l-ajru
u t-tpaqpiq inċessanti tat-traffiku
mat-tpeċlieq reddieni tal-passiġġiera
dieħel itambar ġewwa rasu

Għajnejh,

jilmħu fil-mera mżejna rużarji
wiċċ ix-xjaten suwed emmissarji
mibgħuta jitturufnawh fil-wied ta’ rwieh mitlufa
u ma jiflaħx iktar

“Move back, ħaqqalla” (għax id-dagħa huwa obbligu)
“Or go back to your country”

♦

“It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee”
Bir-road map quddiemu jiddandan daqs pagun

Ħsibijietu,

mgħarrqa taħt wiegħdiet u illużjoni
imbandla f’baħar ċekkijiet li qatt ma se jissarfu
miżgħuda bil-piż ta’ responsabilità li qatt ma basar
mejtin għal kapru espijatorju
għal Ażażel baħri tal-bnazzi

Ħalqu,

jitgħawweġ u jitkemmex fit-truf
bejn tbissima għax ġietu tajba
u oħra qarsa tal-verità mhix magħrufa
għax jafha hu biss
filwaqt li jbellgħa t-togħma tar-rebħa
għax bi kliemu jġib l-ilma jiżfen

“Push back” intranżiġenti
Pero tinkwetawx.. nieħdu ħsieb nisa u tfal

♦

“Waan ku jecelahay” qaltlu bid-dmugħ nieżel ma’ ħaddejha
…”jiena nħobbok”

Ħsibijietha,

marru f’art twelidhom,
fl-infern li ħallew warajhom
fit-tama ta’ bidu ġdid,
marru fl-ewwel darba li ratu
dik it-tbissima dawl f’deżert ta’ dieqa
dik il-ħarsa torri f’nofs armata ħażen u biża’,
marru f’jum żwieġhom
f’jum twelid binhom
fi vjaġġi tul deżerti u fost kriminali

Għajnejha,

lemħu ġisem żewġha,
l-aħħar qtar ta’ ħajtu jnixxi minn ġo fih
bħaldonnu mgħaġġla jeħilsu minn saħtet l-art,
lemħu t-tarbija tolfoq dmugħ
u raw lil Karonti jgħajjat xi ordni
(li widnejha la semgħu u lanqas kienu jifhmu)

U lemħu dawl blu jpetpet
raw l-anġlu joħroġ idu u jerfa’ lilha u lil binha
raw il-kutra tgħattiha

u reħiet għal mument id-destin tagħha f’idejn ħaddieħor

“Waan ku jecelaway” qaltlu bid-dmugħ nieżel ma’ ħaddejha
…. inħobbok.

 

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Where’s the plague when you need it?

It’s become too much of a cliché for people like us to yell “A plague on both your houses” at the PLPN and all they represent. The first line of defence is always that your repetition of the PLPN mantra is an obsession. Hand on heart however, how many can sincerely say that this is not the era of the proverbial fecal matter hitting the rotating device. We’re knee deep in doo-doo and the rot is only obscured from the man-in-the-street’s eyes because he is high on a double dose of “Taghna Lkoll” pills and post-trouncing of the nasty PN euphoria.

Here at J’accuse I should be popping champagne bottles and rejoicing that our warnings of a dire future that would be caused by this obsession with a race to mediocrity have been (are in still in the process of being) proven right. Naysayers will chime in with that ever so wonderful chorus – “Sure but we had not alternative other than to vote in more of the same”. Right. It’s not like observations such as those that often were to be found in the posts on this blog were only directed at the creation of a credible third alternative. No, they were and are also directed at the fact that as a nation of supposed discerning voters we stop enabling the farce and the circus that are the Nationalist and Labour parties.

What did we do instead? We immersed ourselves in this delectable Maltese version of the war of the roses and threw all caution to the wind. Seven months of Labour and what do we have as a result? In your face appointments that defy reason, unshamefaced cavorting with people of questionable history and the selling out of the nation as an outpost to (parts of) the Chinese behemoth. Elsewhere these ugly warts of Labour’s je ne sais quoi are being dutifully exposed. Well done and more – though it took some people quite some time to notice that the Chinese deal is all about the PV market (Liang Mizzi’s appointment being only yet another unpleasant spin-off of the “già che ci siamo“) kind. Focusing just on one minister – take Anton “Minimum Wage” Refalo as a random example … opens up a pandora’s box of no nos that only serve to demonstrate Labour’s inability to conceive of what democratic representation and the rule of law is about.

Meanwhile Joseph Muscat has turned into photo-op PM hoofing around the world trying to get his not so attractive mug in as many photo shoots as possible. When he is not giving lessons to the United Nations as to how to notice that the REAL sufferers in world immigration are the Maltese he is teaching the United States the secrets of Malta’s economic success (So we are successful now?) to FOX news journalists. Back home his cabinet is engaged in a free for all that makes a herd of pigs battling at a trough look like a silver service  dinner at the Ritz.

The opposition is lost in its own thoughts but is increasingly sending out signals that all is not too well and settled in its house. This blog has already voiced its opinion as to what the early steps in the rebuilding of the PN should be so we will not go there again. As far as we concerned the real measure of the EU Parliament campaign for the PN will not be so much how well it fares vote wise but really how much of the old strategies (read vote driven) still survive. Will the candidates be chosen purely on their propensity to attract votes and their marketability (are we still in DJ’s and popular faces mode?) or will their be a block of political thinkers being pushed? I suspect the temptation to go along with the old fashioned “motley crew” is still very much what the PN is about. Tant pis. It will be a missed chance to inject real quality.

So yes, we are left with wishing a plague upon both their houses. There will not be of course and the population is entitled to dream that everything is fine and dandy for a while longer. That is until the sums are made and the result is not very much to their liking. Pleasures yet to come.

 

In un paese pieno di coglioni, ci mancano le palle. 

Categories
Mediawatch

Di che pasta sei fatto?

It appears now that Dario Fo has waded into the fold à proposi the raging controversy provoked by the comments of Barilla Chief Guido Barilla about the place of homosexuals in his company’s advertisements. Interviewed on a radio and asked whether the famous Barilla adverts could be “improved” by including reference to homosexual couples Barilla had categorically stated that there was no place for homosexuals in his company’s advertising.

Here is what Barilla had to say to La Zanzara (the programme where the interview took place):

La nostra è una famiglia classica dove la donna ha un ruolo fondamentale. Noi abbiamo un concetto differente rispetto alla famiglia gay. Per noi il concetto di famiglia sacrale rimane un valore fondamentale dell’azienda. (Ours is a classic family in which the woman plays a fundamental role. We have a different concept to that of a gay family. For us the concept of the “sacred” family remains a fundamental value for the company).

My first reaction was very much in the line of shock. Such words are the kind of words that should not be uttered because they reinforce certain attitudes and mentalities that are downright discriminatory. Yes, I too was affected by the initial shock value that was very obviously what the Zanzara interviewer wanted to obtain.

A few breaths and organisings of thoughts later though the source of my anger had shifted dramatically. This was after all an assault on a private entrepreneur’s right to advertise and sell his or her product as he best deems fit. Barilla have over the years built a type of advertising timbre based around the concept of the family. It’s a utopic ideal of a family – recognised by Italian sociologists as the “Mulino Bianco” Family. Mulino Bianco is in fact a trademark created to distinguish Barilla’s pasta from the non-pasta range of products. The idea of the Mulino Bianco Family was born in the early ’90s:

Agli inizi degli anni novanta la strategia comunicativa dell’azienda cambiò puntando sul “ritorno in campagna”. Nell’episodio iniziale del 1990 della Famiglia del Mulino, una famiglia media italiana, il padre Federico giornalista, la madre Giulia insegnante elementare, i due figli Andrea e Linda e il nonno, esprimono il desiderio di vivere nel verde e si trasferiscono in campagna. Sullo sfondo del mulino di Chiusdino, vennero ambientati una serie di episodi di vita quotidiana della famiglia. La Famiglia del Mulino assurse ben presto lo stereotipo della “famiglia perfetta” inserita in un luogo fiabesco. La pubblicità della Famiglia del Mulino andò avanti per tutta la prima metà degli anni Novanta.

In his open letter to Guido Barilla, nobel laureate Dario Fo is appealing to the company owner to “improve” the ads and catch up with the signs of times – reflect new attitudes to society and family. All well and good. It is a choice Barilla has and can make if it likes. Yet it is a choice. It cannot and should not be bullied into making it. Other companies like Ikea (and apparently now pasta rival Buitoni) will have hooked onto the possibility of attracting clients from other segments of the market (though I find it hard to see that a specialist “pasta-eating homosexual” consumer market existed before this fuss was kicked up and a boycott encouraged).

Guido Barilla may have committed a commercial hara kiri by stating that “gays can shop elsewhere” and he will have to pay the consequences for that. His opinions apart though one cannot but take stock of the collective bullying of one company simply because it opts not to include a new stereotype in its vision for selling its products. Had Barilla simply stated “We are happy enough with our advertising as it is thank you very much” would that have still provoked the ire of the internet? I’d like to think not.

The absurdity lies in the question originally put to Guido Barilla. Why the hell should I want to influence (or rather impose) a company as to how it advertises its products? What is all this rubbish about political correctness or (worse) being so easily offended. I do not see much of a difference between a muslim mother asking for a cross to be removed in a school and a gay lobby group insisting on Barilla having a gay-friendly advert. Where do we stop? Should I as a gluten-intolerant coeliac feel offended unless Barilla inserts a cameo role for the sad man at the table who is obliged to pass on the delicious looking plate of spaghetti pummarola because “Hey! I’m intolerant” (sad face and all?).

Just because the likes of Ikea think it is trendy to promote their products with new commercials thought up to be more gay friendly does not mean that other companies are obliged to follow suit. This is a huge fuss being kicked up for nothing (or at least for the not-so-carefully chosen words by Guido Barilla).

Just eat your bloody pasta e non scassate i coglioni.

 

Categories
Mediawatch

I know nothing

“I know nothing” can be quite an intelligent motto to carry around – particularly if it is as an expression of the Socratic paradox (scio me nescire). An appreciation of the limits of one’s knowledge is an important tool to carry about in life. Ignorance of the kind that is basically the mere absence of knowledge is a tool badly wielded. I am not sure whether feigned ignorance is any better either. At the end of the day “I know nothing” outside the comfort zone of the aforementioned Socratic paradox becomes a sort of Manuel-ish expression. Manuel as in the waiter from Barcelona.

Minister Chris Cardona and I were course colleagues and I would hate for him to fall under the category of ignorant advocates that our beloved faculty and university seem all too ready to produce nowadays. My worry is quite egoistic I admit though I am sure that Cardona’s latest flurry of denials of knowledge (a polite way of saying “proclamations of ignorance”) is probably based on the stressful nature of his post and the undeniably hard time he must be having catching up with all things commercial – what with his ever so unsuitable qualification as a lawyer.

So here he was faced by a Times’ journalist and posed with the question of whether something was not amiss with Malta Enterprise’s direct appointment of the wife of Energy Minister Mizzi to some post as an envoy for procurement of business from the Far East. Our modern day Lord MacCartney is none other than Sai Mizzi Liang the Chinese born wife of Minister Mizzi. Chris Cardona decided to faff through different phases that bordered between justification and denial:

1) I had no idea : “Don’t ask me I don’t know” was the gist, just before he proceeded to assume that ME (Malta Enterprise) needed a specialised person, that the recruitment system works in that manner and that ME picked out the person that best fitted what they deemed they needed.

2) How I think it should be done : Next Cardona gave us a lesson in opinion or “how I think it should be done”. Certain appointments should be made on the need that you have, he explains. Righto Mr. Minister but that is not legal is it? As in, it’s not why we have laws? Appointing people on the need that you feel you have is what, for want of a better word, an autocrat or a despot can do. For us mere democrats there’s boards and exams and calls for applications.

3) It’s always been like this : Inevitably this one had to be slipped in. Those nasty nationalists were apparently (or allegedly since Cardona was on a roll of assumptions there) doing the same thing in the past (really? How many Minister’s wives were appointed as envoys anywhere?). Far be it from me to look into evidence of the murky nationalist past – I don’t need to anyway. Aren’t we supposed to have a transparent and meritocratic government? Isn’t this the change they voted for? What rubbish.

4) The appointment was done in good faith: When facts fail you head for religion. We are to take the Minister’s word on the fact that he trusts that whoever made the appointment made it in good faith. Of course we do Chris. Somehow though I have a feeling it should not be working like that. Especially not with the loads a bull your government fed the people about meritocracy.

5) She is specialised: And then came the best part. Pressed for more answers by the journalist, Cardona had to answer the rather irritating question “But what is Sai Mizzi Liang specialised in?”. He starts off with a bit of mumbling about the fact that she is specialised in the “negozju” (commerce) of these nations but then cuts off suddenly and concludes: “She’s from there, she has a natural knowledge base”. So it is ignorance. Of the craziest kind. Still, you couldn’t expect anything less from a government flouting Vienna Convention rules in its appointment of diplomats. Ah the law… such a fickle thing.

To conclude I present you with a useless bit of our constitution that will soon (probably) fall redundant and be replaced by a new article entitled “On Appointment by Hunch, Good Faith and Nationality”. Enjoy it while it lasts. Ignorantia legis neminem excusat. (Subarticle 6 is particularly juicy).

 

Article 110 of the Constitution of Malta

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, power to make appointments to public offices and to remove and to exercise disciplinary control over persons holding or acting in any such offices shall vest in the Prime Minister, acting on therecommendation of the Public Service Commission:

Provided that the Prime Minister may, acting on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission, delegate in writing, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the instrument of delegation, any of the powers referred to in this sub-article to such public officer or other authority as may be specified in that instrument.

(2) A delegation of a power under this article –

(a) shall be without prejudice to the exercise of that power by the Prime Minister acting on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission;

(b) may authorise the public officer or other authority concerned to exercise that power either with or without reference to the Public Service Commission; and

(c) in respect of recruitment to public offices from outside the public service, shall, unless such recruitment is made after a public examination advertised in the Gazette, be exercised only through an employment service provided out of public funds which ensures that no distinction, exclusion or preference is made or given in favour or against any person by reason of his political opinion and which provides opportunity for employment solely in the best interests of the public service and of the nation generally.

(…)

(6) Recruitment for employment with any body established by the Constitution or by or under any other law, or with any partnership or other body in which the Government of Malta, or any such body as aforesaid, have a controlling interest or over which they have effective control, shall, unless such recruitment is made after a public examination duly advertised, be made through an employment service as provided in sub-article (2) of this article.

Categories
Politics

Broken Bad the second

“We may be broke but we are not broken”. I may be paraphrasing Beppe Fenech Adami a little here but that was the thrust of his address on the granaries last night. Well, that’s too bad Beppe because I’ve chosen the title for this little series about the PN quandaries and it’s there to stay. Obviously I do believe that the party is pretty broken besides being broke and I will not deny that the not so subtle reference to one of the greatest series ever written for TV made the choice of this title much much simpler.

Having got that off my chest let me now turn to the PN Leader’s speech last night. Simon Busuttil switched away from reminding us how Joseph Muscat has lost his map and for one night seems to have focused on his own house that needs setting in order. This is the right time of course in which the PN can engage in a little introspection and the granaries is the right forum for such introspection to be given the seal of approval. Busuttil told the crowd that the PN has always had vision and has had vision for 49 years and he added that the PN still has vision now. But does it?

Some readers will hopefully forgive me for another reference to Guy Ritchie’s movies but all that talk about vision reminded me of a Vinnie Jones speech in Snatch – he had an idea about what exactly it is that has drive and clarity of vision, he was not too impressed about its cleverness though. The thing is I have an aversion to party conference/mass meeting/staged event rhetoric and that aversion is deeply rooted in the fact that most times the basic building block of such rhetoric is good old bull. The point about having vision is not that you talk about it but that you act upon it. You see Simon, to people like me your talk about having vision is not very different from Joseph Muscat’s talk about having a road map.

Six months have passed since the ignominious thrashing at the polls for the PN. During those six months it was supposed to go through the inevitable “sackcloth” moment that involves a diet of humble pie and much (very much) introspection. During those six months we did not expect the PN to renege on its constitutional responsibility to act as an opposition and guardian. The latter work comes as second nature of course but its importance should never be underestimated – the opposition has a very important role to play within our constitutional structure and an important part of that task is keeping the government in check when it comes to seeing whether it is delivering what it promised.

But that’s not what the “vision” bit is about. The vision bit is directly linked to what I spoke about in the first part of this series. The PN is supposed to be asking itself what kind of party it wants to be. In a way it needs to be reinventing itself to a certain extent – particularly if it does not want to fall into the same ruts of the past. It is encouraging (very) to see Simon Busuttil distinguishing between the politics of salesmanship and the real politics of values. What is not really credible is the assertion that the PN has already found its vision. Really?

Unless this vision has been cloned from some outside source there have been little clues to show that the PN is reforming its forma mentis and that it has developed a new basic building block upon which to build a real plan that can be pitched to the voters eventually. Nobody is expecting the PN to come up with an electoral manifesto as of yesterday and to be honest we would even be prepared to wait a little longer than six months given the structural deficiencies (administratively speaking) within which such intellectual revival needs to take place. In the meantime though I would dare suggest that the PN undertakes an exercise of intellectual honesty with its closest members as well as with the more discerning of voters.

“We have worn the sackcloth, we repent, we recognise where we need to go and we are beginning to work to get there” would have been a splendid start. Throw in an appeal for involvement that does not smack of a recruitment campaign for billboards and yes-men (and women) and you might just be on the right track.

Returning the nationalist party to the value-driven movement that is built on the value of the human being and his potential does not have to be a step back. It can be a step forward (as they like to say). It will take a bit of discipline to ignore the instincts and bad habits that have developed over the past.

It will mean that they don’t need to bother much about a few misplaced boos here and there.

Sticks and stones.