Tag: Anton Refalo

Categories
Mediawatch Transport

Case Closed

F**k “tu quoque“, Muscat has resorted to an all new tactic straight out of the immense book of playground logic. The idea of claiming that whatever bad his party in government was doing had already been done by the nationalist party in government was beginning to run thin. So just before “talk to the hand ‘coz the face ain’t listening” and “sticks and stones won’t break my bones” he has taken up another of the playground greats: “I’m not playing”. This, mind you, from a man who sits as the Prime Minister of a supposèd democratic republic.

The latest hissy fit comes in the context of RefaloGate. Interviewed by the Times Muscat stated categorically that as far as he was concerned the case was closed.  Muscat is obviously labouring under the illusion that quod Muscat dixit veritatis habet rigorem – anything that he says is automatically true or right because he says it. So he fobs off the journalist de tour by telling him (1) Refalo acted in accordance with Gozo Channel policy, (2) therefore for Joseph Muscat the case is closed.

Thankfully the Times does not stop there. It does point out that “Speaking to Times of Malta on condition of anonymity, various Gozo Channel employees denied such a policy existed. In practice, it always used to send one of its ferries relieved from the shuttle service empty to dock for the night at Mġarr.”

Somehow the contrasting versions, the foot shuffling and the inability of Anton Refalo to give a clear answer to any question make me more inclined to believe the anonymous Gozo Channel employees. As for Muscat, his latest tactic reminds me of the kid at school who brought the ball for footie during the break. The moment his side was losing or the moment he contested a hot decision he would pick the ball place it under his arms and walk off huffing and puffing. “The game is over”.

Sadly for Muscat this is not a playground and politics is not about his personal football. The case is far from closed, it remains an open sore that will continue to fester and remind the people that “Taghna Lkoll” was nothing but words…. small ideas for small people.

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 Mediawatch

Academic?

It’s unbelievable. Joseph Muscat has gone on record stating that AST’s article was “an academic exercise”. What exactly is that supposed to mean? Is it to be ignored because “academia” is just an exercise in mental masturbation? Is Anton Refalo’s article in today’s Independent academic too? Should academia be dismissed in favour of the more “erudite” rantings of Joseph and his clan?

Let’s face it Joseph. At the end of the day the political chessboard has spoken. The PN is fully aware of the fact that it cannot rely on the votes of some of its MPs for much longer. That is why it “survived” the pre-estival votes and parliament is now in recess. This recess has delivered the obvious reality that the country is in full election mode: just look at the recent Billboard War. This recess will end with a few attempts at legislating that will inevitably culminate in a vote of confidence sooner rather than later.

What does that mean in real terms? It means that the PN is very aware that the present legislature and government has its days counted. What the PN does not do is erode at the legitimacy of the rule of law and the foundations of democratic government by constantly farting spurious arguments about “undemocratic government” that betray a clear will to ignore the rules of the game. Labour on the other hand is lost repeating the mantra of the obvious – clearly more comfortable in the “non-academic” field of conjecture so long as that means staying away from presenting its plan for government should it get elected.

Now Joseph has no qualms in belittling the importance of “academic” arguments  so long as he can gain more brownie points in the land of spin, conjecture and away from the tangible battles that should be the real battleground in the run-up to an election.

Incidentally Joseph, if Sciberras Trigona’s exercise was an academic exercise in, say, constitutional law, he’d be sitting in his little study sweating out over his notes prepping up for the September resit. Yes, Joseph, even his academic piece was an abject failure.

From the Times:

Labour leader Joseph Muscat has sidestepped the implications of an article penned by his international secretary, Alex Sceberras Trigona, saying the piece claiming the government had lost its “constitutional legality” was an academic exercise.

Asked if Dr Sceberras Trigona’s analysis reflected his position, Dr Muscat said he would rather focus on the political implications of the current “unsustainable” scenario and added that it was up to the Prime Minister to make the necessary decisions.

Dr Sceberras Trigona’s was “a good academic exercise”, Dr Muscat said.

Categories
Mediawatch

Anton Refalo & the law

Writing in the Malta Independent Today, Daphne Caruana Galizia takes another (well deserved) dig at Alex Sciberras Trigona and rightly points out the blatant incongruence of AST’s “democratic” arguments. It’s not just that AST has the barefaced cheek of calling the present situation undemocratic but also that he has got the basic constitutional principles wrong – as J’accuse has explained time and again, this government is legitimate so long as it does not lose a confidence vote in parliament. Daphne mentions the efforts of the Labour party to “rewrite history” and a quick look at the J’accuse archives points to how this effort at propagandist revisionism was predictable some time back (see The J’accuse 2011 Tag Cloud under “History Manipulation”).

The trouble (or one of the troubles) with Labour is that in their effort to counter the PN “30-years Back” propaganda they are coming up with the most brazenly offensive bits of propaganda with regard to the present government in an effort to picture its tenure as some dictatorial, non-law abiding clique in the style of an Army Coup in some tin pot democracy. Labour’s propaganda technique is simple: repeat a lie so many times that it begins to sound like the truth. We are not talking of legal nitpicking on some moot point that could go both ways but about a simple constitutional principle that yells in your face. A government is a government so long as it does not lose its support in parliament. The only way to gauge that support is by votes in parliament – not by declarations in MaltaToday or interpretations in MaltaStar or status updates on facebook. Simple.

Or it should be simple. Right beneath Daphne’s article (on the Indy Online) lies an article by Labour’s spokesman for Gozo Anton Refalo. The man’s reputation among legal circles is of an efficient lawyer – efficient does not translate to good and believe you me in this case good is very far from efficient. You see the laws of the land also include procedural elements and ethical components with regard to the functioning of a lawyer in assisting his clients. By abiding by these laws and procedures, lawyers form part of a wider system that does its best to mete out justice for all: blindly, impartially and equally. The rules of representation and chinese walls between lawyer and client in particular are very important for this functioning. I harbour strong doubts whether Anton Refalo, Gozo’s aspiring Minister even has a clue about how these should really work.

He gave us an example of his grasp of constitutional politics in today’s article. The bottom line is simple… the laws are just there for your aesthetic convenience. Follow the “social contract” (which one Anton? Should we have an Alfred Sant-like stunt every election with the Dear Leader signing some “social contract” for the fun of the people complete with Notary in attendance?) and forget the law.

The GonziPN can twist and spin the story beyond reasonable boundaries but the bottom line remains the same: That is, that the PN has lost the working majority in the House. Even if the Constitution still gives the PN the legal rights to remain in power, morally and politically it might not. There is no other way but to put an end to this situation by giving the people the right to express their view.

By refusing to take this step, the Prime Minister is putting himself in a situation where his legitimacy is being eroded. The Prime Minister must realise that ultimately any democratically-elected sovereign derives his legitimacy more from an unwritten social contract than from the written laws.

Well Anton. A democratically elected sovereign will go to the polls once it is clear that he has lost the working majority of the house. He does so when a vote of confidence is called in the house (as has been done over the past year) and when that vote of confidence is lost (as has not happened yet). In the meantime all the talk about legitimacy and undemocratic regimes is just a load of hot air, talk and bravado. It may work elsewhere Anton, but so long as the law is to be abided and so long as we have a modicum of decency in the application of that law then you’ll have to wait for the inevitable vote of confidence that will crop up in the last semester of this year.

The law Anton, we are all servants of the law so that we may be free.