Category: Articles

Categories
Articles

Seize the moment

This article first appeared on The Shift News on 10.12.2019.

Sunday afternoon turned out to be quite surreal. As the sun began to set on The Eternal City, I stood at the top of the Spanish steps looking down on a huge crowd of people gathered to follow the Pope’s Immacolata procession.

At that precise moment, some 650km away (as the ravenflies) another crowd was beginning to assemble. Unlike the papal crowd, the crowd at Castille Square was calling for justice and accountability. They wanted the man who obstinately clings to the seat of power to let go immediately.

Only the previous day, that man had brazenly been to visit the Pope. Undoubtedly, this was part of his ‘business as usual’ charade: the same charade that would continue on Sunday with his ‘farewell tour’ surrounded by those after his sullied throne.

Since the precipitation of events (to put it mildly) drew Castille’s occupants into circle upon circle of Dantesque damnation, the government’s effort to ‘minimise the fuss’ has multiplied. There has yet to be responsibility assumed for the mess.

Sure, we have seen resignations. They are not the kind of submission to authority that you would expect, though. Rather, those resigning are fêted as heroes. Chiefs of Staff “move on“, Ministers reaffirm their dedication to the cause and the project — and we must be the only country where a Prime Minister mired in corruption and abuse of power is on the road to beatification.

The way the government and backbenchers have rallied behind Muscat can only be described as the thickness of thieves. Each day of denial rendered every one of them complicit in the institutional abuse and cover-up.

Yet, the growing wave of discontent is now clear for all to see. Beyond the Potemkin village meetings that Muscat and friends can orchestrate among the flag-waving diehards lies a brave new world that is gathering momentum and courage. It is a disparate agglomeration of individuals still in search of a leading voice.

Theirs has been an uphill struggle. First came the ‘early adopters’ who, from the start, realised that something was rotten in the state of Denmark.

Then came the angry crowd who had understood that this was not a government for the people by the people, and they had a reason to complain that it was not right.

Last came the doubting Thomas’ who could only be swayed with the ever so deceptive ‘proof’. For the first time in the history of this young nation, a political movement of strange bedfellows was born out of the realisation that the Old Republic was no longer a servant of the people.

Yes, as part of the learning curve in civil action, at every step we had to stress that this was not a political movement (political with a small p as in ‘partisan’). Yes, we had to overcome the mutual diffidence and suspicions of underlying agendas. The remarkable nature of the moment lies in the fact that the overwhelming consensus within the movement of change is that change must come without the political (with a small p) parties. It must happen despite them.

We are a few steps away from understanding that this could be a defining moment constitutionally for our republic. At this stage, the eyes of people from different ideological backgrounds are open. They understand (for different reasons) that our Constitution, and hence our State, is paralysed by conflicting interests.

For some, it is ‘the businessmen’. For others, it is the parties that abuse their power. For others still, it is the lack of certainty. The next step is for all the forces contributing to this wave of anger at the establishment that has let us down to accept that it is the whole system that needs a reboot – beyond the different ideologies.

Prepare the ground for a constitutional reform within which the different ideologies and projects for the country’s future may find fertile ground to debate and grow. A project that returns politics to the normal, boring politics — but one with a capital ‘P’.

Those who expect this change to come from within one of our stagnant parties have still not read the writing on the wall. They will try to operate within the same constitutional constraints that the parties have abused since the birth of the republic.

The latest surveys show that the Labour Party still leads the PN at the polls, but it has not gained in popularity. Rather, it seems to be losing support. The PN has practically not budged in a situation where it should have been benefiting from the anger as the Party in opposition. I do not read these signs negatively. The loss of the two-Party support is our nation’s gain.

The country needs real leaders. Individuals who can guide this movement through this bumpy phase. It must not, and will not, stop at justice for the corrupt. It must also proceed to lay the foundations for the new republic.

Seize the moment.

Categories
Articles

Whispering a revolution

This article first appeared on the Shift news.

In May 2017 I co-founded a group called the Advocates for the Rule of Law. We took out a full-page advert on The Times of Malta in which we announced vacancies for the proper functioning of democracy. That was the beginning of a brief campaign in which we raised the alarm that the backsliding of the Rule of Law in Malta had taken a fast turn.

The Rule of Law as a concept is hard to sell. Harder still when all the signs of backsliding are happening at a time when the nation is buoyed by a false sense of confidence, itself boosted by the income from questionable economic policies.

It is even harder when you factor in the tribal rivalries, antipathies and mutual mistrust that pervade the socio-political scene. Attribution of ulterior motive to any criticism is just one aspect of the strong counter-information propaganda machines.

Sadly, we did not manage to get our message across. The majority opted to confirm the status quo. The scenes of hundreds of government supporters celebrating on the doorsteps of Pilatus Bank right after the election results were symbolic of the failure to get the people to understand what the backsliding of the rule of law was about.

You cannot start a revolution so long as the main victims of the status quo remain oblivious to its consequences. All change begins with grievances that are first thought in silence (and fear) and then whispered gradually in the streets and in the markets.

So long as these grievances are not felt, all explanations concerning backsliding remain technical. So long as the overwhelming partisan sentiment is exploited in an ‘Us vs Them’ rhetoric then discussions on the need for change remain technical.

The rotten State

The ulcer grew into a tumour at an astounding rate, despite the blatant unmeritocratic nominations to ‘positions of trust’ and despite the increasing suspicion in major deals on hospitals, the power station, and property transactions contracted without any effort of accountability and transparency.

It got worse despite the increasing amount of information patiently collected by the part of the Fourth Estate that still functions – those journalists and investigators picking up where the captured authorities failed. It got worse despite the brutal assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

The alarm bells remained silent.

A culture of fear had been instilled in a segment of the population – fear from retribution. Where there was no fear there was confusion. The official opposition was in tatters – it, too, a victim of institutional capture.

This is not a partisan call. It is a call across society to win back what is ours

The heritage that the PN carries is one of perennially closing an eye to the warning signs that the system off which it feeds is sick and damaging the nation. Even the most rebellious elements within the PN still fail to understand that the change needed includes a ‘partisan-ectomy – the PN itself must ‘die’.

The last years of institutional erosion have been characterised by a weak system finally submitting to the ultimate abuse. The Executive, Parliament and the Judiciary became the playground for an all-out assault on democratic functionality.

All the while, the last vestiges of possible watchdog activity were being silenced – first clumsily with a flurry of libel activity then brutally with a brutal assassination.

The law courts became the battleground where fake news and propaganda met institutional inadequacy. The police force and all other investigators were effectively neutered by heightened political intervention. Long-drawn libel suits extended a lifeline of superficial credibility to government positions. We are only now seeing the futility of the exercise as suit after suit is dropped.

The penny began to drop.

Magisterial inquiries are bandied about in a protracted game of inconclusiveness. Muscat’s government has not had one clear judgment in its favour – only a series of dropped libel cases, stalled inquiries and unpublished results.

We have only just begun to scratch the surface of the Vitals deal, the Electrogas deal, the Panama Papers data (including the slippery eel that is Egrant) and more, much more. Every public contract needs to be scrutinised – yet with institutional meltdown, this becomes an impossible task. Or not.

‘Talkin’ bout a revolution’

This brings me back to the whispers on the streets. The streets are where change can begin to happen. The same streets that voted in huge numbers in 2013 to bring about a change for the better against what was finally perceived as a rotting administration.

The same streets are slowly waking up to the dark reality that they have been lied to. That the ‘Best of Times’ is a lie. The message that we tried to relay three years ago is now writing itself.

Fulfilling Tracy Chapman’s words, the whispers of revolution are out on the street. There is only so far that people can accept to be deceived. It is the people who must now take the lead – demand what is theirs. This is not a partisan call. It is a call across society to win back what is ours.

The divide is between those who have the nation at heart and those who are tied to the slippery race for power and money

No amount of technical explanation will be better than the real tangible experiences of life. As Immanuel Mifsud puts it in L-Aqwa Zmien (my translation):

“When the last echoes of a politician’s emotional speech dwindle into nothing; when the marathon programmes close; when the last ever-rising graph stops and the financial expert has the last smile… somewhere, someone will be closing the garage door to fall asleep; someone will have to leave his home; someone else begins to be abused; and there will be someone who is losing his life uselessly.” .

Last week’s peaceful protests in Valletta were another step in this struggle. Parliamentarians of goodwill, who hold the interest of the people at heart, would do well to follow this call. There are no longer any Nationalist or Labour politicians – the divide is between those who have the nation at heart and those who are tied to the slippery race for power and money.

Categories
Articles Rule of Law

Seeing justice done

This article appeared in today’s Sunday Times of Malta. 

In her Republic Day address, President Coleiro Preca stated that she believes “that the rule of law is as strong as the people acknowledge it to be, as much as they believe in it, cherish it, and continue to support it.” In her reference to the concept of “belief”, the President might have unintentionally struck an important chord that plays through the ongoing debate where the “rule of law” is concerned.

Seeing, in this period of Post-Truth Politics, is believing – even when what we see is a staged performance that is intended to reassure the emotional side of our thinking brains while at the same time numbing any rational reaction thereto. The phenomenon has been pigeonholed using various metaphors: the emperor’s clothes and Magritte’s pipe (ceci n’est pas une pipe) come to mind right now. Whole generations (particularly the baby-boomers) prize emotional sincerity over “the starchy pursuit of objective truth”.

Truth has been relegated to a relative importance in the list of priorities. It has to compete with the panoply of emotional expressions that have moved up on the popular agenda. The lack of forensic analysis, when people stop questioning the facts, has also meant that society has less time for ‘experts’. There is no trust in them. The Brexit and Trump phenomena followed on the heels of the financial crisis of 2008 when trust ratings in experts plummeted.

The collapse of trust is dangerous. As Matthew d’Ancona (who I rely upon quite liberally in this article) states “… all successful societies rely upon a relatively high degree of honesty to preserve order, uphold the law, hold the powerful to account and generate prosperity”.

Without the real value of truth our gauge of what the people appreciate shifts dramatically. Law, the rule of law, is not about faith. The very concept of a working system under the rule of law is not designed to work depending on the number of believers in the system. There is a word for a system based on belief: Religion. The rule of law is not about faith. Nor is it about hope – hope that justice is done. The danger of misinterpreting the phrase “seeing that justice is done” is based on the simple fact that it is part of a larger whole.

Fearne brought up ‘the rule of law’ often and it was like the devil quoting scriptures

The full phrase in fact is, “Not only must justice be done, it must be seen to be done”. Remove the first part – actually and linguistically – and you get an act of prestidigitation, where you are made to believe that something is there when it is not. Such a magic act requires a theatrical appeal to emotional intelligence of the highest kind: it not only requires that you believe but also that you suspend that belief and actually believe what you are being told that you should see.

“Seeing justice done” should in fact be the final act of a progression of events that include justice actually being meted out. In the past weeks we have seen the concept of the rule of law twisted and turned beyond recognition. The danger is that people begin to believe that what they see in action is the rule of law when actually it is the rule by law. In his Commentary on the Constitution Tonio Borg sets out the distinction clearly: “So the rule of law is a concept which gauges not just the number of laws enacted but their nature and direction. It is also a political concept so that something, which is clearly within the parameters of the law, may still go against the rule of law in spirit.”

Watching Chris Fearne squirm to Tim Sebastian’s questioning on the Conflict Zone (DeutscheWelle) was not pleasant. Fearne brought up “the rule of law” often and it was like the devil quoting scriptures. The Prime Minister appealing in court in order to stop inquiries, redacted contracts because commercial interests trump public interest, quoting laws in order to prevent sharing of information regarding passport buyers… that is just an aperitif.

We have naively called the new religion out as spin. It is not just spin. It is a dangerous belief system that is supplanting what should be a concrete system based on law and inspired by natural justice. Bringing three men before the courts of law for the heinious murder of a journalist can never be seen as the final curtain call that proves that all is well in the state of the Republic.

Believe me, it is not.

Jacques Zammit is a référendaire at the Court of Justice of the European Union and one of the founders of the Advocates for the Rule of Law. Opinions expressed in this article are strictly personal.

Categories
Articles

Closing Time

This is the last article in the J’accuse series on the Malta Independent on Sunday. I have decided to concentrate on J’accuse the blog and limit any print contributions to an ad hoc basis. Until the next print adventure… it’s been emotional. Don’t forget to subscribe to J’accuse and receive updates by mail. Use the box below the video clip to the left of your screen. (Accuse Me!) 

Interesting times. 2012 has begun very much in the way 2011 ended: with the fireworks, the ominous cloud of crisis(es) and a general holding of breath for what is to come. Metaphorically we are still holding our breath and I am not just referring to the election-no-election saga but to the world of wider affairs and economic crises. Malta – the civilisation of 400,000 people at the centre of the known universe – kicked off the year with a horrible double-murder and then shifted its attention to one man who holds the fate of our political history for the short-term, foreseeable future.

I have often referred to the Chinese curse that goes “May you live in interesting times” that is based on the assumption that interesting times would involve war, blood and danger. Well insofar as insular politics are concerned it does not get more interesting than this. The survival instincts of every politician on the island are piqued at this moment – raring to plunge into another battle of passionate electoral proportions and no amount of Standard & Poor degrading will deviate their attention from the ultimate Holy Grail of a parliamentary seat.

Ah yes. We’ve been downgraded. The fact that Malta’s rating now has less A’s than Franco Debono’s school reports has a lot to do with the fact that this country forms part of an elite group of members of the eurozone who are also intimately tied with saving packages and funds intended to soften the damage of any impending crises. S&P were not very positive about these plans and chose to clip the credit ratings of Malta – and France, and Italy, and Spain, and Austria (among others).

Lost in Translation
Well the Merkozy efforts to recreate a solid European Union economically speaking, the S&P rating reviews based on eurozone performance, the events happening beyond the Mediterranean’s navel…. they’re aeons away from reality. Once you land in the island of milk & honey it’s time warp time and all that noise is lost in translation. Joseph Muscat’s election team has a new buzzword… 1996’s Hofra is 2012’s Instability. Sure, economic instability is happening far, far away and trickles down to us in the form of) budget tweaking but we also have political instability don’t we?

Which brings me to the greatest show on earth after the big bang (pace Jovanotti). Franco Debono is a colleague of mine in more ways than one. I too am an Old Aloysian (a year younger than Franco’s) and I too am a law graduate (same class of ‘99). Don’t ask me for my school or university report. In the first instance I was busy being the Aloysian equivalent of Just William – splitting my time between detention room duties and crazy dares as to who would get the grade closest to zero in our spot tests. At university I preferred to concentrate on the extra-curricular buzz of student politics while getting just enough results to have a degree of sorts conferred on me. Experience has taught me that in both cases my time was well spent. Anyway, as Franco would probably never say, this is not about me.

Franco Debono
I had thought of using this last article of mine (see conclusion) to write an open letter to Franco. I would appeal to the sense of disciplined logic that our Jesuit education imparted upon us (Serio et Constanter) and to the sense of social justice that might have trickled into our system at philosophy of law lectures. I would have appealed for a sense of perspective that has long been lost in the heat of the events that are unfolding before us. I would have shown a sense of solidarity with Franco in so far as a number of the causes he claims to champion are concerned.

Yes Franco, there are a few among us who understand the compelling need for change. We understand the incremental amount of damage that the bipartisan system, rules and methods are causing to the development and maturity of our country. I have long claimed through my blog that the PLPN are a huge handicap to open competition, transparent exchange of ideas and to the emancipation from our insular mentality. Franco you might have come to the same conclusion from within the system.

Then something went wrong. You probably got caught up in the vortex of twisted checks and balances that the system kicks on when it’s very own survival is threatened. And you did not help either. I would not be the first one to criticise your methor. Was it panic? Was it an inability to prevent yourself from becoming another politician caught in the rut? Was it an impatience with the rules of the system that insist that everybody wait his turn? Whatever happened forced you to switch to becoming a nervous contradiction – drowning your original crusade in a storm of tantrums, nervous reactions and inconsistencies. That is the picture people have of you now – even those applauding you only do so because of the enormous window of opportunism (sic) that you have thrown wide open for them.

Franco, we share certain convictions about the changes needed in our political system. Yes, even some fundamental constitutional changes might require discussing and implementing. Our similarity stops there. I may salute you for what seemed like the early courage that you displayed when you challenged the establishment. What I cannot salute is the manner in which you seem intent on undoing your achievement noisily, nervously and with an inexplicable unabashed sense of self-aggrandisement. The principles that you originally claimed to espouse have been watered down by your need to constantly focus attention on yourself – forgetting the fundamental tenet of a politician’s guide: that he is there to serve and be judged.

What’s left unwritten
There, I would have written that and more. I would conclude appealing to Franco’s sense of justice that should be enough to tell him that forcing an election now is the most irrational and counterproductive act he could ever commit. An election needs parties with a program for the next difficult years ahead. Muscat’s labour is aeons away from any coherent plan beyond the all important “getting into power” bit. Gonzi’s PN is still learning it’s lessons from the errors committed in 2008 and that ironically rewarded it with an extended government by coalition. My bet is that my appeal would have been superfluous. By now it is clear to me that come Thursday Franco will abstain on Labour’s motion if only to extend his current nervous honeymoon with the dizzy heights of power.

That is why this is not an open letter to Franco. I have written more about this in J’accuse – www.akkuza.com – particularly the two posts entitled “That Constitutional Question” and “Windows of Opportunism”. More of course will be added to the blog and this is where I break a sad bit of news for you, the reader. In the coming weeks and months if you feel the need to see what the J’accuse take on things is you will only be able to do so on the blog.

Closing Time
Yes. This is the end of the J’accuse series of articles on the Malta Independent on Sunday. I have decided to concentrate on the blogging side and take my ideas and crazy writing back to the blog where they started. I probably miss writing the weekly column much more than you will miss reading it. In any case it has been a great ride and I would like to thank my fellow adventurer Bertu who has prepared the last two toons for this series.

In this country that loves speculation and gossip I must rush to add that this decision of mine is in agreement with the Independent editors – I am merely taking the opportunity of a time of stock taking to refocus on the online blog that remains the primary mode of expression and promises to be an important actor in the coming months. So don’t forget to add www.akkuza.com to your bookmarks (if you hadn’t done so already) and to subscribe to the mail updates.

I hope that it’s been as pleasant for you to read this column as it has been for me to write it. Thank you all for your patience and custom. See you on the net.

Last one out, switch off the lights.

www.akkuza.com is Malta’s longest running quality blog. Since the 10th March 2005 provocative thinking worth reading. www.bertoons.com contains a full collection of the illustrations that have brought you a smile on Sunday over the last few years. P.S. The honeymoon was great – thank you to all the well-wishers.

Categories
Articles

The J’accuse 2011 Tag Cloud

We have reached the point in the Julian Calendar when we indulge in retrospective analysis prior to letting ourselves go with reckless abandon into the New Year and whatever it may bring (including Mayan end-of-the-world prophecies). I thought it would be meet and fitting to give you, my kind and patient reader, a “tag cloud” of sorts – this time with a short reflection appended to each tag. Think of it as the J’accuse reference for 2011. Allow me a caveat – it has no claim to completeness and like everything else marked J’accuse comes with our trademark slant and perspective. Here goes (the order, I hasten to add, has no particular significance).
Euro Debt Crisis : The big, scary one. It’s shaking our way of life, threatening our future and quaking the constitutional foundations of a union that has kept a continent out of sabre-rattling action for nigh sixty years (what solution for Europa?). Arab Spring: It’s not about the money – from Tahrir Square to Tripoli the protestors (Time Personality of the Year) rose in unison yelling “Enough”, “Freedom” and more. As I type the military is in Tahrir Square (again) and the spilling of more blood seems to be the destiny of the prolonged “spring” (a stark reminder – if needed – of the Universality of Human Rights).

Palestine : The US cutting of funding to UNESCO as Palestine becomes the latest member reminded us of the complicated politics in the Middle East. Israel and Iran will both throw their tantrums again and again while US troops finally quit Afghanistan before the year’s end (The Middle East is still “partying” like it’s 1979). Japan, Thailand & New Zealand were the latest victims of mother nature’s ire and quirks.

Steve Jobs: The biggest “changer” of his era passed away this year – as insignificant men standing on this minuscule point in time we can only marvel at the waves that the man in the black outfit managed to cause (iMissYou Steve). Higgs Bosun & God : Science has Higgs Bosun, Religion has God : both are sure that the other exists – one tries desperately (and ever more successfully) to take a snapshot of it while the other faithfully lives the truth (A Large Hadron Collider: When proof and faith collide).

Gaddafi, Mubarak, Berlusconi: Dead or out of public sight. Each in their own way have stepped out of the equation – expect the comeback from the Bunga Bunga party man though. (Karma Chameleons). Christopher Hitchens: The pain is still fresh, the tag is growing – farewell to a role model and a massive figure, a giant of the media world (standing on the shoulders of the media gods).

Rule of Law: this nation of ours may be almost 50 but is showing up a major deficiency in the understanding of its constitutional and social underpinnings that hold us all together (the naive servibus legis). Good & Evil: It is not just politics, it’s everything we do – dichotomous thinking and judgemental (angels and demons). Austerity: We’ve either never had it so good or we’re begging for a scrap of pizza at the rich man’s table (l-għaks – with a “k” dear – u l-ħbieb tal-ħbieb).

Censorship: It’s the flipside to expression and can either be self-inflicted or imposed – we’re having a tough time coming to terms with its strict relationship with intellectual honesty and maturity (gags & megaphones). Expression: see censorship and next entry. Education: This one’s a tough one – standards are crashing down it seems and we fail to realise what an important pillar of our society this particular element is (Reap, sow etc). Family : A tag of its own that’s been pilloried and battered through the year – it’s not divorce or gay marriage that are the threat (at all) but the inability to realise how the underpinning element of a “family” is mutual love and responsibility (here’s to a future nation built on love).

Representation: Quit coughing in the back. This was the annus horribilis for the D’Hondt Majority – that one chair magicked out of the “wasted vote” election turned into a sword of Damocles for government and a symbol of unfulfilled hope for an opposition. It turned out to be an eye-opener for those who wanted to see that “representation” in our parliamentary terms is a whimsical minefield blotted with “free-votes”, “Private Members’ Bills” and foot-stamping, tantrum-throwing backbenchers (Who’s YOUR representative then?).

Valuri sodi : Well, not really – when push came to shove our politicians failed to show us what this was all about. We may have an “updated” set of values (Roots 2.0) but the general feeling is still of a “pick’n’mix” umbrella politics of the one-size-fits the ballot sheet variety. (Insert Policy Here). Progressive & Moderate : We’ve never been big fans of this oxymoron but it’s there as a form of battle cry in the warm up for the next election – thing is we’re still trying to understand where exactly the P&M really comes in (tanto fumo, niente arrosto).

Labels: This one is not so evident but when anything from LGBT to hunters to immigrants becomes more of a label and less of a person we should be worrying – when the labels are brazenly manipulated by politicians then  alarm bells should be ringing(I’m a wankellectual). Crime: For a tiny nation that we are there’s a tad bit too many guns, drugs and corruption – and now a drug ridden prison: Who will fix it? (Confessions of a criminal nation) Honoraria: It might have been a reasonably justifiable raise but it was more the manner in which it was introduced that left the Gonzi government with an indelible stain (The secret of comedy is timing). Cannabis: 10 years imprisonment? Get real! (decriminalise it).

Arriva: The local favourite – it’s a matter of timing and a symbol of our schizophrenic approach to change. They just won’t get it will they – now they’re importing bendy buses from Boris in London (Did we really need being driven round the bend?). City Gate Project: Enough already, get the damn thing built and move on (Lapparelli eggs them on). Utilities Bills: The latest victim of political ping pong – will we ever get down to doing the business because it needs to be done rather than because it pays this or that party to promote/criticise it? (and what’s this about Sargas and John Dalli?) Vested Interests: Nothing gets done for altruistic reasons or as Dr House would have it “Trust no one” (We’d love our political class to be more transparent about their operations but then again we’d also love a three-day working week).


History Manipulation: I’m predicting that this one will be a big tag in 2012 – rewriting history or abusing it will become the trend in the election run up as will… Blogs – expect a flourishing of those. 2012 will surely give us a blogging overdose as every party lackey under the sun suddenly discovers the power of independent media and then goes on to soil it as only they can (namesurname.com is the new fad). 51 Proposals We’re still waiting to see whether they should be taken seriously (it’s just a sketch) or whether they are the new path to enlightenment (Ara kemm hu bravu Joseph he answered 10 questions with 51 answers). J’accuse stands by our earlier assessment: it’s a load of incongruous marketing bullshit.

Divorce Debate: Did this debate, referendum and vote signify a schism from the conservative past and an appreciation of a more liberal society? Not really. Our society has a particular way of evolving that mimics a youth going through puberty with the stilted growths, ugly self-doubting and involves loads of acne. Somehow we move on but there’s still lots of Clearasil waiting round the corner. (When I grow up, I want to be a healthy nation).

Newswatch: Facebook+, Twitter, Blogs, Online Papers, Commentators, it’s not that debate and expression is missing – at least in the ether. It’s that the honest quest for the truth that is symbolised by such greats as Mr Hitchens is a rarity in our parts. It’s an interest-driven complex of self-referential goldfish bowls and there seem to be no signs of change for 2012 as far as this aspect is concerned (yes,
 that includes you Mr Calleja).Births, Marriages and J’accuse: The last tag is private. 2011 was meant to be a “lucky year” for me should I really believe in numerology. 11/11/11 was also my 36th birthday and by then I was married and four days away from becoming an uncle. The j’accuse family welcomed Ella, Lee and Simon (in that order) and of course the lovely wife Lara. Who’s complaining?I’d like to wish all readers a Happy Christmas and New Year. The next time we will meet we will be well into 2012 (15th January) since I am off for a well deserved long honeymoon trip. Be good and be nice to each other.The revamping www.akkuza.com will also be on honeymoon mode – we leave you with the J’accuse slogan for 2011: “in un paese di coglioni, ci mancano le palle” which is modestly speaking quite a good summary for the year.

Categories
Articles

J’accuse : Cool Britannia?

Listening to London’s Heart radio on a Saturday morning, I got to know that for the first time ever the capital’s Oxford and Regent streets would be traffic free for the whole day. The reason for this car-free bonanza was of course shopping. Londoners who forwent the option of visiting such colossi as Bluewater and Brent Cross would be granted the possibility of traipsing around the main shopping streets free from the polluting nuisance of cars. Conservative estimates had it that by the evening of this busiest shopping day of the year (for London), a million and a half shoppers would have hit the stores − presumably to spend some of their well-earned British Pounds.

Nothing abnormal there is there? Whether it is Sliema, Valletta or London, every town will be doing its best to get the lion’s share of the Christmas spending market and London is no exception. Enthusiasm oozed out of the radio as the announcer coordinated listeners through traffic jams, transport hitches and special opening times towards the giant Mecca of consumption. Here was Britain’s answer to the US Black Friday. There was even a whiff of the Dickensian Christmas that could be detected through the advertorials… until the half-hourly news stepped in.

Are you being deceived?

Yep. For the news could not miss out on the greatest item of the day. Europe (the naughty, naughty EU) had decided to forge ahead without the UK. It was all over the place − from the indignation and anger of Sarkozy, the unaffected matter-of-factness of Frau Merkel, and the schoolboy half-hearted apologies of David Cameron: The Euro 17 + 9 others (that means all the EU minus the UK) will forge ahead with an intergovernmental pact. The Euro Debt Summit (you know how bad things are when the word “Debt” creeps into the summit title) had unsurprisingly resulted in egg on the face for whoever thought that states would pool sovereignty as easily as they pool debts.

The best off-record comment I read about the summit has been attributed to an anonymous French diplomat. He said: “The Brits turned up to the Euro Summit like a man who turns up to a wife-swapping party without a wife.” I’m assuming it was not Strauss-Kahn who said that but probably someone with very much the same mentality. What did happen of course is that many states were not that eager to have a rapid tinker with the Treaties as the Merkozy duo had suggested at the beginning of the week. What they have opted for is the sort of Intergovernmental Agreement that consolidates the belief that we are still at a stage where nations and their sovereignty come before any idea of union and solidarity, which is also what federations are about.

United we lend

Behind the minutiae of the agreement lie a few unaltered truths. States will hang on to their fiscal policies and will only allow a mechanism that punishes deficit defaulters if they are allowed to create the deficit in the first place. Essentially, while the Lisbon criteria regarding deficits were a sort of invitation to budgetary discipline, the new agreement turns that invitation into compulsory conformity − with consequences for those who fail.

Why is the UK out? The UK is out because it never was really that far in. It sat at the table for 10 hours demanding the impossible in exchange for its participation. Frankly, the UK is not the problem. The issue here is how much of this is a long-term solution and how much will turn out to be cosmetic playing to the markets. The opting for an intergovernmental approach is also a clear sign that Europe might have once again missed its chance of institutional integration within a federal framework. One of this week’s blog posts on J’accuse (http://www.akkuza.com/2011/12/06/aaa/) looks at a speech delivered by Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski.

Calling spades

Sikorski’s speech has the added advantage of having that no-nonsense approach. Here are his words of advice to the UK:

You have given the Union its common language. The Single Market was largely your brilliant idea. A British commissioner runs our diplomacy. You could lead Europe on defence. You are an indispensable link across the Atlantic. On the other hand, the eurozone’s collapse would hugely harm your economy. Also, your total sovereign, corporate and household debt exceeds 400 per cent of GDP. Are you sure markets will always favour you? We would prefer you in, but if you can’t join, please allow us to forge ahead. And please start explaining to your people that European decisions are not Brussels’ diktats but results of agreements in which you freely participate.

If you can’t join us please allow us to forge ahead. That was Sikorski’s “plea” to the UK on 28th November. By 9th December, Europe was doing just that − forging ahead.

The UK was left wondering whether this opt-out was really such a good deal after all. Either that or, instead of wondering, it was busy shopping in Oxford and Regent streets because the recession might turn out to be one big Brussels lie after all … might it not?