Tag: AD

Categories
Campaign 2013

Manifestly Political – a zolabyte

AD’s PRO André Vella has submitted this post as a Zolabyte. In this piece and accompanying infographic Vella compares how the three parties square up before all the manifestos were published. 

A political manifesto is the official seal of approval of a party’s agenda when (and if) in power; but the truth is that certain policies and positions are already lauded in public before approved by any party executive or general meeting.

For any political party, there are two types of issues. The issues you want to avoid, and the issue you can’t stop to talk about. Then there are the not so clear issues which are somewhere in between. Let’s take gay civil rights for example. PL want to flaunt their stance of civil union (which is more liberal than PN) but they do not want to focus on their contradictory inequality of what they are proposing (by not granting gay couples full rights). PN want to talk about gay rights as well, to regain that conservative base by scaring them with the image of a little child having two daddies, doing so knowingly that they might risk alienating the few pink votes they have. For the Green Party, at least, this issue is not in the middle as they took the clearest path towards gay marriage, being the only party fully endorsing MGRM’s proposes.

Somehow, the bigger parties always have the greatest challenge to appease as many people as possible, a task which fails most of the time as you cannot bind a long-serving successful party to populism instead of an ideology.

So while we all wait for the three manifestos to be officially approved, here is a little Infographic, shedding light on some party positions depending on public remarks passed by party officials or press releases. If it looks biased, it is because it is. Until the manifestos are publicly available, this is the pre-manifesto showdown of Malta Elections 2013!

The author is the PRO of Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party.

andrevellapic

*****
Zolabytes is a rubrique on J’accuse – the name is a nod to the original J’accuser (Emile Zola) and a building block of the digital age (byte). Zolabytes is intended to be a collection of guest contributions in the spirit of discussion that has been promoted by J’accuse on the online Maltese political scene for 7 years.
Opinions expressed in zolabyte contributions are those of the author in question. Opinions appearing on zolabytes do not necessarily reflect the editorial line of J’accuse the blog.
***

Categories
Campaign 2013

That inexistent opposition

Anglu Farrugia’s smile should haunt Labour diehards for years to come. I say should because I am convinced that they are probably in the throes of jubilation and singing his praises at how his performance far outshone that of Simon Busuttil. Unfortunately it is only those blinded by the wrong kind of passion for politics who will have seen anything of value in Labour’s bumbling deputy leader. His performance was catastrophic and whoever coached him must have been tearing out his or her hair from the first minute.

It has nothing to do with Simon Busuttil and whatever performance he put on. As I said in yesterday’s post, Anglu Farrugia would be capable of losing a debate with himself. He is completely at loss in 99% of the subjects brought up and it is evident that he can only sound convincing to ‘kerchief waving constituents gathered at a coffee morning. How many more times must he be forced to face the agony of prime time television only to squirm and faffle the moment anything technical or specific is brought up.

The Living Wage? More like living hell. The moment Anglu attempts to describe the economic reality of the living wage and what it is about he makes it sound like a cross between viagra and self-raising flour. He had absolutely nothing to go on – and were it not for the PN bungle with regards to taxing the minimum wage I have a strong suspicion that Labour candidates would have absolutely no other example of taxes that would be changed to alleviate what they call the burdens on the less wealthy.

Which is where I have to speak about the man who sat on the sofa and who had approximately a quarter of an hour to have his say compared to the interminable 45 minutes in which Anglu Farrugia gave us his little bit of circus. Carmel Cacopardo’s interventions were not only incisive and clear but they were relevant. No theatrics, no faux rhetoric or time wasted on personal arguments – straight to the point. Cacopardo spoke of policy. He had questions, he had criticisms and above all he had solutions.

It is such a pity that Carmel Cacopardo and his party will once again be a victim of the winner-takes-all politics that is so useful to the PLPN. You’ll see how on the eve of the election Simon’s nationalist party will be busy unearthing the ghost of Franco and instability in order to scare votes away from electing the third party. It will be too late then to explain that this third party has concrete ideas and would stick to a coalition on terms of principle not for the sake of power. A coalition government would be the stuff that dreams are made of – with a serious AD keeping the arrogant arms of PN in check.

What would be more realistic in a world where voters vote with their minds and not with their hearts would be AD winning over the cape of opposition party from a Labour party that is devoid of ideas and that has become a veritable farce of a party – all slogans and no substance. In a real world the 62,000 persons living below the poverty line would be voting AD into parliament and making sure that they get a strong say in the opposition. In a real world that is…

but this is the world of Anglu Farrugia, the Where’s Everybody aquarium and endless spin that will do its utmost to make a very serious party as AD seem as irrelevant as Franco Debono.

In un paese pieno di coglioni ci mancano le palle.

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.

Categories
Politics

Din l-art ħelwa

Donnhom jagħmluha bi ħsieb. Tasal elezzjoni u jzeffnu  l-art fin-nofs. Tkun se toqrob elezzjoni u min forsi ikun xi ftit marid b’dik il-fissazzjoni dwar valuri, ideat u politika ta’ prinċipji isib ruħu imdawwar bi kronaka kriminali, psewdo-kriminali u allegazzjonijiet ta’ attivitajiet korrotti. Ħa ngħiduha kif inhi – il-politika imkien ma hi abjad fuq iswed. Ma tantx ser issib okkazzjonijiet fejn għażla bejn sew politiki/ideat differenti ssir b’diskussjoni denja ta’ fakulta tal-filosofija.

Bosta drabi f’pajjiżna innutajt illi l-qafas pre-elettorali għandu ħabta jiġi iddominat minn xi kwistjoni li tinvolvi bejgħ jew xiri ta’ artijiet. Niftakar żmien ilu (m’inix żert kienx id-96 jew id-98) lil Fenech Adami iħambaq għal ħin twil waqt mass meeting ġo Triq Psaila. Kien dwar xi kuntratt li mar żmerċ. Xi Charles Mangion jekk minix sejjer żball (imma jaf li iva sejjer zball). Li naf li moħħi kien jintefa wara ftit. Din it-taħlita ta’ psewdo-investigazzjoni u allegazzjoni pubblika kienet ittellifli kull sens ta’ interess. Filli kont nissaħħar wara dak li instema bħala proġett mibni fuq sisien ta’ xogħol, ġustizzja, liberta, solidarjeta, u sussidjarjeta… imbagħad filli qed jitkellmu dwar kuntratti, korruzzjoni, fottimenti, klikek li jagħmlu flus, art li mhux tagħhom eċċ. (titwiba) eċċ.

Għal bidu ma stajtx nifhem xi bżonn kien hemm li jingħataw tant importanza lil dawn l-affarijiet. Iva mela le, investigahom, u hekk, imma mhux madonna taħlili siegħa diskors fuq kuntratti u ftit (ftit wisq) fuq il-ħsieb tiegħek għall-ġejjieni u fuq liema prinċipji se jsawru l-pjan prattiku tal-gvern futur. Imbagħad kelli nidra. Għax bejn Sant u d-diskors kontinwu dwar barunijiet (li kienu ukoll imprendituri, spekulaturi fl-art) u bejn kuntratti li minn sena għal oħra kienu ikunu qishom il-pern li fuqhom tinbena politika ta kritika kelli nidra li f’din l-art ħelwa, l-art kollox.

Hemm għalfejn immorru l-bogħod? Tinsewx li l-elezzjoni tal-2008 (l-aħħar waħda biex niftehemu) intrebħet u intilfet fuq biċċa art il-Mistra. Pullicino Orlando u d-dmugħ falz tiegħu ssussidjat mill-klikka tal-ispin nazzjonalista kellu sehem importantissimu fir-riżultat finali. Daqstant ieħor kellu sehem it-timing hażin ta’ Alfred Sant li forsi ma għarafx iġestixxi sewwa l-mument li jikxef l-għawar fuq l-aħħar kuntratt mbażwar li kien ser iniġġeż lil din l-art ħelwa. Jekk hux art kbira li se tinbiegħ lil intraprenditur jew xi abbuż mill-kriterji tal-ippjanar (ah xi kriterji) tagħna bħal Manwel Arriva Delia li jiftaħlek offiċċju fir-raħal imma għadu biss bil-permess li jbiegħ il-ħaxix (ifhem).

Iddur fejn iddur tispiċċ titkellem fuq art. Mhux ta’ b’xejn li waħda mill-ikoni tal-politika Maltija inbniet wara Perit. Fejn issib biċċa business fl-art kull ma trid tagħmel hu li tfittex ftit. Hemm issib il-ħaxi. Jekk mhux verita għallinqas hija sewwa magħrufa (fis-sens ta’ “mhux kullħadd jaf, mhux ovvja”). Għax hekk għallmuna naħsbu. Issa ħarġu waħda ġdida. Perfetta. Għall warm up għall elezzjoni li jmiss għandna l-kuntratt bejn it-Tfal tal-Perit u ċ-Ċaqnu. Bellezza.  Tal-alternattiva ilhom imsieken jaqbżu għal din l-art ħelwa u isejħu għal politika miftuħa, nadifa u trasparenti fil-qasam tal-art. Anki f’dan il-każ indunaw illi dal-kuntratt jinten miż-żewġ naħat. Kif jista ma jintinx… għandu storja li tinbet fl-aħħar xhur tal-politika soċjalista u tkompli tul il-perijodu ta’ gvernijiet nazzjonalisti.

Din l-art ħelwa. Stennew botta u kontro botta dwar il-kuntratt, il-ħaxi, il-fottimenti, in-nuqqasijiet li bihom qed indardruha. Fuq kollox stennew li kull naħa toħroġ ta’ kavalliera protettriċi ta’ dan il-wirt tagħna u tas-suppost prinċipji li inħaddnu biex nindukrawha. Stennew storbju, stennew frakass u allegazzjonijiet. Stennew, bħal ma kien qal Rupert, l-għaġeb bħal ma sar fil-każ tal-bajd tal-fkieren. Imbagħad tgħaddi l-elezzjoni u kollox qisu ma hu xejn. il-bajd jintesew u l-ħaxxejja jibqgħu jaħxu – huma min huma.  L-art fejn tal-Barrani tinbena plottijiet u jgaqwdu minnha ulied Mintoff u ulied Fenech Adami. Mhux it-tfal ta’ … uliedhom – fis-sens ta’ ulied Mose… dawk li ħaddnu l-istess modus operandi tul iż-żmien. Li waqt li jkantaw dwar din l-art ħelwa u kemm jgħożżuha ma refgħux id biex iħarsuha minn kull deni.

Id-dehen lil min jaħkimha? Forsi ilu li għadda ż-żmien meta jmissna indunajna li l-ħakkiema kollha ta’ l-istess pezza.

Il-Ħadd it-tajjeb.

 

Categories
Uncategorized

The State of Our Unions

Chris Said must not be too happy with the reception that has been afforded the Civil Cohabitation Partnerships Bill. The MGRM and AD as well as the Civil Rights group Aditus have all slammed one aspect or another of the bill. It must be said that the greatest hype has been around the expectations that had been instilled among the gay community with regards to a move that would finally constitute the adoption of a gay marriage law in Malta. Not being an infallible sentient being I am not sure whether I am getting all the signs right but I do have more than a modicum of suspicion that there is more than a strong tinge of confusion in the matter from all parties concerned – either wilfully and in line with particular agendas or unwittingly and underlined by a particular level of ignorance of what the law is about.

On PACS and othe civil partnerships

Let us begin with the abstract – away from the hustle and bustle of what is the current line of thought in Malta. The first point that must be clearly established is that a law on civil partnerships and a law on gay marriage are two very different pieces of legislation. The fact that the former (a civil union law) could facilitate the life of gay couples (and that is an understatement) does not in any way make the two any less different. The clearest and most straightforward example is France and French law where thankfully the confusion that may be brought about by the religion inspired forms of marriage is virtually non-existent.

Since the 15th November 1999 France has what is called a PACS -translated in English as a civil solidarity pact. By definition it is an agreement between two adults (see: no mention of gender or blood relation) who enter such an agreement with the purpose of jointly organising and administering their lives. It changes their situation in the eyes of the law: couples are said to be pacsé on their status description and they stand to be considered as a unit in different situations such as fiscal calculations and entitlements as well as presumptions in the case of inheritance. PACS was introduced in France when marriage was on the downturn and was definitely not exclusively considered as a marriage solution for gay couples (in 2012, 94% of PACS were between opposite sex couples). It goesd without saying though that the concept of a civil union or a recognised cohabitation includes the possibility of same-sex couples.

PACS was never intended to replace or come close to the concept of marriage – the civil concept mind you. Most civil unions are intended in this manner.

Same-sex Marriage

Very different from PACS is the legislation of gay marriages. If we look at our Wikipedia fact machine we will see the following verbal venn diagram:

Currently 22 of the 51 countries in Europe recognize some type of same-sex unions, among them a majority of members of the European Union. Eight European countries legally recognize same-sex marriage, namely Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. An additional fourteen have a form of civil union or unregistered cohabitation. San Marino only allows immigration and cohabitation of a citizen’s partner. Several countries are currently considering same-sex union recognition.

Do note the difference. 22 countries recognise some type of same-sex unions. Of these eight recognise same-sex marriage. The additional fourteen have a form of civil union or unregistered cohabitation. Malta’s Bill would add it to the latter fourteen. It has nothing to do with the formal recognition of gay marriages. Even after the Cohabitation Bill is passed we would still be aeons away from any form of legal sanction of marriage between same-sex couples.

So what’s happening in Malta?

I have it on quite a reliable source that on the eve of last election a deal was struck between a panicking Nationalist party and the MGRM. The deal was simple: MGRM would block vote for PN and PN would enact a cohabitation law. That got some uber necessary votes away from the PL (the hopeful vote) and the AD (the protest vote). Let’s call this the Xarabank deal for want of a better description. Now we know how the PN legislative agenda has been disrupted ever since the divorce surprise but the Bill had to be shoved through as promised otherwise the next election would find the PN with its pants down… and we don’t want any of that do we?

So we have a cohabitation bill being drafted at gunpoint so to speak and whatsmore – as Raphael Vassallo pointed out – being piloted by a former head honcho of the anti-divorce movement. What we end up with is a bill that seems to be blatantly discriminatory and fails to produce the goods insofar as the goal of a solid civil unions law is concerned. It’s the second (non-couple) part of the law that has drawn much attrition – mainly for what are being described as discriminatory conditions.

The bill fails to take into consideration the situation of siblings sharing the same household – failing to factor in recent ECJ case law in this regard. It also ignores completely the tax issues relating to the civil union – practically neutering one of the most important aspects of the law. These criticisms – and, if they are proven to be true, the criticisms aimed at the different time-frame for the recognition of civil unions depending on the type of union – are not only founded but very important if any bearing is to be had on the final version of the law.

There is though the issue of “family” and “gay marriage” that has been thrown into the discussion by most of the groups reacting to the bill. Such talk is highly misplaced. Fine tuning the Cohabitation Bill is not only good but imperative. The criticism and constructive suggestions should be confined to the declared aims and intentions of the bill. Same-sex marriages is definitely not one of them. Don’t get me wrong –  it will never be too soon for a discussion and process to be opened in order to have a same-sex marriage law in Malta. It is important to recognise the difference though and not to be drawn into facile conclusions.

The Cohabitation Partnerships Bill does seem to need more than a bit of fine tuning. It would be unfair and very underhand of all parties concerned should the remit of such a bill be extended to the introduction of same-sex unions. Such an introduction does not deserve to be made surreptitiously. Rather. It should be made openly, consciously and following an open national consultation – possibly including a vote (unless all our parties include the proposal in their next manifesto – in which case we will just be voting in the government that would turn the proposal to legislation).

If the country was deemed mature enough to debate, vote upon and ultimately enact a divorce law then there should be no reason why the same should not hold true of same-sex marriages. I for one believe it’s inevitable.

Change. You want it? Vote for it.

 

Categories
Politics Rubriques

I.M. Jack – the March Hare (I)

1. The State of the Parties

(PN) It’s over for GonziPN – or so seems to be the general opinion in the punditry pages. Following Gonzi’s landslide victory in the one-man race poll (96.6%) we are seeing a definite shift away from the one-man monolith that was victorious last election and a contemporaneous effort to re-establish roots among the electorate. Which leaves us with a number of conclusions and concerns.

First of all insofar as the business of governance is concerned, the PN General Council vote has not changed much. Even with a repentant Debono returning into the fold (his idea of repentance being that he believes he was proved right) the lasting impression is of a party that will go to any lengths to survive a full term in power. The dissidents within the fold excluded themselves from the 96%, mostly by abstaining. Meanwhile the “papabili” such as De Marco or Busuttil rallied behind the leader.

The PN remains a fragmented party in search of a definition. The signs coming from the minor tussles in Local Council campaigns are not positive. The fragility of the very fabric that should be keeping the party together is evident with its dealings with past and prospective candidates. There is however a silent larger picture with the usual suspects seeming to prefer a “silenzio stampa” to the noise we had become accustomed to.

Might there be a new strategy in the making? Is the transition back from GonziPN to PN a superficial diversion from deeper moves that might bring about a timely resetting of the PN modus operandi? Above all, are we dealing here with the proverbial “too little, too late”?

J’accuse vote: Brownian Motion.

(PL) Not much to be added here. The PL’s only consistency is its constant assault on the weak points of governance. The strategy of blaming every ill -imagined or real – on “GonziPN” is combined with procedural and psychological pressures to push a teetering government off the seat of power.

The prolonged lifeline of the current government might soon turn out to be the PL’s weakness. While Joseph gleefully repeats the “iggranfat mas-siggu tal-poter” mantra he fails to appreciate that the longer he is prancing about as the “prattikament Prim Ministru” the more he will actually set people wondering whether he has what it takes to carry out the job. How long they will be happy with his evasive answers as to actual plans might be anybodies guess but it might soon be time to stop taking bets.

J’accuse vote: Hooke’s Law.

(AD) Like the football team intent on surviving the drop AD can only plan its strategy step by step. Don’t blame the outfit for concentrating on the Local Council elections for now, General Elections can wait. AD may be short of manpower but they could have been greedy and fielded more candidates irrespective of their quality in areas such as Sliema where they could expect a huge backlash at the outgoing council’s farce. Instead AD are content to field their single version of a “heavyweight” with party chairman Briguglio.

Don’t expect many people to look at AD’s manifesto, which is a pity. The most the small party can hope is to get some mileage and exposure that could serve as a platform for an assault on the impossible come the next General Election.

J’accuse vote: Small Hadron Collider.

(Blogs) They’re not a political party but they’re evolving too. We are in a positive boom phase with more blogs than you could care to count (or read in a day). That is definitely positive. Expect to find more of the short-lived instruments – the lunga manu of party propaganda. Expect to be surprised that notwithstanding what is now a long internet presence (at least five years of growing internet readership) we will find that users (mostly readers) have trouble coming to terms with the immediacy and interactivity of the net. Most importantly the ability of your average voter to use his meninges to sieve through the information shot in his direction is about to be severely tested.
J’accuse vote : Blog and be damned.