Tag: Muscat

Categories
Constitutional Development

Democracy Everywhere

indonesia_akkuzaJoseph Muscat’s positively progressive band of meritocratic men announce the scrapping of Local Council Elections as a cost cutting exercise and practically nobody other than the opposition bats an eyelid. Ah but the opposition is negative isn’t it? And we need to save money because this administration has turned the very business of government into an expensive enterprise by exploding the emoluments bill for the meritocratically selected mandarins that have been absorbed within its ranks (and thus artificially adjusting unemployment figures).

Muscat speaks so proudly of legislative reform and second republic and emancipation of younger voters but then takes a right royal crap on democratic representation. We should be used by now to his Carollian interpretation of all the mechanics of democratic representation and how the constitution really works. So long as the newspeak keeps the sheep happy.

Not so in the fourth most populous democracy in the world. An Islamic democracy to boot – with all the perceived connotations of a feeble grasp of how representation really work:

The Indonesian parliament voted to scrap direct elections for regional office-bearers early Friday — a decision that critics say is a step backward for democracy in the world’s fourth most populous nation and biggest Muslim-majority country.When Indonesians woke up to the news, many reacted with anger and fury. “A Democratic Betrayal,” read the Jakarta Globe headline on Friday. (TIME)

Indonesia must be replete with “negative thinkers” who are ready to pounce on and criticise a progressive and positive government. I am sure Muscat would have a word or two for the people gathering out of the Indonesian parliament: to protest the scrapping of local elections.

Wake up and smell the coffee indeed. Rather than hanging onto tired clichès about Simon Busuttil’s negativity, the electorate would do well to listen to the dangerous warning signals that he highlighted during the Independence Day speech. The erosion of a culture of democracy and democratic representation begins when the electorate is prepared to allow people like Muscat’s band to take them for a ride.

Scrapping local elections should never be on the cards. No excuse is good enough – particularly the ridiculous cost-cutting exercise that Muscat seems to be clinging to as a lame excuse.

 

Categories
Hunting

The Hunters and the Palace

hutners_akkuzaAll the love that Labour’s lost. Well in many ways it is just desserts. Whenever I asked how sustainable Muscat’s populist politics I always seem to be given confident answers in the positive. Of course it is sustainable – people are happy and happy people will generate wealth. Really?

On a recent visit to the island I had a chance to speak to persons active within the Labour party. They were overwhelmed by what they described as the triumph of different strands of progressive thought that were being allowed to express themselves. To me it seemed like a particularly strong attack of drug induced delirium but they were really convinced that the progress made in different legislative fields and the introduction of “rights” was the result of some progressive dialectic that was taking place within the Labour party and finding itself baked into government policy.

Blinded by such laudable successes as the belated introduction of gay partnership rights they actually believed that this was the beginning of the unraveling of a great programme of Labour social and civic policy.  At no point did they suspect that this was Labour allowing all the mini-sectors of society who had provided the much needed votes to cash their hard-earned cheques. No one was suspecting that this peppering of ex gratia interventions had no foundation in solid planning.

Trust the hunters to be the first to call the bluff. They had to be. The unruly lot are mired in twisted self-perception based on misconstruction of such terms as “conservation”. They have always laboured under the illusion of constituting a veritable block vote that will first and foremost back their “namur”. What was that daubed in paint on the Mnajdra Temples way back in less suspicious days? “Namur jew intajru”?

Muscat had wooed them with vague accommodating signals. Relaxing of licensing rules, a not too helpful approach with the nature wardens – including mass transfers of experienced personnel. Even the courts joined in the surreal dance by arraigning bird lovers for having displayed dead carcasses. Could you blame the Kaccaturi for thinking “Illum il-gvern taghna u naghmlu li irridu”? I wonder which strand of socialist progressivism leads to that kind of thinking. Not that the kaccaturi ever seem to care which party is sucking on their immense balls in order to pander to their vote-winning quality.

Yet here was their latest hero. Muscat’s government even went so far as to propose the sabotaging of the democratic process of local elections in what was too suspiciously a ploy to facilitate the hunters’ hand in the forthcoming referendum on spring hunting. How could they imagine such a paladin ever turning against them? He had dangled enough carrots to woo even the most hardened of donkeys onto his side.

Then they overdid it. The kids who had been handed air guns and catapults for Christmas suddenly found themselves in detention for shooting the neighbours cat and skinning it for good measure. Suddenly generous daddy who had won their kisses and praise became an irrational punisher. They could not fathom why. So they burnt the labour tesseri on youtube and yelled “No Kacca, No Party”. Oh how heavy handed Muscat seemed. Un pugno di ferro. And this after his monumental “moral” decision to keep out a sailor who was sick with hepatitis (it could have been ebola you know… and our hospital is prepared for an outbreak but not one that involves foreigners).

Of course Muscat’s bark could very well be a handy decision to boost Karmenu Vella’s chances during his commission grilling as a potential Environment Commissioner. If he is asked about Armier Boathouses and the raping of public land in order to get votes he may feign not having understood and repeat “But we stopped hunting abruptly” ad infinitum. You’d be surprised what percentage of gullible persons exist in any random collection of homo sapiens.

Once the grilling is over Muscat may yet return to the table with the Kaccaturi San Isplodu and hand out a few more carrots. He is also safe in the knowledge that the hunters cannot really threaten with votes since if his local council move really happens, the hunters will not be asked their opinion on which party is most likely to suck up to their demands before 2018.

The hunters are in the palace all right. They are busy exposing the faults in the underlying premises of Malta Taghna Lkoll. They may yet be appeased for another season but we have them to thank if Labour’s hypocritic policies are finally being exposed for what they are.

Bang.

 

Categories
Mediawatch

The Messenger

Just as all the oohs and aahs were beginning to gain momentum, the government has made it abundantly clear that the Dalli Mater Dei report does not represent an official government position. It might, on the face of it, seem strange that the government is distancing itself from what is definitely turning out to be a damning report of “bad practices under GonziPN”. It is not strange however when you step back and look at it in the general order of how the Taghna Lkoll government functioned – both when in opposition and now that it is in government. Muscat tends to prefer the non-committal policy which is really a non-policy. What happens is that the Labour party gains time acting like some kind of all-encompassing party (Musumeci’s ridiculous concept of “moviment”) and then when it has sussed out what popular opinion is on the subject it goes ahead and claims some kind of ownership of the idea – or ditches it as someone elses.

Taghna Lkoll is still learning that this kind of modus operandi does not always work – just look at the passport for sale fiasco: the turnaround occurred too late since the law had already been enacted and the egg was splashed all over the government’s face and reputation. Dalli’s report, loaded as it is with innuendos of personal vendettas and burdned with the unfinished business in Brussels might still turn out not to be such a smoking gun that does any good to Labour’s purposes. Already the nurses are up in arms (whether rightly or not is another issue) so what does Muscat do? Well, via his metatron the Health Minister he declares that the Dalli report is “not the government’s position”. Next we will have two boards examining the report itself – it’s beginning to sound like an administrative nightmare.

Muscat will not ask you not to shoot the messenger. He’s actually quite happy to put the messenger high on a pedestal and have him as a prime target… deflecting attention from whatever position he may eventually end up taking. What is important is that there is a new spin trying to breathe new life into the idea of “the wastage and corruption under the nationalists”. Still governing by opposition, still unable to actually print that roadmap we heard of so often in the run up to last election.

messenger_AKKUZA

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Muscat’s Going Medieval

It just occurred to me that we now have full confirmation that all the TaghnaLkoll talk of roadmaps and costings was nothing but an elaborate bluff. The information that we now have in hand regarding Henley’s role in the Passports for Sale scheme shows us that far from projecting Malta into the age of modern business as Muscat was so eager to highlight, we are witnessing a regression to Medieval business. Yep, that’s the Middle Ages – definitely before your grandpapa was alive.

You see, ever eager to make a quick buck, the current Maltese government has hatched a scheme that makes a mockery of the prized possession of Maltese and EU citizenship and all this simply to create a very-medieval scheme of exclusive monopoly. What was done by medieval towns is now being practiced by the dinosaurs in charge of our economy with more than a little connivance by those supposedly in charge of our safety and security. In the past Medieval towns would grant traders exclusivity over a particular merchandise and then take a cut on all the trade that occurs. Simples. No sweat, just a seal and a little tax.

Muscat could not exactly come up with some form of government approved monopoly in, say, colour televisions. Of course not. This is not 1984 (meh). He took one thing that could not really be commercialised (and this for obvious reasons such as national security and integrity) and changed it into a cheap trick available to someone who could relatively afford a mezzanine in Luxembourg’s outskirts. Nobody in his entourage could be trusted in selling this kind of merchandise so he found an outside company that will get a huge cut on every transaction. No time for niceties so the same company getting the cut will be trusted (please, stop laughing in the back) to vet applicants and possibly refuse a potential killing simply because it might develop a conscience and believe that Malta’s territorial integrity is at stake.

This medieval scheme is now having the not so welcome result that international agreements with states such as the US of A might be imperiled insofar as VISA waiver schemes are concerned. Would you blame them? They can tell a trojan horse when they see one – not that Muscat would know. He’s busy going medieval on our citizenship and transforming our nation into a peddler of the cheapest kind.


 

Categories
Campaign 2013

Ex post – Elephants and the constitution

A couple of days back (28th November) I had uploaded a post discussing “the elephant in the room” that would be so conspicuous during the budget debate. The elephant in question is of course Franco Debono’s not too veiled threat to vote against the budget and thus bring about the end of GonziPN’s term in office. Having seen his last hopes of reconciliation fritter away with Simon Busuttil’s volte face on the matter Franco has been in Armageddon mode ever since.

One of the arguments I made in that post referred to the position(s) taken by Joseph Muscat – and this was before his jaw-dropping post-budget assertion that Labour is the best party to put Tonio Fenech’s budget into practice. Muscat’s appropriation of the PN government’s financial plans was to me the final straw that definitely ruled out any vote for Labour (not that there was much hope there but I had left an open door waiting for a very, very convincing argument in that respect – needless to say that argument never turned up). Muscat’s actual position on the budget notwithstanding I had stated:

If Muscat were half the statesman he wishes to be then he would be operating differently. The interest of governance and governability would trump his greed for getting into government. He should not be reinforcing Franco Debono and that parliamentarian’s hara-kiri. At the end of the day the election is months away in any case – budget or no budget. Muscat could use this opportunity to pull the carpet from under Franco’s legs and be in command of his own party’s destiny. His best move would be to instruct two or more of his MPs (how many are necessary) to abstain in the budget vote. The budget would pass, without the vote of labour who would go on record as having voted against.

As far as I know (and I’m not particularly keen on this calling dibs business) this was the first time that this theoretical approach was mentioned in the media (printed or otherwise). Last night though a “Guest Post” was up on the Runs discussing the very idea though it was presented as “A rather bizarre rumour is doing the rounds.” The abstention, according to the rumour, would no longer be from one or two of Muscat’s MPs but Joseph Muscat himself. Guestposterontheruns proceeded to rubbish the idea:

Should this scenario come to pass, Labour would once again show that it has turned inconsistency and lack of principle into an art. How can a prospective prime minister and party leader vote one way while his entire party vote for its antithesis on what is essentially a vote of confidence in this government? How can the entire Opposition vote to bring down the government while its leader votes to keep it in place? How can the party leader himself vote against the party whip?

The anonymous writer – presumably fearful of showing her name lest she loses her day job for having an opinion (you know given these oppressive times we live in) – goes on to explain that “Unlike the case of divorce, a budgetary vote is not, and cannot be, a matter of conscience. There is no free vote on the matter and there cannot be, under any circumstance.” Which might make for quite a convincing argument. In a vacuum. All other things being equal (as Labourites apparently tend to think).

What guestposterontheruns fails to notice is the constitutional underpinning of the original theoretical scenario. While it may be argued that the value of the budgetary vote is a political vote that is not tied to conscience or free votes, its value is grounded in the fact that a budgetary vote is also an implied vote of confidence in government. A budgetary vote therefore is all about the stability of government and governance.

Should Joseph Muscat take up the J’accuse suggestion and use his vote in order to undermine Franco Debono’s efforts to vote against the budget irrespective of its content then Muscat would be acting in order to guarantee the very principle of governmental stability that underpins our constitutional provisions. The message and precedent set would be of extreme importance, not just for the government of the day (whose days are counted anyway) but also for future governments and their MPs. A renegade MP linking a budgetary vote to a personal issue (Austin Gatt) will not be seconded in his actions by the opposition.

This point is valid irrespectively of the inherent contradiction of the Labour party’s political position on the budget itself (we like it, we adopt it but we will vote against it). The arguments made by guestposterontheruns are short-sighted in that they tackle Muscat as the Labour leader within the current electoral campaign and scenario. The theoretical scenario I originally posted is neutral of current events and could be applied to any future scenario where a renegade MP abuses of his position.

That is what the “statesman” business is all about. Constitutionally, the need to establish a clear precedent for our two-party system and that states that renegade MP shenanigans will not be seconded in order to cause unnecessary instability, trumps by far the usual customary rules with regard to budgetary votes (whip, free vote etc).

The “rumour” might after all not turn out to be true (or simply sourced from a careful reader of this blog). I also have my doubts about how much Muscat and his team would understand the true value of the strategy I outlined. Even in short-term political terms it would be quite a winner for Labour. To be seen as not wanting power at all costs, to pull the carpet from under Franco’s feet and to simply wait a few more months (two?) for the government to run its natural course would be a boost for a party still reeling from its mishandling of the early post-budget.

I suspect that the very fact of the danger that Muscat might actually contemplate such a scenario that runs havoc with the PNs electoral plans is what must have prompted guestposterontheruns  to write about the “rumour” in the first place. Always if the rumour turns out to be true, that is.

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Allons enfants de l’austerity

Some required reading from today’s Figaro. Unfortunately the editorial is still not available online for non-paying members so I have typed out the main quote. We will see more of this in tonight’s debate between Francois Hollande and Sarkozy  but what is more interesting is how the main thrust of the problems that will be debated is a universal set of issues that apply Europe-wide.

Last time round the nationalist party cloned Sarkozy’s slogan “Ensemble, tout est possible” (Flimkien kollox possibli). This time we might see some more inevitable parallels. France’s “progressive” left built around anti-Sarkozyism is running a campaign built on “Hope”.

Hollande has promised employment and work but while his appealing rhetoric might sound great for the anti-austerity crowd it has already attracted the worried stares of the financial markets. Sarkozy is basing his challenge on facing the stark reality of failed models and failed economies.

May day’ speeches in Malta might be a taste of similar things to come closer to home. Joseph Muscat’s hope and rhetoric still fails the basic test of “Show me the money”. Combine that with his pre-hedging regarding “Hofra Mark 2012” (or the gap in finances he will obviously be surprised to discover once he is elected PM) and you seem to be getting a perfect clone of François Hollande.

There is much more to be read into this and I will do so as soon as I find the time. Here is part of Le Figaro’s editorial. For an amusing reading try replacing NS with Lawrence Gonzi and FH with Joseph Muscat.

“(NS) a défendu un nouveau modèle français, fondé sur un constat d’évidence : la mondialisation bouscule tout, tout est donc à repenser si on ne veut pas etre englouti. Le viex modéle social, perpétuellement financé à crédit, ne tient plus la route. Si l’on ne fait rien, il s’écroulera bientot. (…) (FH) connait bien le problème de fond de sa campagne. Il promet des choses qu’il ne pourra tenir, puisque tous les créanciers de la France – la fameuse “finance” – l’observeront seconde par seconde.”

(watch the video top-right from 14 minutes)