Categories
Politics

The politics of serenity

I don’t know whether Carm Mifsud Bonnici has his own facebook account – though I know that he does blog on a regular basis. If he does have a facebook account – or if he did – it would be fitting if his current status read “serene”. He told reporters that felt serene both before and after the vote of confidence and this because he was prepared for every eventuality. Kudos to Carm Mifsud Bonnici who has opted to put on a brave display of cool, calm and a very Christian (democrat) form of zen. It is no coincidence that the emotional and physical behaviour of Mifsud Bonnici provide a stark contrast to the picture of a power hungry, angry and revengeful Franco Debono.

Joseph Muscat may have stressed the fact that this government (read the parliamentary group) remains divided and that no amount of confidence motions survived with the speaker’s vote or that of a recalcitrant Debono will improve the situation but the leader of the progressive movement may be missing the wood for the trees. The lack of political acumen in Labour is ever so glaringly obvious when they persist in error. The very rift that caused glee among labourite supporters and among those nationalists who are dying to spite GonziPN by seeing the end of it is the very foundation upon which the nationalist party’s potential revival is built upon.

How I hear you ask? Well to begin with the issue of the CMB motion was an eye opener of itself. Politics as it should be was nowhere to be seen. You may get the sweeping statements about the “unjust justice system” and you may have an opposition spokesman turning a list of grievances about the courts, the police and the laws into a show of unhappiness. What we did have in actual terms however was a bloodthirsty attack at the throat of an ex-Minister – for by the time the motion was presented (and amended into a call for resignation) that was what CMB had become.

If the subject of the motion had been the supposedly disastrous state of affairs in the justice ministry then the only resignation that should have been demanded – and a symbolic one at that – should have been of the Minister currently in charge of the portfolio. That would be Minister Chris Said. So many lessons of ministerial responsibility, collective responsibility, governmental responsibility had been given in press conferences and long-winded speeches that one would have expected this motion to be directed at the right person. But no.

And it is evident why not. Because politics and responsibility had nothing to do with this motion. Whether or not you agree with the ills that befell our justice and security systems in the past few years, your cause, your petita was not considered one bit. Instead – as has been widely documented – this was a vendetta. It was personal.

J’accuse has elsewhere complained about the use of certain terminology in politics. The martyr complex, the excessive descriptions of “suffering” and “hurt”. A large part of our voting masses reason in these terms. It is no crude calculation on the basis of policies but rather a complex build up of emotions where a partisan DNA struggles with feeling of entitlement, chips on the shoulder and some weird collective illusion that politicians suffer whenever they “serve” the people.

Carm Mifsud Bonnici’s serene acceptance of the inevitable outcome of the vendetta plot is no cup of hemlock. It is a rallying call. Strategically the moment of serenity is a necessary stroke of genius. Given that the political battle on a national level seems to have taken the direction of being fought out on the emotional rather than the factual fields then might as well take the cue early in this pre-election run. Mifsud Bonnici’s serenity comes out stronger when contrasted to the actions of his self-appointed nemesis Debono and that of the braying power-or-nothing pitchfork gang on the benches of the opposition.

We would have thought that exposing the absolute vacuum that is Labour’s sum total of projects and preparedness for its time in government would have been enough for PN to have a field day. On second thoughts and having seen the latest events unfold we cannot but applaud the emotional counter-moves that have begun to surface. If anything it will distract attention from the embarassing gaffes being committed in the social marketing field – better known as the mychoice.pn campaign.

Categories
Politics

PM.pn – auctioning off the prime minister

I’m afraid that I may be a little late on this one since I was still lounging by the pool when this “initiative” made the headlines. To be quite honest when I first heard of it I thought it was a joke – a funny “tickle me under the arms” affair that goes by the name of satire these days. Could it be that the lads at Bis-Serjetà pulled off another “The Onion” inspired headline?  Sadly my first hunch was wrong and the Partit Nazzjonalista was really offering its followers a chance to “become PM for a day” (and win an iPad 3 to boot).  Here is how the Independent reported the possible winnings (PN launches “Be PM for a day”):

The winner of this contest will be handed the opportunity to propose one particular idea or project, as well as naming his or her own members of Cabinet and members of parliament from their acquaintances. The winner will spend a whole day with the Prime Minister on Tuesday, 19 June during which he or she will get to meet the press, tour the corridors of Castille, and discuss policy ideas with Dr Gonzi.

Now this idea of “reaching out” to the public by one of our two political parties smacks of “wrong” in so many ways that I risk missing out on some of them if I do not turn them into a “list”. In these days when marketing and snazzy websites might trump content many people might think that this move is actually “good”, we beg to differ and here is why:

1. PN (a party) – PM (a head of government)

The first and most obvious objection to this crass exercise of X Factor meets Castille is the fact that a party initiative, kicking off from a party website is auctioning off the role of a government position. Not just any government position but THE BIG KAHUNA. It’s the PM seat for chrissakes and they are not even playing make believe. For it would be one thing if the winner would “fake” being Prime Minister and play along in a sort of re-enactment with his friends and the press… you know a sort of King Carnival but for politics. But it’s another thing when our Prime Minister is actually part and parcel of the prize. Which brings me to point two…

2. Does not PM Gonzi have better things to do?

After all what with all these ridiculous motions by the opposition, an economy to hold steady and a government with that perilous one seat majority you would expect a Prime Minister to spend his time in better ways than prancing around with a make believe duplicate addressing press releases about fancy projects from the citizen. What does he expect them to come up with? Something fantastical? A tunnel to Gozo perhaps?

3. The Miseducation of Joe Citizen

Once we’re on this play acting business, even if we were prepared to play along with the party game then there is the not too irrelevant business of education. If we really are trying to get something out of this exercise how about not drumming home the idea that the PM is such a powerful man that he names “his or her own members of Cabinet and members of parliament from their acquaintances”. I mean for crying out loud do they not even stop and read what they propose? A PM choosing members of parliament? From their acquaintances? What shall we call it? “Il-parlament tal-ħbieb (tal=ħbieb) tal-Prim Ministru”? A prime minister does not choose members of parliament – the people do. That’s lesson number one in basic democratic skills innit?

4. Tour the corridors of Castille and discuss policy

Seriously. I was under the impression that Castille had its open days during the nuits blanches that are thrown every now and then. Anybody could get to walk into Castille and shake Dr Gonzi’s hand. As for policy – this is running a bit thin isn’t it? I mean is this the best “listening” the PN can do?

The “Be a PM for a day” is an exercise that would be more fitting in Azerbaijan than in Malta. Yet it is happening and the danger is that it is actually being taken seriously by the fourth estate and the voters who are meant to be more demanding on our politicians and their parties. What next? Shall we bring Simon Cowell in to evaluate the contestants? After all guys like Christian Peregin might have a conflict of interest selecting the winner while also interviewing them on the day they got to play PM.

Strength and resilience. Lord knows that we’re going to need much of those till election time.

 

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.

 

Categories
Politics

Malta Post-Franco (II) – Franco

There could be no other place to begin than with the main protagonist. Franco Debono kept the whole nation waiting with bated breath for the unfolding of whatever his plan might be. Notwithstanding his declared agenda it was hard to second guess where he may be going with it – especially since the timing of most of his decisions seemed to be misjudged and more importantly because whatever plans he had were constantly outshone by his ego.

It could be that in order to fight the establishment you do need balls the size of Mosta dome and it is also a fact that in Malta short of renting an applaud-me crowd of hacks and elves you end up having to blow your own trumpet. It could be all that and more but there seemed to be more than one point where Franco Debono seemed to have lost the plot.

To be fair most of the contents of Franco Debono’s list of grievances survive the test of political sanity. They are far from being a Norman Lowell style list of anachronistic or loony policies. Taken individually some of the minor points (cassette tapes in court) tend to remove  the shine from a plan that includes wholistic institutional reform and a strong direct challenge to the PLPN lifeline of unregulated party financing. Franco Debono has done more for the cause of highlighting the problems of our duopolistic rush to mediocrity than anyone else in the last twenty years. So what  went wrong?

Well beyond the egomaniacal self-aggrandisement and the scattered presentation of the grievances, Franco Debono’s biggest problem was one: timing. It is always a pertinent question to ask when analysing the news: Why Now? Why indeed did Franco rock the boat when he did? Franco’s edginess became pronounced following the divorce vote in parliament – Dr Gonzi’s vote against the popular vote seems to have done the trick. The problem is that judging by what Franco has to say nowadays there is no real correlation between the divorce vote and the problems he highlights.

From day one, this government has always been at risk of being at the mercy of a one-seat renegade. As I pointed out early after last election, GonziPN might have snatched victory from the jaws of defeat but this was done at a the expense of stability. It was not just the one seat-majority but also the pick’n’mix of candidates that were virtually an undeclared coalition of disparate ideas and agendas patched together simply to garner votes.

So why does Franco wait till the dying moments of this legislature before dropping the big bomb? The urgency of institutional reform and of electoral reform did not occur overnight. The question of “cliques” running our political parties – a direct consequence of their internal systems adapting to the parallel mechanisms of power on a national scale – were also there from Day 1. So why now?

The outcome of last Thursday’s vote might point to a compromise having been reached. Did Franco get a promise that the legislation he wants will be passed through parliament? That’s highly unlikely. You do not prepare a “wholistic change” to constitutional structures in six months. Even the much taunted Party Financing bill risks running into a 3/4 majority parliament wall should it attempt to introduce crimes for violations of electoral law.

So if that was not the compromise what was? The hunch we have is that Franco is attempting to change the power hierarchies of the nationalist party by threatening the stability of government. The hints are there – his calls for PM Gonzi’s resignation are qualified with additional calls that he should change his ring of advisors and that a number of ministers’ heads should roll. Ironically Debono sees the strongest justification for filling the party hierarchies (and Ministries) as being popular support : universal suffrage.

So Debono’s timing for the party financing and reform laws blew the wind out of his sails as to whether or not he is the great champion of reform. Instead the timing of his abstention and all that surrounds it points to the real battle he seems to be engaging: an internal one within the PN hierarchy. Either Don Quixote has chosen the wrong windmill to battle or he has identified the wrong priority.

Again Debono stands as living proof of the wrong perception that PLPN politics has of our nation’s constitutional construct. Oftentimes we use the word “arrogant” to describe politicians. Well the arrogance of PLPN political thought lies in the fact that to them the constitutional institutions and the rules governing them are there to serve the party and its need to fit in a duopolistic system of alternation.

Which is what leads a backbencher who is suddenly thrust into a chair of dizzying slim-majority power in parliament to take on the whole system with the simple aim of improving his stance within the Nationalist party hierarchy.

To get at Austin Gatt, Joe Saliba, Carm Mifsud Bonnici, Richard Cachia Caruana and others Franco Debono decided that the best option was to threaten to topple government. He had had enough waiting in the sidelines for his opinions and ideas to be heard and for a place in the decision making clique that counts. So he refused to play.

The honourable aims of reforming and improving our constitutional and institutional framework, of changing our electoral laws and rules of party financing became a club to be wielded clumsily in the hands of a very angry backbencher who believed that he had been overlooked one time too many.

What next for Debono? It remains to be seen whether the nationalist party will play out their part of the deal that won them a temporary respite from the Debono tsunami. His role within the party is imperiled if he fails to obtain the right to present himself as a candidate for the next election. Technically his career should be over: “sacrificed” as he likes to put it, for the greater good. Ironically he might be a magnet for the kind of voter that liked his shit-stirring antics and who would rather vote a maverick than vote labour. That kind of voter believed Franco’s promises of reform and is the kind who would have loved Franco’s swan song in parliament.

Debono’s fate is intrinsically tied to the decisions that the party that he claims he loves will take in the near future. If the PN once again will be in the business of assembling a rag-tag group of disparate candidates then he might be in on the off-chance that his Champion of the Disgruntled image wins him a few number 1s. It will be a hard struggle though and until the next elections Debono might still have the last word in precipitating a Nationalist party decision to go to the polls.

The Age of the Generalissimo is, in all probability, almost over.

 

Categories
Politics

Prep Talk for an Election

The Debono Damocles’ Sword still hangs on the nationalist government notwithstanding all the peace entreaties of the last hours. Lawrence Gonzi must be plucking away at his own version of “loves me – loves me not” petals while rumour has it that the strategy team at Pietà are already hard at work preparing for a tough campaign. So what we have really is speculation about the “when” of an election and the closer we get to the official expiry date of the nationalist mandate the more the “if” becomes superfluous. It’s all well and good for the punters and underground betters who would slip a euro or two on the outcome of Thursday’s confidence vote but if we were to look at the happenings from a wider point of view the importance of this moment is minor. Trivial even.

For the day will come when the election is called – with or without a Franco tantrum – and the nation will shift to election gear without as much as a by-your-leave. That day will mark the first day in the life of Franco the non-entity, relegated to the footnotes of history and the school reports of a Jesuit college. It will also be the end of speculation as to whether an election should take place and this will be replaced by speculation on who will get the most votes. We’ve seen the polls that talk of swings of point advantages and of the presumed underdogs. We are still in the realm of electioneering though – it’s all about tactic. When to call the election, what marketing and spin to push in the run up to gather people’s attention, and then we move into the appearances – the debates, the flaws and the track records.

All well and good. We are after all experts in the field. If Italy is a nation of football coaches, Malta is a nation of election supremos. Everybody knows what it takes to win an election. Or to lose it. What we do seem to be forgetting more and more – as we are all taken up with suppositions, political chess moves and admiration/scorn at the latest politician who makes his move in the arena – what we seem to be forgetting is that politics is about content. You know: the program, the manifesto, the ideas, the management plan, the principles espoused by the candidates. Yep those. Because whether Franco caves in on Thursday or whether we will have an election close to the next budget makes no difference. Theoretically we need to be voting on content.

And my friends, lend me your ears – I’ll repay you with interest – of content there does not seem to be much. Gatt, Cachia Caruana and lord knows who else might be locked in some room planning strategy but if they are going by the same measure as last time round then strategy involves packaging muck and shit and selling it as gold in the hope that enough consumers fall for it. There will also be large helpings of “the others are a crock of unelectable shite” to go around – which is short of a synoptic way of saying “hey, who cares what we have to offer – so long as you don’t get the other bunch”.

Now if I was a part of the Nationalist party with its history I would be speaking in the language of sacrifices and principles. This is the time of sackcloth and rolling up of sleeves. This is the time for the party to look inwards and ask itself who it wants to be and what principles it wants to espouse. From the social (education, pensions, solidarity) to the economic (how to run a nation responsibly, thriftily while stimulating creativity and open competition). First get your DNA in place. Then comes the all important part. Only get people on board who are willing to fight for this plan. They must believe in these principles more than they must yearn for power. For power is borrowed in trust but principles should be for life.

The sacrifice that a reformed nationalist party must be prepared to make is that it should be clear that it prefers principles over power. A minority in parliament with strong beliefs is a stronger foundation for the future than a ramshackle combination of mercenaries prepared to win the temporary vote but without a clue about the road ahead.

This is the real prep talk that should be on the lips of the nationalist party team right now. It should be obvious that power for power’s sake is a dangerous weapon indeed. And I have the feeling that the first person to notice this will be Joseph Muscat should he wake up in a Castille office the first working day after the election.

Categories
Politics

The Value-Mouth Relationship

Much is being made in the Labour-friendly press and media about the supposed strategic “U-turn” that is in progress in the spanking new halls at PN HQ. I will look into the fallacy of the “u-turn” argument in one of my next posts and will attempt to explain how rather than a “u-turn”, the current within PN thinking might actually be a correct interpretation of christian-democrat politics for the 21st century – always admitting that there is one version of correct in politics (let’s call it “more correct”).

What is more important at this junction is that the nationalist party wants to be seen as being seriously committed to a set of updated values – a commitment underlined by the fact that Lawrence Gonzi spoke in terms of a “pacta sunt servanda” (patti chiari, amicizia lunga) approach. That’s right. If this exercise is not going to turn out to be an exercise in shiny marketing rewrapping of the kind that was slowly proving to be the undoing of the nationalist party’s values then it should not be limited to fine talk but should be transformed into concrete action.

The fourth point in the new PN document presented at the General Council is a direct reference to “taking decisions responsibly”. With the commitment to take decisions responsibly comes the onus to take responsibility for one’s actions. A tautology if ever there was one but a clear one for that. Accountability can no longer remain a buzzword in the propaganda circles when you are committing yourself to strengthening the value-driven approach to politics.

Which is why Joseph Grech of the Gozo Channel Co. should no longer hold the position of Chairman today. A ministerial reprimand does not suffice in the eyes of those who are supposed to be learning the new lessons and approach of “patti chiari, amicizia lunga”. I don’t know if it was the young turk Carol Aquilina who stated that the PN rightly choses people it can trust  to manage important positions in government or state-related companies. Sure Carol, but the corollary to that reasoning is that the PN trusts such persons to carry out the job because it believes that they are the right vehicles to bring into effect the policies that are inspired by the PN’s basic principles. The circle of trust is double – the PN government trusts them with putting policy into action but it does so as the custodian of the trust “lent” (and I emphasise the lending part) to it by the people.

Joseph Grech’s move to call back a Gozo Ferry was not a gaffe. It was an administrative no-no of the highest order – described as an “abuse of office” in most law books. A serious government wanting to impress with the value of responsibility cannot factor the idea of “resignation” out of the equation… otherwise the message is not of responsibility but of “friends of friends” come what may.

The meter of updated values has to begin to apply as of yesterday. Even when selecting its round of candidates for next elections the PN must bear this in mind. You cannot whitewash over past errors simply by wearing a new dress. Pardon the cliche but actions are worth a thousand words… and the PN needs to start acting fast.