Category: Campaign 2013

Categories
Campaign 2013

The last rites

No. I am not ignoring what is going on in Parliament. How can you? On the other hand I still am amazed at how ridiculously shallow is the level of political assessment in this country of ours.

Kudos, first of all, goes to Lawrence and his “team” for having managed to string together a mini-Med summit that will go down in the annals of history as yet another photo snapping opportunity for a group of 10 leaders who sat together all bearing the same expression of “why the hell am I here?”. Sure, Med cooperation and plans are great and necessary but we know much more than go fawning at the foot of an idea that had lain frozen since the last meeting in 2003, lived in a coma right throughout enthusiastic Sarkozy’s “Mediterranean  Union” and proved to be worth jack shit at the time of the Arab Spring.

Anyways, after the Arab spring we get this cocktail-glass-clinking event that gets us a bit of tarmac, Monti giving the obsequious nod about security in the Mediterranean, Lawrence Gonzi spouting some circum tauri about the common values and aspirations of these nations and … oh yes… there will be an MCAST in Misurata. I am told that Arriva officials panicked at the idea of getting thousands of schoolboys to the college across the sea in time. (Just kidding, I’m not that stupid you know… if I were I’d have planned the new transport system in Malta and would be running for elections as a certain party’s future promise).

Which brings me to the Allies continually battling the Axis of Evil and who face Armageddon single-handedly. Why oh why are we still bothering with Franco and Jeffrey? Well one reason is that Gonzi’s PN are trying to make some point of pride and “we shall not be moved” business. Which is beginning to look damn silly. You know, the kind of silly as surrounds the kid who is caught with nutella all round his mouth and bread crumbs on his shirt and claims “I’m not eating in class miss”. Yep. Gonzi and his PN are strolling around with pie all over their face and they don’t seem to be bothered one bit.

Meanwhile, across from Pieta and over to Hamrun you have the other bunch of idiots. They are swooning and swaying all over that gullible piece of work that is Franco Debono – egging him on to get at Austin, Joe or whatever tickles his renegade fancy. The Earl Grey sipping dork still believes that he is somehow remotely relevant to the business of government and accountability when in actual fact his actions (and those of his companion in crime) belie the true base nature of his intentions. Were it not clear enough we now have the concerted effort between the Paladins of Progressivism, the Cavalier of Democracy and the Sipper of Teas to get a debate and motion onto parliament’s agenda that smacks of desperate opportunism to say the least.

Gonzi must have been hoping that it would come to this. The PM seemingly busy with his ultra-important tête-a-tête with nine leaders of state while Labour scrabbles for the floor and whinges and whines in order to get a very very important motion on the table of the house. What motion? Well …. it’s a motion about plans to privatise the management of car parks. Well actually it is a motion about plans to privatise the management of car parks …. that have been shelved. AND Franco Debono and Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando – still playing at the game of “we care so much for the people and are duty bound to represent them” have been performing somersaults trying to slip in a motion of no confidence in Austin Gatt.

What a sad and sorry bunch. Labour’s high and mighty appeal about all the woes of our nation and then just look at what kind of subject they want to use as a motion of no confidence that might (in their hopes) bring the government down. A utility measure? A budget bill? IVF? Immigration? What else could it be? Hell no… it’s a shelved plan for a car park. This coming from a party whose exponents are not ashamed of  representing a party that gives off all the signs of having no clue about what to do when in government.

Franco and Jeffrey? Less said about them the better. Jeffrey’s intellectual prowess when it comes to defending arguments is tantamount to “unfriending” people whom he disagrees with. Shallow and transparent does not even begin to describe him. Franco – well enough has really been said about Franco. He can no longer hide behind grand plans of reform – legal or otherwise. If ever they were close to his heart then he lost them some time ago and he has definitely succumbed to the battle of nerves.

As for the party in government. You get the feeling that just before the end of summer they had sort of sniffed out an exit strategy – one that could be a repeat of the famous “snatching victory from the jaws of defeat”. Something has gone very Pete Tong though and this must have happened on or around the Independence day festivities. The guess here at J’accuse is that the PN has opted to focus on the wrong issues and hit the wrong targets. Above all, the PN is repeating the same mistake that it risked committing in 2008 – the same mistake that Labour persists in committing every election. What mistake? Simple. The mistake of treating your electorate like absolute fools and taking their vote for granted.

We will definitely be seeing new efforts at denigrating the wrongly called “floating voter” (not floaters as that tautological fool Musumeci calls them) the closer the election gets. J’accuse has a message for these people (yes, that includes you Mario Vella) – stay strong and don’t vote before you’ve got their attention. Every single one of them. Including those who will tell you that (alas) you are setting yourselves up as objects of hate right before they rush off and vote intelligently with a huge number one next to the name of … Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando.

Categories
Campaign 2013

More Anton Refalo about nothing

Anton Refalo cannot afford to sit at his desk and string a few (empty) words together and just send off one article. Which is why following his Independent article from October 4th he is now “gracing” the pages of the Times with a new magnus opus. This time, the erstwhile loud member from the 13th district has pointed his guns on what he calls the nationalist party fear campaign. Yet again we get much from Anton Refalo in the form of finger pointing about “fear this and rumour that” but not once… mark my words… not once does the cocksure lawyer indicate anything in the form of a plan, an idea, hell a tiny school project as tgo what Labour and – more importantly – Anton Refalo will do for Gozo.

I have no doubt that Anton Refalo probably believes that he is Gozo’s future minister by birthright and that he should be elected to his seat in parliament solely on the strength of the fact that he thinks that he ought to be there (and I do know for a fact that the tiny island is full of more than its share of kow-towers who will make sure Refalo’s dream will come true). What Refalo seems to ignore is that his bullishness will be worth zilch when the people begin cashing the cheques he seems to be so busy distributing in pre-election mode.

Still…. we get more Anton Refalo about nothing. It would be tiring if it were not the norm. Read his latest masterpiece here.

Categories
Campaign 2013

Much Anton Refalo about nothing

The Honourable member from the 13th district has published an article in today’s Independent that deals inter alia (amongst other things) with the concept and history of the “minimum wage”. The issue itself has probably been milked dry and I strongly suspect that bar for a few smartarse reminders and quips it will be banished to the annals of history as yet another exercise of empty media marketing.

The most striking part of this whole “minimum/living wage” debate has been the fact that the two main parties have absolutely no use for it in their plans. Look at it like this. The only reason why the nationalist party mentioned the minimum wage is because some minion in its spin machine decided to make it seem that Joseph Muscat would “freeze the minimum wage”. Muscat had intimated his intention not to touch the minimum wage – very much in the same way that successive governments have generally done since 1974. The whole “freeze” business sounded hipper to the nationalist spin crowd – given the logical and associative leaps it allowed to the Labour economic management of the eighties.

Labour on the other hand is busy denying any form of freezing and has spent most its breaks from calling anybody in the nationalist party “liar” explaining that it has absolutely no intention of doing anything with the minimum wage (because growth will help us all equally – see Debating substance with regard to the logic of this argument). So two parties – both of whom have no practical plans involving “minimum wage” and yet we have been exposed to noisy, useless spin from both sides. Great.

Anton Refalo is an expert at useless and noisy. Which is probably why he regaled us with a history of minimum wage in Malta followed by the usual diatribe about those lying, scheming nationalists. Any ideas or concrete plans about how the minimum wage can actually be used by a potential progressive government. Does Refalo know one more than the devil (or Karmenu Vella for what it matters)? Does he rubbish. The only positive from this article is the attempted (though vague) reference at some actual statistics about persons on the minimum wage in Malta (though no reference to the source is given):

Studies, both local and international, consistently show the amount of employees that earn the minimum wage in Malta amount to less than one worker out of 20 while the ratio declined by definition when compared to the total working population. The studies also confirm that around one-fourth of the persons on minimum wage are employed in the wholesale and retail sector. The sector with the second largest number of people on minimum wage is the manufacturing sector.

Other sectors employing a significant number of persons on minimum wage are the construction sector and the hotel and restaurant sector. This, however, does not mean that many thousands of people do not have to survive with wages just above the threshold. In fact, there are thousands of workers whose income is close enough to the minimum wage that they fall in the bracket of people classified as being in risk of poverty.

In any case, Refalo hardly bothers to tell us what he, or his party, proposes with regards to all this. He limits himself to a concluding tirade at GonziPN: “Instead of spinning stories and perpetuating lies, GonziPN should focus on creating real jobs. The minimum wage is an issue only when those seeking employment are at the mercy of events.”

Yeah right Anton. So you still have no idea how all this wealth will be generated do you? All we get is much Anton Refalo about nothing.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

Debating substance (it’s lamb this Christmas)

So the first round goes to Romney. Or so they are saying. Is it possible to draw conclusions from the electoral run-up in one of the world’s largest democracies and apply them to what might happen in the island-democracy (tal-klikek) some time soon? Well, with a modicum of restraint peppered with huge doses of realism the answer is in all probability a resounding yes. Election hopefuls in any nation are definitely part of a generation that cannot and need not be envied. Their hope is to get elected to govern in a time when the business of governance is difficult and that is putting it mildly. Aside from the normal considerations (all things being equal) of the responsibility and gravity of government the economic woes of the western world make the creation and putting into practice of new policies a tough balancing act.

Whether you are Obama, Cameron, Rajoy, Merkel or Gonzi you have found yourself in the driving seat at a time when traditional party policies and programmes for a nation will perforce have to be tweaked in order to take into consideration the difficult environment and context within which such decisions will be taken. Welfare, health, standard of living, taxation – the pluses and minuses of economic policy – are no longer cocooned from the outside reality and every government’s decision is straight-jacketed by external consequences.

When you set aside the incumbents you get to look at those vying to replace them. Hollande is the first signal of a possible wave of change most likely caused by the increasing discontent of the masses at the handling of the period of austerity. Following his first 100 days in office the verdict was out and it was not so positive. That is partly because Hollande was guilty of doing what other oppositions are tempted to do in order to get to the seat of government: oppositions riding the wave of discontent need but promise the world and pander to that huge bulk that is the “middle class” while promising to “punish the rich”. Their programmes might avoid the blatant diabolical pacts but the devil is in the detail.

Take a look at what the Times (UK) leader (October 3rd) had to say about Miliband for example after his latest conference foray in Manchester:

This speech will go down as the one in which Mr Miliband announced himself as a politician not to be written off. But in the longer view it will be regarded as a missed opportunity. This was a moment at which the leader could have told the country why they should vote Labour. Instead, he told us about a distant land he would like to live in and revealed that his plan for the country is not yet that of a serious party of government. (Vintage Labour – might require subscription)

The analysis of what could have been a plan for government is even more damning:

(…) he offered a nod to future cuts in public sector pay and ill-defined difficult choices in the years to come. This was vague; a dogwhistle, not a plan. He painted, in broad strokes, the sort of plan for government that will not stand up to scrutiny. His section on the economy was jejune but it was enough to show that he, and it seems his party, has no feel for what makes an enterprise tick. (Vintage Labour)

Sound familiar? Well get used to it. It’s what oppositions the world over seem to have to offer. What’s that I hear you say? A sweeping statement? Here is the International Herald Tribune (New York Times) today analysing Mitt Romney’s tax plans for the middle class (there it goes again):

In the first minutes of the debate, Mr. Romney defended himself against the charge that he would cut taxes for the wealthy and raise taxes on the middle class. The lack of specificity of his tax plan opened him to the charge.

Here’s why. Mr Romney says he wants to cut marginal tax rates by 20% while having the government bring in the same amount of revenue, meaning that he would not widen the deficit further. He would accomplish that goal by clearing out the underbrush of credits, loopholes and preferences in the tax code. He has also promised that his plan will be “distributionally neutral” – that he will not raise the tax burden on the poor or middle class.

Here’s the problem. As explained in a detailed paper by the Tax Policy Center, if you cut rates by 20%, you give the wealthy a multibillion-dollar tax break. Even if you take away all of their credits and loopholes and preferential rates, they still do not owe the government as much as they did before. If the rich are paying less, then the poor and middle class must pay more in order to raise the same amount of money.

Mr. Romney’s campaign argues that the math does work out, in no small part because they expect their tax plan to help bolster growth. Still, independent economists question whether this is possible. Of course, rather than breaking his promise not to raise taxes on the poor and middle class, Mr. Romney could break one of his other promises. His tax plan could widen the deficit. Or he could lower marginal tax rates less than 20%. – Annie Lowrie reporter (retyped for J’accuse – original text on NYTimes).

Substance. From what I gather, the verdict in Romney’s favour is based on rhetoric. Romney’s style during the debate was based on brevity and generally unquantified assertions. Obama’s biggest drawback, it seems, is his inability to rein in his instinct for long-winded, detailed explanations that he feels his audience deserve. The stage is set for the next debates – will Romney keep the momentum going on his own turf : where rhetoric and promises to move away from austerity measures that Obama was at pains to justify are the routine?

The world is listening. Remember the adage that turkeys would never vote for Christmas? Well it would seem that to a general extent those who are battling the incumbents have caught onto the trick and are planning to capitalise on the fact that a whole mass of innocent lambs could be gullible enough to swallow the pie-in-the-sky rhetoric that is not fit for government but fit enough to get elected.

If you cannot get turkeys to vote for Christmas… it’s a slaughter of lambs that’s the most likely menu.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013

That elusive middle class

I was listening to yet another radio discussion on France INFO about the Salon d’Automobile that is on in Paris at the moment. It’s actually called the “Mondial d’Auto” but nostalgics still refer to it with the original name. Listening to the experts debating the dwindling fortunes of the European auto mobile industry in these times of crisis was very revealing. One word that kept cropping up in the discussion was “la classe moyenne” (the middle class) – the main reason being that this was the social class that was most hit by the economic crisis and that risked changing its purchasing habits.

The vehicle industry turns out to be an interesting laboratory for assessment. Vehicles are either a utility or a luxury depending on how you see them but in any case, the vehicle industry needs to get a good feel of its clients and their needs if they want to keep selling new models. The first interesting observation I noted was that when clients buy a car they do not give price the highest priority. There’s a load of technical details that come before the consideration of price.

There’s that and there’s the very remarkable statement regarding the fad retro models – from VW Beetle to FIAT’s 500 to the Mini Minor to the new 2CV Citroen that is being launched at this year’s salon. According to one of the speakers the kitsch attraction of these cars allowed manufacturers to price them way above the actual cost. The 500 for example costs very little to produce and the final sale price is nowhere near the original production cost. Yet people rushed to buy these cars – and it seems that they still do.

Then there was Renault and their subsidiary Dacia. When Renault bought the Romanian company Dacia their intention was to sell these cars in Eastern Europe. The line of Dacia cars is basic and their entry price is very accessible. What Renault did not expect is for Dacia to do very well in France and Europe. Exceptionally well. Which would seem to contradict the fact that clients will not give price much consideration unless you also consider that the Dacia line seems to guarantee a sturdy reliability at a good value. All the marketing experts at Renault failed to predict the success of this car – they failed to understand what the middle class really wanted.  In the case of the Dacia the success came more of a hindsight than as an inspired marketing move.

What about the middle class then? Well the middle class is in trouble all over the place. The middle class in Europe was sold a dream that fit cleanly into a mixture of consumerism and government cushioning. The key to the growth of the middle class was linked with more spending and a constant pressure on one’s conception of “status” – what Alain de Botton famously described as Status Anxiety back in 2004. It is a bit worrying then that the classe moyenne – a preferred target of the automobile industry in times of recession – is in more than a bit of status crisis itself.

Which makes it all the more baffling that the very notion of “middle class” is being sold as something to aspire for by at least one of our political parties for the next election. Go figure.

 

Categories
Campaign 2013 Mediawatch

Il-politika tal-friża

Aħna li ngħixu il-bogħod minn xtut gżiritna inbagħtu l-iktar mill-bard u kesħa li taffliġġi l-ambjenti illi naħdmu fihom tmenin fil-mija tas-sena. Filgħodu naraw it-tbassir tat-temp b’għajnejna jaqgħu l-ewwel fuq it-termometru u imbagħad inqabblu malajr malajr mat-temp f’Malta. Dalgħodu per eżempju jien u nsuq minn fost l-għelieqi fit-tramuntana tal-belt ta’ Lussemburgu tajt daqqa t’għajn lejn x’immarka t-termometru ‘abbord il-vettura’… tlett gradi ċentigradi (bis-sinjal ipetpet jiġifieri possibli li ssib silġ fuq it-triq u suq bi prudenza). Il-kesħa u l-friża … ma nħobbuhomx.

U dan l-aħħar id-diskors politiku reġa’ waqa’ bl-ikreħ fuq l-iffriżar. Xejn ma nħobbuh l-iffriżar f’pajjiżna. Tiftakru lil Sant hekk kif ġie elett fil-gvern x’għamel? Iffriżajna t-talba ta’ sħubija fl-Unjoni Ewropea. Tfajniha fil-kexxun maċ-ċanga u mal-pork tistenna li tiġi xi ruħ tajba u tħollha (kif ġara ftit wara – ukoll grazzi għal Mintoff, ma setax jonqos). Imbagħad ġew Eddie u Guido u x-ċuċ hu il-majkrowejv.

Imma illum il-friża hija l-iktar waħda tal-biża. Qed jitkellmu u jixlu u allegatament jillibellaw lil xulxin kawża tal-misħuta iffriżar tal-paga minima. Din tal-iffriżar tal-pagi kwistjoni kurrenti ħafna. Ara biss x’ippropona fil-baġit tiegħu il-gvern ta’ Hollande. Il-ħaddiema tal-gvern Franċiż se jkollhom il-pagi tagħom iffriżati – ma jistgħux jieħdu iktar żiediet. Minn x’imkien kellhom jibdew jissikkaw iċ-ċinturin. Kellhom xorti il-ħaddiema tal-gvern għax oħrajn bħal dawk ta’ Arcelor-Mittal fil-Lorena ġirien tagħna sejrin saħansitra jitilfu xogħlhom meta tagħlaq waħda mill-aħħar fabbriki siderurġici f’żona li żmien ieħor kienet il-pulmun ekonomiku tal-Ewropa.

Imma konna qed ngħidu. Il-paga minima. Mela qed jgħidu li Muscat qal li se jiffriża l-paga minima (u ejja ninsew il-living wage) għax qal (u dan qalu) li ma hux se jżidha. Sewwa. Imma imbagħad kif spjega sew mingħalija Spiteri – kemm ilha teżisti il-paga minima l-ebda gvern ma żiedha u dan qed ngħidu mill-1974. Sewwa ukoll. Jiġifieri biex niftehemu jekk iffriżar ifisser li ma żżidx il-paga minima oltre il-COLA (Cost of living adjustment – li ġeneralment jittraduċi f’pakket sigaretti) allura kemm in-Nazzjonalisti u kif ukoll il-Laburisti ilhom li tefgħu il-paga minima fil-friża u insewha hemm għal 38 sena. X’bard.

Iżda anki jekk nieqfu hawn u naħsbu ftit fuq verament x’inhu jingħad mill-partiti nindunaw li l-friża hija ukoll tal-ideat. Għax tal-Lejber sabu x-xoqqa f’moxxtha u erħilhom jgħajjru l-PN giddebin għax Muscat ma hu se jiffriża xejn. Tal-PN għadni ma fhimtx eżattament x’jaħsbu għax jew se titkaża bl-iffriżar u allura inti se tieħu azzjoni differenti i.e. mhux tiffriżaha imma żżidha jew tagħlaq ħalqek għax inutli tgħajjar lil ħaddieħor li jagħmel eżattament li qed tagħmel int. Tal-alternattiva kienu ċari … bl-alternattiva fil-gvern togħla il-paga minima. Imma l-AD fil-gvern? Il-votant ilu li tefa’ dik l-idea fil-friża.

Il-PLPN moħħom biex jiġġieldu u jillibellaw dwar dak li mhux se jagħmlu. Sadattant il-valuri u pjanijiet ċari dwar dak li forsi se jagħmlu jekk jiġu eletti għadna ma rajna xejn minnhom. Billboards kemm trid imma fi żmien ta’ baġits awsteri fi Spanja, fl-Italja u anki fl-Ingilterra, il-partiti tagħna moħħhom biex jittrasportaw id-diskussjoni fuq l-eventwalitajiet ineżistenti.

Fi kliem ieħor ħafna paroli fl-arja, ħafna xinxilli, mass meetings, kungressi u x-naf jien… u l-ideat, pjanijiet konkreti u rieda ta’ tmexxija għaqlija ilhom li intefgħu fil-friża.

F’dan il-pajjiż ma nsolvux problemi… nindukrawhom.