Lights are out or returning back on this morning in Malta. It’s long past being a funny situation – the power station business that is – and the blackout will ironically throw more fuel into the incandescent fire that is every discussion about power stations, government contracts and governmental mismanagement.
While Malta floundered around in the dark UK Deputy PM Nick Clegg was busy reassuring his voters that the forthcoming government programme will include “the “biggest shake-up of our democracy” in 178 years”. This includes fixed-term parliaments, a fully elected House of Lords and a referendum on electoral reform.
The Liberal leader is in charge of the reform plans and has stated that he wants to “transform our politics so the state has far less control over you, and you have far more control over the state”. Centralised states were on the mind of Clegg throughout his presentation and at one point he stated:
Britain was once the cradle of modern democracy. We are now, on some measures, the most centralised country in Europe, bar Malta.
Now that’s a bugger innit? The contrast being made is obvious. Britain has relinquished its past as a “cradle of modern democracy” and having done so has approached – what? – Malta. Ouch. That hurts. It’s painful. But there must be a reason why Nick’s first thought when thinking of a decentralised (and consequentially distant from being a cradle of modern democracy) country leaps to Malta.
My bet is that if any repercussions will be had in Malta all blame will fall squarely on the nutjobs at the Alleanza Liberali who have carried the “Liberal” name for quite some time now – with dire consequences on any chances that name might have if taken up by normal minded people. There might even be a photo of Nick with John Zammit (who is currently busy working on www.freewebs.com/mintoffjani) as part of his Mintoffjan/Liberal project.
It would be too easy though to blame it on the nutjobs though. Nick Clegg, deputy PM of one of the largest political realities in Europe does not think highly of our political system – were it just a voice out of the blue it would be something we could easily ignore. Instead, Clegg is simply confirming what this forum has said for ages – the PLPN duopoly has much to answer for in this respect.
You already know what we think of Bondi and Bondi+. But we’re a blog – a particularly difficult customer in the market of public opinion. We pronounced the death of investigative journalism quite some time ago and we never got a reply to the many questions we posed to Lou and his programme guest. But we’re a blog. We are but one opinion in a world of different opinions.
We may have a boringly irrelevant opinion and we may attract a few commentators (not bloggers Lou, not bloggers) that reflect even more opinions yet we are out there – to be read, agreed with or disagreed with. We too create our ripples in public opinion. And sometimes those ripples can be irritating. Irritating to the point that both blogger and commentators can be seen as “paċlieqa” – troublesome chatters that threaten the order of things. (video clip available further down).
Last Tuesday the sans-pareil of Maltese journalism had a programme about the environmental effects of the Delimara project. At one point in the programme he had a little battibecco with Leo Brincat when Leo dared to suggest that it is not only the experts who do not like the government plans but that there is also a strong wave of negative public opinion. At that point Lou Bondi – having earlier dismissed the importance of public opinion in such technical matters – feels threatened and interrupts on one of his classical “points of order”.
Lou is not against public opinion but against public opinion being the measure on technical issues. He throws in a stab at blogs and bloggers “ipeċilqu fuq il-blogs” – an indeterminate verb that is an attempt at superior disdain that backfires. You see Lou’s problem here is that he loses the plot quickly. Very quickly. On the one hand the whole spirit of his program is supposed to be that of an information exercise and the clients of such an exercise are the general public. Presumably they are being provided with facts with which to form an opinion – either that or this is pure entertainment and majtezwel have the bearded lady and a few elephants on the show.
The greater order of things however require that Lou is the arbiter of what is relevant (and definitely not the public). How wrong can he be? The public do not get to choose what is the right machinery – we are not all Profs Edward Mallias – but surely the exercise here is to see whether those entrusted with the choosing have done so in a proper manner and with the public good in mind. That is the relevance of the wave of public opinion that Leo Brincat rightly mentioned. It even goes beyond the NGO‘s.
Public opinion, according to Lou, is not relevant in technical matters. We should assume of course that Lawrence Gonzi‘s place of abode and the distance in meters from the San Antnin processing plant and from Delimara is of some obscure technical relevance only graspable by the likes of Lou. By his reasoning we should not really vote unless we grasp the full (technical) consequences of the decisions that our elected representatives will take – all the decisions.
Moving away from the issue of whether public opinion is or is not relevant in such a discussion, Lou’s blatant disregard of his very clients – the thousands supposed to be watching his every programme (why? not to have an opinion since it is irrelevant – so presumably to drool over his immense capability to orchestrate the stage) is shaming. Where’s Everybody has an English slogan: Programmes People Watch. They really should put a question mark at the end of that statement. Or simply add – Programmes People Watch – and hell if we know why.
Fast forward to proceedings before the Broadcasting Authority and Lou has a damascene moment – he is suddenly all for the public pulse and what they are thinking. Defending his cause for the right to have Norman Lowell on his programme he whips out a very technical criterion:
However, Mr Bondì claimed that, although there was a lot of feedback about the programme, he spoke to all those who felt offended and they later understood the producers’ reasoning that such ideas had to be exposed and challenged. He said Mr Lowell’s popularity had increased over the past years and he garnered almost 4,000 votes in the last election. This was partly because he was only allowed to appear on television without anyone rebutting his claims. This meant there was a public interest motivation in making people realise how dangerous Mr Lowell’s arguments were.
Funny. Leo Brincat (who is also guilty of throwing bloggers into the bipartisan basket – “bloggers taz-zewg nahat”) had simply stated that public opinion should also be important when measuring whether the government was being considered as the right administrator for the awarding of contracts. Lou was quick to dismiss that with a trademark non sequiturand leapt at the opportunity to side-jab the fora he has avoided to face time and time again.
Paċlieqa he says. Programs Paċlieqa Watch. Quite fitting I guess.
Here’s the clip of the relevant parts… and the useless song at the end.
Always at the forefront of investigative journalism J’accuse is proud to present an exclusive walk-umentary as we shadow a Maltese member of parliament from the PLPN grouping in order to understand what goes on through their mind at voting time. In order to preserve anonimity, the MP has been heavily disguised and is being filmed and interviewed under a pseudonym: Ms Vicky Pollard.
A Monday morning email from the PL Communications Office lands straight in my work outlook. How did they get my email address? Yes, there is a Whoiswho directory for EU fonctionnaires but somehow I don’t recall granting permission to the Malta Labour Party to make use of my date for its propaganda – or any other political party for that matter. No worries, I shall flag their spamming address with the IT people this side of the great firewall.
Meanwhile back at Dar it-Trasparenza the charade continues. Malta‘s Labour Party wants you to believe that the reason democracy has been undermined is because a member of parliament was allowed to rectify his vote. There is no way in hell that this tantrum will go down well with the intelligent voters. Erskine May or no Erskine May the constitutional understanding behind a members’ vote is related to the expression of his intention. If his expression was hindered in any way as to cause error then surely Joseph would know that his intention counts more important than his tired slip.
The charade is hopeless. It borrows on heavy words “undermining of democracy” because it is desperate for a marketing, PR ploy that can be sold without too much logic and reasoning. PL believes that there is a weaker democracy so what will it do? It resigns from the “kummitat” (double-m for J) for the strengthening of democracy. Labour is strong on the cliché adjectives … “assolutament, bl-iktar mod possibbli…” then comes the pause… because when you try to reach a climax with a bubble you risk it bursting in your face (see video at 53 seconds).
Mario Galea would never have voted in favour of Labour’s motion. Joseph can cry till his tear ducts are dry. The Labour benches may swell with yells that will serve as an easy reminder of thuggery in parliaments past but this is no constitutional crisis. It is a charade.
Tonio Borg‘s “solution” to the Mario Galea gaffe is just as despicably pitiful. It is not exactly an “attakk oxxen/fahxi” that Labour would like it to sound like but you can understand why Justyne Caruana is pretty miffed at being thrown into the business like Pilate in the creed and why she is suddenly being projected as Labour’s answer to Aun San Suu Kyi.
I would say that there is an undermining of a democratic principle. One that has been in the process of rapid deterioration for quite some time now. It is that of representation. For a moment you would say that the people are being unfairly and wrongly represented by a class of buffons hitherto unequalled. Then, after a moment of reflection, you correct yourself by remembering that it was “the people” who put them there in the first place.
Reap. Sow. Reap. Sow. Reap. Sow.
Mick Jagger notwithstanding sometimes you get just exactly what you wanted.
Some time ago J’accuse commented on how Bondi’s programme Bondiplus represented the death of investigative journalism. Only last week we pointed out the incongruency of the next programme planned by Lou – with Norman Lowell as guest. So. Is it still Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox? Hardly. Here’s what was said in the press today:
The day after last Monday’s show, when people were aghast in that very ‘what was Bondi thinking’ sort of way, disturbed by the exposure he was given, seeing it as some sort of incitement to racial hatred, I on the other hand seemed unable to fathom what all the fuss was about. Lowell worries me as much as Mary Poppins does. The only worrying thing about last Monday’s programme was that we were hardly going to be in for any surprises and we certainly were not going to hear anything we hadn’t already heard before. – Mikela Spiteri (“Our very own inglorious basterd“, Times)
When you consider these factors, it’s not surprising to see why Bondi invited Lowell along during a period when the topic of immigration is not very topical. Put yourself in his shoes. You can root around for a relevant subject (preferably one that puts the Labour Party in a bad light and hasn’t already been done to death in previous editions), spend long hours carrying out tedious research, and then have a programme where people only wake up for the closing credits and Rod Stewart crooning away. Alternatively, you could invite Lowell, choose choice extracts from a book which has been published for years, make a quick photomontage of black icons, and let Lowell do the talking. You’d be guaranteed a much wider audience with minimal effort, and if it was audience survey week, you’d be in with a winner. Never mind the fact that you’re providing a visibility platform for someone who spouts obnoxious and criminal views. That’s just a tiny niggle to be ignored when you’re in the business of producing ‘Programmes People Watch’. I wonder if the earlier Bondiplus slogan ‘Ġurnaliżmu Fuq Kollox’ has been replaced. It would look like it. – Claire Bonello (“Chasing ratings, not respect“, Times)
This week, Lou Bondí decided to take a break from the sublime and descend to the ridiculous. This week’s Bondí+ treated us to a people-bashing session by Norman Lowell, wearing his cravat backwards. The arguments were as cohesive as a jigsaw puzzle with several bits missing. But it was unfair of Bondí to try to put words into Lowell’s mouth by dint of repetition. – Tanja Cilia (“Blank versus“, Times)
The Bondiplus programme led to mixed reactions and many heated discussions online, particularly on Facebook, with some arguing that the right to free speech should also include Mr Lowell’s right to express his beliefs, while others pointed out that his racist views were tantamount to incitement to hatred of specific groups, and therefore illegal. Other viewers felt that the programme only served to ridicule Mr Lowell, thus neutralising any potential influence he may have on viewers. While there were those who admitted they merely watched the programme “for a laugh”, there is real concern that Lowell’s followers are increasing in number, especially among the younger age group. (Independent)
Meanwhile Lou has been providing his guru expertise to the MZPN. Here’s a link to a pre-UK election discussion where Lou and Refalo discuss the extreme dangers of unstable government. MZPN Vid on Facebook
It’s another we told you so moment for J’accuse. As Chris would say: we’re doing the I told you so dance… all over again.
A few comments here and there while we gear up for the usual article writing and news observing. There’s lots of titbits being thrown up in the news that deserve at least a fleeting bit of attention.
Exhausted Parliament
For those who missed the farce that calls itself parliamentary representation yesterday there was much to hear and see. On the PN side most members faffed on about how nothing had been proven and hence the administrative decision is sound. BWSC contract apart we are still left in limbo as to whether the administrative and procedural shortcomings will be seen to. Franco Debono yelled “transparency law and regulation of political party funding” to an audience too distracted (tired) to listen.
Joseph and Anglu tried hard to emulate the PN coup of 1998. They’ve been at it for some time now – instead of concentrating in building a strong and valid alternative to this tired and exhausted government they still pin their hopes on what? On a lapsus, a renegade MP or on their dramatising a problematic democracy in what they hope would be a reversal of 1981. He even got his walk out. Who knows? Maybe a long sabbatical out of parliament might do the Labour party good – enough time to get it’s ideas right.
An Egyptian group calling itself “Lawyers without Restrictions” has called for the banning of “One Thousand and One Nights“. They are suing Egypt‘s very own General Authority of Culture (they might be twinned with our classification board) and they are suing under article 178 of the Egyptian Criminal Code which bans publication of material deemed “offensive to public decency” with violations of that code bringing a jail sentence of up to two years.
Ludicrous isn’t it? Arabian Nights, Ali Baba and all being banned because they are offensive to public decency. Thank deities of choice that we live in a Western community where such lawsuits are relegated to our medieval past. *ahem*
Language Lessons
Tonio Fenech did not spare a few tirades at the level of English on the Labour side of parliament. Ironically though whenever he read from the Auditor General’s report he did not exactly strike us as the champion of the English Speaking board. We just loved “hundsajt” – a rendering of the word “hindsight” that is right up there with “majtezwell”.
Euro Crash
Having planned a trip to the Big Apple in the near future I am somewhat demoralised by the rapid decline of the buying power of the Euro in the US of A. A few months ago a euro would have bought you a dollar and a half. It is now down to a bit more than a dollar twenty-five. Thank you Greece, thank you UK, thank you Freddie bloody Mac and Fanny bloody Mae. Greece is still not out of the merde and we’ll just have to see what the European Economic Summit will bring us before wondering whether our purchasing power in New York will have gone up in the angry flames of Athens. How some idiots can still claim not to feel “involved” by the politics in other countries (let alone being “bored to tears” by relevant developments in their own) is beyond any reasonable persons ken.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=449576d5-a343-41ec-9d6c-e556e9a4a75c)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3ad56a4d-4d9e-4019-8ef6-6e9fc66902bb)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=7ca52e4f-da53-4539-a8d7-de2bf5d35332)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ae433332-2b8e-44aa-8c29-2fe7c28d8cb5)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=d9c2d282-5f96-4d1b-9786-1274f971fa32)
