Coalition government impossible

Mark Camilleri

Feb 21st 2008, 12:39

Dear Mr. Aquilina. I suffered 5 years of hell because of the Family Act introduced by a 1950's church leaning-PN. Maybe it was their way for thanking me for voting PN 4 times on the tot. There will be no 5th time as I find myself more at home with AD. If the Prime Minister is gambling on me to vote for him because the alternative is labour, he has a fast one coming. The only alternative is AD.........or nothing at all. When the PM comes down to earth the situation may be reconsidered.

Joseph Aquilina

Feb 20th 2008, 12:14

Dear Mr Schembri, when comparing PN and MLP I think the latter are more likely to take us back to the 50s than the foremost. AD is it is have no chance to make a coalition with PN, which means that they can only hope for a coalition with MLP. Now do you prefer to see Dr.Sant or Dr.Gonzi as PM of Malta? Maybe you are right, under PN there is less change that civil rights such as divorce are implemented, but is that the only thing our country needs?

Jo Jo Schembri

Feb 19th 2008, 12:46

Joseph, you make a good point about the PN getting civil liberties EXCEPT where the church is involved. In that case Edward Spiteri is correct. It is very obvious that 5 more years or PN will take the clock back to the 1950's and this worries me and makes me refrain from a PN governing without a coalition. So far I won't vote for any devil but I admit I am very much tempted by AD. I have read that they are an evolved version of the PN and in some respects there is no doubt about that but ultimately it is the PN's fundamentalist / backward looking social / civil policies that make me adamant not to vote for them.

Joseph Aquilina

Feb 19th 2008, 11:12

Dear Mr.Spiteri, Do you have the right for a FAIR TRAIL? Do you have the right for PRIVACY? The right of PEACFULL PROTEST? The right to VOTE? The right to PERSONAL FREEDOM? The right to FREEDOM of MOVEMENT? The right of EQUAL PROTECTION? As much as I know all these civil rights are far from repressed here in Malta and mostly thanks to a Nationalist government. I do not believe this is the right place to argue if divorce should be allowed or not because I believe we both (not only you) would be beating a dead horse :) However I wanted to show you that here in Malta I feel we are far away from having civil rights REPRESSED as Mr.Zammit stated. My message to you is “Should we decide our government on personal or on national needs?”.

Edward A. Spiteri

Feb 19th 2008, 10:00

Of course there is a repression of civil rights in Malta. Do you know that the government sold my civil rights to the church and that I cannot get an annulment in court before submitting to the church? Do you realise that there is no divorce in Malta - unlike the rest of the world?....and I could go on but I suspect I am beating a dead horse. Actually Mr Aquilina - I must beg the question of whether you live in Malta. Mr. Calleja I respect and support your views.

Robert Callus

Feb 18th 2008, 18:03

I agree 100% with Joe Calleja's statement.

I'm an environmentalist and AD is the only party that has an impeccable record on this issue. Last minute gimmicks by Gonzi do not impress me much.

However, the main reason I'm voting AD is democracy not the environment.

The two main parties do not work on their strengths but on the other party's weaknesses.

I believe this country deserves better. I'm waiting for the day when people start voting for someone, because they agree with his policies and have faith in his administration.

I will vote AD because they are the only party who focus on policies (the majority of which I agree on) NOT on wigs and smiles.

Other countries have done it, some with coalitions. We can do it - together. The problem is that some want to do it on their own, no matter what their slogans say.

Joseph Aquilina

Feb 18th 2008, 17:41

'Repressing civil rights ' - I live in Malta! Where do you live? Because I am pretty sure here in Malta no civil rights are oppressed. You can talk about bureaucracy as much as you like but from that to repressing civil rights there is a long way!! Also why is AD only talking against PN? Did they forget that MLP is also contesting the election? Is AD closing one eye (already) on MLP because of the hope of being in the government? If this is the attitude AD is taking before the election, how can I believe that AD will not also close an eye when in government in order to KEEP their little seat!? How?

John Calleja

Feb 18th 2008, 16:59

What you are advocating is to have a government of 'yesmen' from the same party. To me that is a dictatorship in democracy not a coalition. Having lived in the USA for a few years I have seen Republicans and democrats vote against their own party but in recent hsitory this only happened with good ol' Dom. The more I think about the case you are trying to make the more I believe that the time for a more mature way of doing politics is required. Is AD the answer?? Maybe and I am ready to give them a chance.

Etienne Zammit

Feb 18th 2008, 15:33

Claire, you are quite correct. The only reason I will be voting is because AD represents the last glimmer of hope in this country. If AD did not exist I would not vote at all. People are not realising this but the PN in Government has been brutally resisting and repressing civil rights that the rest of the EU have enjoyed for decades. What we got was an EU a la Maltese. I have given the PN the benefit of the doubt 3 times already and I assure you there will not be a 4th time. Good luck to Harry Vassallo and Arnold Cassola, I am sure this time the wall will come crumbling down - and not before time too.

Wayne Hewitt

Feb 18th 2008, 15:06

Martin, what you did not mention is that both Berlusconi and Prodi 'ruled' under ransom by the smaller parties in their respective coalitions. Berlusconi was just good at struggling to survive for the full 5 year tenure. But that doesn't mean this produced good governance. Berlusconi himself admits that due to in-coalition disagreements alot of projects crucial to the well being of the country could not go forward.

So, are you telling me you want AD to rule Malta just by managing to get 1 or 2 seats in parliament and holding at ransom both big parties? I am sure you'll agree this would be flawed democracy.... a dictatorship of the minority.

No wonder AD is lusting for a coalition government!

Claire Bonello

Feb 18th 2008, 13:49

Joseph Aquilina assumes that the liberal agenda will feature higher on the PN's list of priorities if it is returned to power. This is incorrect. Liberal issues will be pushed onto the backburner even more if this happens, as there will be no impetus or incentive to change things. The same would apply if the MLP was elected. The only way of promoting liberal values is to vote for the party which has espoused them consistently - AD.
As for the other gratuitous assumption that people who would vote for AD, would vote for PN if AD were not in the picture - I find this to be baseless. Many people would abstain rather than have to choose between the PN or MLP. It's their democratic right to do so. Perhaps if the PN's performance had been more persuasive it would be elected on its own merits, instead of relying on the MLP's demerits.

Martin Galea

Feb 18th 2008, 11:50

Wayne, your reasoning is blurred by blue. Since you always quote Italian politics I will take you up on this. Remember that Silvio Berlusconi ruled for his full 5 year term with a small coalition of 3 main parties. So a coalition of two should be even easier. Also remember Germany had a ruling coalition of SDP and Greens for over 10 years. Remember Ireland'S coalition (again with the greens).... I think the real reason behind refusing a coalition is that the PN is gambling on winning votes from people who are tired and disillusioned with their policies by protraying labour as being a worse alternative. From what I am seeing, this is having the opposite effect and AD support seems to be increasing - maybe it's because voters are realising that change is possible. I have come to realise that the real alternative in this country is 'Alternattiva' and if people want change they must be prepared to be brave enough to vote for change in spite of the scaremongers who want to keep us deep routed to a stagnant political system.

Joseph Aquilina

Feb 16th 2008, 16:48

I believe any liberal voter wants first and foremost the well being of our country, and an assured future for our children. It is true that PN have made some mistakes during these last five years, but can any liberal voter believe that our country did not improve during these last five years? Can any liberal voter believe that MLP is any better? Can any liberal voter believe in Dr.Sant after his two years as Prime Minister? I do not think so and hopefully most of them like me think the same way! MLP have shown us in these last few weeks they are no different than they were 10 and 20 years ago! They are the same, not only in their faces, but in their attitude. So who do liberal voters want? Dr.Sant or Dr.Gonzi to be their next leader? That is the option liberal voters have in this election!

Wayne Hewitt

Feb 15th 2008, 22:46

'A new way of doing politics'? and make Malta, a Naples in the Mediterranean... thanks but no thanks! If you have any doubt, look at Italy what coalition governments mean. If you're still not sure, ask Arnold Cassola, member of the recent coalition flop in Italy, and whose leader (of the italian political party Verdi (Greens) or AD equivalent of Italy), Pecoraro Scagno, incumbent italian Minister of the Environment, holds the ministry responsible for the garbage mess in Naples. Reason, the inability of speedy execution by coalition governments due to never-ending haggling.

If we have some stability in this country is thanks to the 2 party system and thanks to the historical contributions to this country by both the PN and the MLP (with their negatives and positives). Let's stay complacent then until the first 'little' party (partitino in italian) pops up in our parliament. Time will tell if this will be a reason to party or to cry.

Robert Callus

Feb 15th 2008, 15:14

Harry Vassallo's mantra is 'A new way of doing politics'. Looking at the filthy way the PN are doing politics, scaremongering irresponsibly and reckessly against AD, definitely shows that now it's about time to find a new way of doing politics. If I had any doubts whether to vote AD or not, now I am 100% convinced

John Bartolo

Feb 15th 2008, 11:42

What sends shivers down my spine is the thought of another 5 years of the PN in government. Unlike labour, the PN acutally encompasses a coalition of different voters varying from the die-hard catholic fundamentalists and pro-fascists to the liberal side of the spectrum. In the last years, this coalition has fractured with the liberals obviously finding themselves more at home with AD principles. Some 'pro-blackshirt supporters may also be deflecting to AN though the number is much smaller. The loss of the liberal vote might have been avoided had the PN leadership been intelligent and courageous enough to manage change. Unfortunately they have opted for an ill conceived scaremongering campaign and gone on record as stating that no coalition will take place with AD. Rather than bring more votes to the kitty the effect I am seeing is that people intent on voting AD will not continue with a transfer of votes onto the PN. Apparently the lessons of the 2004 Arnold Cassola MEP campaign have not been learnt.

Wayne Hewitt

Feb 14th 2008, 18:56

The only thought of AN or AD clinching a seat in parliament brings shivers down my spine. Have a look at the mess in Italy right now... a government that cannot stand for more then 2 years, massively taxed citizens, extreme poverty throughout and a garbage choked Naples. Is this what we want for our country? Minority rule is dictatorship not democracy. MLP & PN should agree to change the constitution so that no party can hold a seat in parliament unless the party itself (not the candidate) gets at least 10% of the countrywide electorate. Soon, before it is too late!!

J Zammit

Feb 14th 2008, 12:34

Just look at Italy where a supposedly strong coalition lasted just 21 months. Facts are facts. And the reality in Malta is that Labour now has a clear advantage in the way electoral divisions have been drawn up. It will get a majority of seats in Parliament unless the PN gets more than 50% of the vote.

Claire Bonello

Feb 12th 2008, 23:22

There is the mistaken assumption that coalition partners are always holding each other to ransom. This is not the case. It would be political suicide for a party in a coalition to act unreasonably and against the wishes of the people who voted it into office - they would just boot it out next time round. The majority of parliamentary activity is done on a consensual basis. With a coalition a greater section of the population gets to be represented

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 12th 2008, 14:57

John Agius says that we should decide how to vote on the basis of the parties' electoral manifestos. This is like choosing somebody for a job on the basis of how he tells you he intends to do it, in his letter of application - no interview, no assessment, nothing. Track record and and an assessment of the people involved count for as much as an electoral programme, if not more so.

As for the other comments about the important of having a small party with one seat in parliament, to call the shots, haven't these people realised that a democracy is about majority rule, and not minority rule? How does a party with the support of a few thousand electors, if that, have the nerve to say that it is important they get to call the shots and tell the other 95% of electors what to do?

Joseph Briffa

Feb 12th 2008, 10:39

As I have already hinted, votes for AD and AN will come from disgruntled nationalist supporters; labourites will not vote for AD or AN. Since the two big parties are at the moment neck and neck, poaching a few thousand votes from the PN and transferring them to AD or AN will result in an MLP victory. It's absurd for digruntled nationalists to deprive PN of their votes to 'waste' them on AD or AN thereby enabling labour to win the elections, when these ex-nationalists do not want the MLP to be in power, otherwise they would vote for the MLP. They would give their vote to AD or AN simply to spite the PN but they do not want the MLP to be in government. But as things stand, by depriving the PN from their vote they are only helping the MLP. This is what they would achieve as they are aware that AD and AN do not stand a chance of gaining a seat. In the unlikely event that AD gain representation in the House matters would be more complicated as the presence of a third party in Parliament would preclude the adoption of the mechanism of the addition of seats to reflect the ratio of first preference votes, which can only be adopted if there are just two parties in the House. Let's say the PN get 48.5% of the first preference votes but gain 32 seats; the MLP get 47.5% and 33 seats; and AN and AD get 4% first preferences but no seats. In that event the PN would be given 2 more seats because of their relative majority and would be in government. If, on the other hand the 4% first preferences of AD or AN enables one of them to get a seat, the PN would get 31 seats, the MLP 33 seats, and AD or AN 1 seat. The adjustment of seats mechanism CANNOT be adopted as there would be three parties in the House, and the MLP would form a government because they have more seats(33) than the PN (31), despite the fact that the PN got more first preferences (48.5%). Moreover, the MLP with 33 seats ( a majority of 2 seats) would not need to form a coalition with AD or AN, whose elected member would just sit on the opposition benches along with the PN. This I think is a very plausible outcome of this election. So the government would not represent the wishes of the majority. And this absurd siuation would only have come about because a few thousand disgruntled nationalists who simply wanted to castigate the PN for one reason or another but did not want the MLP to be in government decided to vote for AD or AN. As this point is driven home to these digruntled lot and the penny drops, more and more of these people will realise that if they want to keep labour out , they cannot afford to vote for the smaller parties; in other words they do not have any other choice but to give their vote to the PN. Mind you, I have nothing against AD; they are a very good pressure group and have done a wonderful job to ensure Malta's entry into the EU; but the latest Constitution amendment which I mention above militates against the small parties in a general election. Whether we like it or not this is the position.

Christian Peregin

Feb 11th 2008, 01:40

I think voters should only give their number 1 vote to AD if they are completely indifferent as to who will be elected into government.

I also think people should only vote AD if they are in Harry's district since he is the only real electable candidate.

However voting AD can also be a statement to the bigger parties that we want the political system to change and that our constitution should cater for other parties, and that we are uninspired by the two bigger parties.

I understand Daphne's fears that many voters may be voting irresponsibly because they do not understand how the system works, but I think she is missing the point that not everyone sees a difference between PN and MLP and that many AD supporters are so disillusioned by the two parties that they simply see two evils and no lesser. Or else they feel they should not have to vote for the lesser of two evils when they have the AD choice.

Having said all this, I'd like to say how great it is to see big political/media players like Harry Vassallo, Daphne Caruana Galizia and Noel Grima participating in these online discussions. Hopefully more people of their calibre will join in throughout the coming month.

Ian Meli

Feb 10th 2008, 14:06

Declaring a 'coalition government impossible' shows that the PN's slogan is just a mocking chant thrown on voters. What a contradiction! PN are saying that together everything is possible.

For most Europeans who are used to coalitions and multi partite parliaments, 'TOGETHER EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE' could easily be the slogan of an alliance.

Who knows if Gonzi's real secret dream is a coalition alliance with Alternattiva Demokratika. After all, before general election of 2003, when Eddie was at the helm, the PN tried to buy Alternattiva Demokratika out of the scene by offering a speaker in parliament.

John Agius

Feb 10th 2008, 11:02

Yes it s a free country, and yes we can do whatever we want with our votes. And no there is nothing wrong with MLP leading the country. Contrary to what Daphne would like us to believe, the MLP's proposals appear to be well thought out (my opinion of course). I mean you can t just go about scaremongering people to keep the same faces in parliament. If you truly want to get a better picture investigate each of the party's election agendas yourself. Voting for AD, AN, Labour or PN should be your choice and yours alone.

Joseph Briffa

Feb 9th 2008, 15:06

Unfortunately the political situation we have had in Malta since the mid-1960s has always militated against the presence of a third or fourth party in the House. This seems to be the result of having had representatives in parliament from only the two big parties for the past four decades.
The presence of other parties in the House must therefore be secured solely at the expense of the poaching of votes from the major parties. Depriving one of the parties from a few thousand votes and transferring them to a third or fourth small party automatically means a victory for the other major party. That is why AD always fared badly in the general elections but did much better in the local council elections. That is why the PN has always advised their disgruntled followers during the election run-up not to be tempted into voting for third parties as this would automatically mean a victory for the MLP which these people do not want. The disgruntled voters want to give their vote to AD, simply to vent their spleen on the PN who, they feel let them down for one reason or another. This is more so the case in the 2008 elections, where the two big parties are more or less neck and neck, and where a fourth party has sprouted with the express intent of garnering votes from disgruntled nationalists, particularly from among those hunters who feel they were taken for a ride by the PN in the spring hunting issue. Unlike the UK Labour party, local labour administrations have always generated uncertainty, particularly among people in business who have a tendency to adopt a wait-and-see attitude, thereby slowing down economic growth, which reduces job opportunities and brings about the weeding out of workers, which raises unemployment, which reduces consumer spending, which brings more uncertainties till the economy grinds to a halt. . And let's face it, no one can blame the entrepreneurs as it is their money that is at stake. The times of the socialist regime of the 1970s and 1980s were definitely not conducive to private investment in all spheres, but why did the economy also stagnate in 1996/98 when the MLP had been cleaned of the violent elements which characterised the party when Mintoff and KMB were at the helm? Alfred Sant succeeded in this clean-up process, yet uncertainty crept in as soon as labour assumed office in 1996 and the economy practically ground to a halt in a couple of years. Is it because labour spend their time in office undoing what their predecessors have done, instead of building on the good work. Why is it that successive MLP administrations have never managed to create the congenial political climate that distinguished all the PN administrations since WW2? Could it be due to the fact that on the eve of an election labour always repeat the same slogan for a new beginning, promises the electorate paradise on earth and then are unable to keep their promises when in office because alot of these promises are not achieveable or not sustainable? Why is it that the country prospers and makes gigantic strides in all the fields of the economy when the PN is in office? One must conclude that it is the style of the PN government that achieves this prosperity and substantial improvement in the quality of life of the Maltese: and if one arrives at this conclusion one must also conclude that the obvious choice for the people is a PN administration, with warts and all, if they want to have peace of mind and witness further improvements in their quality of life. This is the reason why at the eleventh hour, a lot of the traditional PN supporters who feel they have been let down for one reason or another turn away from the smaller parties and return to the fold. I feel this situation will prevail until such time as the association of the MLP with uncertainty and economic downturns is erased from people's minds. But this is unlikely to happen for some time as the MLP is still composed of the same old faces and the same ideas.

Victor Vassallo

Feb 9th 2008, 11:15

Michael Falzon is blowing into the fire of complacency that the PN are hoping will hit the MLP supporters. When everything else seems to be failing, this is the new strategic card being played. Just have a look at in-Nazzjon of today. This is clearly a danger for the MLP with four weeks of campaign ahead. It is true that the electoral boundries should favour labour, but this is yet to be seen. If the game is already won, why are the parties wasting their time and money? There is a strong feeling for change around, but the MLP must stay focused and work to the last minute.

On the other hand, one cannot but notice the usual scaremongering tactic of people like DCG who are desperately trying to convince the pale blues not to vote with their feet or not to vote for AD. People are brains and they do not need to be told what to do. Why not ask some pertinent questions such as if there are plans to raise VAT from 18% to 25%? Remember EFA before 2003 ruling out a change in VAT from 15% to 18%? We all know what happened a few weeks after that election.

Guzeppi Grech

Feb 9th 2008, 10:37

Fair enough, I can understand how my post was interpreted that way, Ms Caruana Galizia. Mea culpa, I tried to be concise, perhaps to a fault and thus my thoughts (so early in the morning before coffee) came across a bit naive and incorrect.

I'll still keep it concise though. What I support is not AD, or MLP in this debate. What I support is the maximisation of democratic choice which, anyone that desires to be fair, will admit is not enhanced by the pressures that business will make by threatening to stop economic activity if AS is voted back prime minister.
My argument is in fact based not on whether business cannot work with restricting policies..fair enough, they won't be happy and they should not be restricted or hampered in their activities. My point which I possibly wrongly construed as arising out of your contribution is that business will do their utmost to hinder the working of a non-PN government.

Again, I don't believe that is conducive to a democratic environment, and yes, I know this is naive, but allow me to at least maintain a principled stand on an open forum and where one can freely air his honest, albeit naive opinion.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 9th 2008, 09:04

I can't believe you've just written that, Mr Grech, but it does prove my point that there are rather too many people about who really don't understand simple economics and the mechanisms by which businesses succeed or fail.
There isn't a magic wand which makes money: businesses depend on cash flow (through sales and efficient revenue collection) to pay their own bills. Businesses don't stop selling (which would be an act of insanity); it's their clients and customers who stop buying. That creates a disturbance in cash flow, which is fed down the line. When business owners feel that the future is uncertain, they restrain their own spending - not just because they now have fewer customers, but also because they need to build up reserves to survive the rollercoaster ride they predict - accurately - will come.
May I point you in the direction of the headlines from this newspaper nine and 10 years ago, when Sant was prime minister? Here are just a very few from very many: 'GRTU warning to government over water, power rates - association may instruct members not to pay bills if no agreement is reached' (9 May 1998); 'Tourism industry cannot shoulder more expenses' (22 May 1998); 'Hotel owners receive exhorbitant water bills: the new bills represent a 50 per cent increase and are impossible to sustain, says the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (20 May 1998); 'ETS in today to replace VAT - FOI warns of possible catastrophe while DOI lists 'benefits'' (1 July 1997); '82 per cent of people blame Sant for rise in prices' (2 September 1998); 'New tax system very confusing, says association of small and medium-sized enterprises' (26 June 1997); 'FOI says new taxation will hit industry' (14 June 1997); 'Confusion, uncertainty in Maltese economy, says Chamber of Commerce' (28 June 1997). Now do you understand why those who run businesses don't want to elect Sant again? Lots of them had voted for him in 1996.
Your assertion that business people vote to keep 'their' party in power is naive at best, Mr Grech. Business people do whatever is best for their business: whatever will keep sales coming in and salaries paid. They are not charities, and they cannot keep people employed when there is no money to pay them or no justification for their salary.
This may come as a surprise to you, as you are so evidently anti-business (and hence your support for AD and the left wing), but employers actually WORRY about the people they employ. They STAY AWAKE AT NIGHT worrying about how salaries are going to be paid to all those people - and their families - who are dependent on the success of the business. I don't have 'business connections'. I grew up in a family of people who set up and ran their own businesses, and I repeat that I am not talking about shops here. I have understood these matters practically since birth, which is why I am impervious to juvenile propaganda and very sensitive to reality.

Guzeppi Grech

Feb 9th 2008, 07:07

Kudos to Ms Caruana Galizia, she has the guts to admit that its businesses that keep the PN in government through their techniques of halting economic turn-over if "their "party is not in power. Yes...this has happened before, and it will probably happen again. I have heard this too; Ms Caruana Galizia is not the only one with family business connections. Justified or not, I am happy that someone had the audacity and nerve to say out loud what others knew but are too scared to voice at this stage of the electoral campaign. Yes, democracy is dead, we are all hostage to the whims of the business class. PN wins, they pick up where they left off. Anyone else wins, stagnation. And then blame it on AD! What a choice!

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 8th 2008, 23:02

Both Claire Bonello and Harry Vassallo know that the only way they can secure votes in Sliema is by reassuring people like me - and I mean exactly that - that a government led by Sant will not be as disastrous for the economy as it was in 1996-1998.
People in business think otherwise, which is why they are putting their support behind Gonzi. They are doing this for no other reason than that business needs stability and sound political decisions, and the soundness of the political decisions of the last few years have led to unprecedented economic growth in Malta, to the extent that we are nearing full employment (something which is 'dangerous' in itself) and foreign direct investment is pouring in in the many millions.
It is because I run a business, and come from a family that runs businesses (not shops) that I know what I am talking about through experience. Anybody in business, especially the most change-sensitive areas like advertising, will tell you that this past week everything ground to a halt. "Oh, that always happens at the prospect of an election," somebody told me today. No, wrong. It happens because of the prospect of a Labour government. Things will stay on hold until election day. If the Nationalists get back into government, business will pick up where it left off. If Sant gets in, things will stay on hold. If they stay that way long enough, we'll have an economic downturn. If the downturn persists, it will turn into a recession. Yes, external factors do affect the country's economy, as Claire Bonello pointed out, but they are not the primary affecting factors. Those are government policy and government stability. You only have to remember that when free Europe was enjoying a boom driven by the bull markets of the 1980s, we were living Soviet lives, with mass unemployment, a depressed economy, and widespread deprivation. Equally, Malta is now close to full employment with a soaring economy, despite the high unemployment and credit crunches of our European neighbours.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm afraid. The truth is that AD is setting itself up to be hated, just as Sant set himself up to be hated in 1996. People end up hating you when you promise what you can't deliver and then, to make matters worse, lead them into a dead-end tunnel. If the people who have been promised a PN-AD coalition government (by AD) with Gonzi as prime minister and AD calling all the shots on divorce and bird-hunting and building in Sliema wake up on March 9 to find Sant as prime minister and Gonzi as Opposition leader, with AD and its miserable seat and no clout (or still worse, no seat at all), then spend the next five years going through the kind of painful chaos of 1996-1998, they'll rue it all badly. But because people are being told not to blame themselves if this happens, that it won't be their fault but the PN's (how?), guess who they'll blame then? AD.

Graham Crocker

Feb 8th 2008, 22:47

That's the problem in Malta, the Laborites and Ultra PN, think we're playing Football when it comes to Voting. They think that the vote is a UBET Ticket. So all the other normal people, have to vote for a party that has been in government for too long, to prevent the other dangerous government from coming in to power. While giving parties like AD and AN, no chance in a million years of getting elected, because people are too busy voting for the wrong party for the right reasons. Think about it, with these "people" voting, the normal intelligent people have NO vote, because if we used our heads for a bit and vote a different party, the "Mickey mouse" Party wins and everything that has been achieved risks going down the toilet, like that "something" that got frozen sometime ago & like those Surchage*cough* sorry tax raises on medicine. I don't think everybody should have a right to vote. I doubt *some party* would ever win if one had to pass an IQ test to get voting power. If people under 18 aren't allowed to vote, then I think people with a low IQ shouldn't be either, because their too naive and gullible, like under-18 year olds. I hope the change will improve our country's progress, and not throw it into a recession as DCG said. I just hope, because "that party " is going to win whether anyone likes it or not.

Enzo Cachia

Feb 8th 2008, 21:34

Mr Falzon in more concerned with people voting AD than with those who intend to vote Labour. Michael Falzon has correctly read my mind. Something is telling me that a vote for a major party is a wasted vote. AD is my natural option.

Noel Grima

Feb 8th 2008, 19:37

While Michael Falzon (PN) is providing a correct interpretation of the Constitution, I really hope that the seats compensation scheme is not needed - we all know the flop the turned out the last time it was triggered. As to the districts, as previously pointed out, it is nobody's but PN's own fault that this situation cropped up! We all know that many voters will go by the PN's suggestion to not vote for one of the smaller parties... however, I plead, use your vote to the full! Do remember what happened at the European MP elections - had PN voters added the AD candidate to the very end of their vote, their vote would not have been wasted (note my choice of words) when that PN candidate was struck off. With those inherited votes, Arnold Cassola would have been elected instead of the MLP candidate. While I congratulate all Maltese European MPs for their superb job, I am afraid MLP with Mr Sant as leader can never ever hope to instil in the people anything resembling confidence.

Mark Aloisio

Feb 8th 2008, 19:23

What these comments show is that there is no straight answer to this old problem. Giulio Andreotti once suggested that people should hold their nose and vote for the Christian Democrats because the alternative would be much worse. This is what DCG seems to be advocating, and certainly there are compelling reasons for doing so if you believe that a MLP government would be a disaster. If however you happen to believe that neither the MLP nor the PN have earned your vote, the choice is potentially much simpler.

Oisin Jones-Dillon

Feb 8th 2008, 18:39

Mr. Falzon and Ms. Caruana Galizia would be well advised to consider thinking alternatively for the compelling reasons cited in http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080131/letters/the-positive-aspects-of-coalitions Given that successive coalition governments have achieved such spectacularly fruitful results in Italy and Ireland, envisage then, what this nation, no less blessed with talented human resources, could similarly accomplish by discarding delusive false dawn “new beginnings”, and embracing instead, an authentically alternative, “new way of doing politics”: that of enlightened common sense consensus governance, and a real reforming change for the better.

Claire Bonello

Feb 8th 2008, 17:50

Daphne Caruana Galizia thinks that external factors such as recession in other countries will not affect the local economy. Only Sant can bring our economy to a juddering halt. The Nationalist Prime Minister, the Parliamentary Secretary and the GRTU all disagree with her. At one point or other they have all mentioned the financial situation abroad and rising cost of fuel as factors which may influence us. Daphne disagrees. She insinuates that I have some personal objectives for writing as I do. There it is - the sly aside - trying to sling mud at anybody who does not agree with you - a technique which Daphne excels in.

Harry Vassallo

Feb 8th 2008, 15:29

The real conspiracy is between Daphne Caruana Galizia and I. Although she seems to be the PN apologist specifically assigned to knock AD, in fact her every mention of AD is our best advertisement. She is truly committed to our cause and will honestly admit if pressed that although she has a price list for everybody else she has never accepted money from AD for her superb professional services.

Harry Vassallo

Feb 8th 2008, 15:21

Michael Falzon has determined that the MP will win the election hands down. I hope that he has wagered his fortune on that in order to have some consolation after the election. His prediction will encourage even more people to vote Green. Pale reds will realise that their support is not crucial for the MLP and pale Blues will be freed to turn bright Green. I look forward to it. The Green presence in parliament will be a grass/roots coalition and an excellent preparation for a full coalition in 2013. Of course Michael Falzon is not as infallible as he is pessimistic. he is contradicted constantly by his leader Dr Gonzi still believes that together nothing is impossible, the Greens will give his slogan a new meaning.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 8th 2008, 15:17

A coalition does not become possible just because AD has decided it is. A coalition has to be possible within the limits of the law, and it isn't. A political party does not have to have an absolute majority to govern. All it needs is a RELATIVE majority. People like Claire Bonello are dreaming, or have absolutely no experience of how business works or understanding of how easily a recession is triggered, when they say that the return of Sant as prime minister will have a negligible effect on the economy. Let's put it this way: this election is do or die for Sant, but it's also do or die for Harry Vassallo, who's been leading his party unsuccessfully for even longer. Sorry, but I'm far from convinced, and my politics are liberal.

Ralph Cassar

Feb 8th 2008, 14:29

We vote because we believe in something, we vote for a party because we identify with it. We do not vote out of predjudice or irrational fear.

Remember: flimkien KOLLOX possibbli

Guzeppi Grech

Feb 8th 2008, 14:21

So much for enjoying freedom of choice in a modern democracy.

Consciousness of rights and obligations are the backbone of adult mature decisions.

But implicitly damning the choice and right to vote for, in this case AD, as an abdication of one's obligations - towards the future of our children, for heavens sake - is downright unfair manipulation of the fear of the MLP bogeyman and a disservice to genuine AD sympathisers. I reiterate; you should vote AD if you want to vote AD....its time for change...its going to happen anyway, whether there is a PN or MLP government (new party or new cabinet).
Time to turn what Michael Falzon (author of this controversial piece) terms as virtually impossible into a reality that resonates with our EU aspirations of what democracy should be.
And as a voter, a contemporary of Mrs Caruana Galizia, who has also tried and tested various of the Political parties, I can honestly say that I never believed money rains down from heaven. How's that for tarring everyone with the same brush! However, apparently some businesses are more equal than others. Enough said.

Mark Bonello

Feb 8th 2008, 14:17

Again Ms. Caruana Galizia has regaled us with another classic piece! I am going to vote Labour this time round yes, and I am not encouraging people to vote AD but at the same time I am not trying to convince them not to express their vote freely by instilling in them some sort of 'CIA conspiracy theory' feeling about Alfred Sant so as to keep him away from the deserved seat in Castille.
And by the way the only party that got to power on the backs of another party is the PN when fooling AD in 2003 just on the eve of an election.

Now to another point raised by Ms. Caruana Galizia. If the majority of people that are going to vote AD come from a PN background its only the PN's problem and not anybody elses. The PN has become a party that is incompetent in leading this country forward, arrogant and saturated with intollerance.

Again Ms. Caruana Galizia says that the Economy is doing fine, but GRTU say that its not such a nice picture after all. GonziPN is saying that Education is doing brilliantly but our achievements in the Lisbon Strategy are saying the opposite! Then who is right??? Are we or are we not living better today? The answer of a lot of families is a definite NO! That is why people will be switching sides and voting for MLP this time round - just like I did!

Claire Bonello

Feb 8th 2008, 14:00

Harry Vassallo might be dreaming of a coalition government but Michael Falzon is dreaming of a perpetual PN monopoly in power. The possibility that this "vision" might not be shared by the electorate keeps him shooting off letters to all the media. Mr. Falzon should take a deep breath and calm down and try to register the possibility that people want to vote for AD because they believe in what the party stands for and because it has been consistent in its positions. We find it hard to believe the ridiculous doomsday scenarios of the paid PN hacks telling us that disaster will overtake the country if the PN is not in government. Of course we will not be reduced to living on the breadline (whichever government is elected) . Voters should not be made to feel guilty if they do not want to vote for the PN. The PN should have addressed the issue of its voting haemorrhage before. If people now favour a different set-up in parliament it's their business. A coalition is possible and judging by the panicked reactions from the other parties - quite probable

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 8th 2008, 13:11

The post by Mark Bonello just serves to underline my point. He appears to support Labour, rather than AD, but yet encourages others to vote AD. Why? Because most potential AD votes are from people who would rather have Gonzi than Sant as prime minister. That's why the Labour Party is helping to spread AD's message - because it is going to get into government on the back of AD.

Mr Grech's post puts forward another interesting argument. Yes, we all have the right to vote for whom we like, but all rights come with obligations, and this particular right comes with the obligation to vote responsibly and to assess the consequences of our actions. That's why I voted AD once in 1992, when I thought there was no risk of KMB getting in. I never did it again. Having children and watching their lives develop taught me to put other people before my own narrow considerations.

Mr Bonello, you must understand that those in the lower income groups fare much better when the economy is thriving (as it is now) than they do on government hand-outs under Labour. If they are so hard up now (they're not), then just imagine how worse off they are going to be when businesses start slashing jobs. Oh, but I forgot: those who vote AD and MLP don't understand that it's business that creates wealth for a country. They think the money rains down from heaven and business is evil.

Guzeppi Grech

Feb 8th 2008, 12:19

Actually, its would be a pity that choosing to vote AD is dependent on whether one wants either the PN or MLP in government.
But haven't we seen this line of reasoning before? Haven't we been told in previous elections not to waste our vote voting AD and that this will only empower the MLP?

So should one not vote AD even though we sympathise and perhaps even strongly support their electoral points?

Well, there it is then...vote AD, not to spite PN which is a silly reason anyway - anyone wanting to spite the PN so much would just vote Labour in the first place - but because you want AD to get your vote. Do we still have the right to vote AD (assuming we want to) without the petty pontification and manipulation from those with their own agenda?

Mark Bonello

Feb 8th 2008, 12:04

Why does the PN always fear the fact that people are free to vote for whoever they like! If people like Ms. Galea want to vote for AD they should be free to do so and not receive any threats or demeaning comments! Is this the state this country has been reduced to after 20 years of PN Administration? The same as it was before 1987 after 16 years of MLP Administration!

A word to Ms. Caruana Galizia. If you are living a decent life at the moment there are other normal people that have a full-time job and another part-time job and still still don't manage to pay the bills and buy food to feed their family! People do actually need a fresh start as things cannot go on like this! How do you explain the fact that in Malta prices are shooting up at twice the rate that they are increasing in the rest of Europe? INCOMPETENT ADMINISTRATION is the Answer!

Mr. Falzon is absolutely wrong! If the electoral districts have been setup in a clear advantage to the MLP it surely wasn't the MLP to do them that way as the Electoral Commission is composed of an equal number of representatives from both parties and a chairperson nominated by the Government in agreement with the Opposition.
And by the way Mr. Falzon again do not try to scare people from voting AD like Eddie Fenech Adami did on the eve of the General Election 2003. Let them live in peace and if your scared of losing a bunch of PN votes than I think you should look at your record in government and you would know why people are turning to MLP and AD for an alternative!

So please Ms. Caruana Galizia and Mr. Falzon stop your useless (and late) scaremongering.

Carmel Micallef

Feb 8th 2008, 11:57

I believe that Miriam Galea's reaction to Micheal Falzon's letter has not been made in real time. She must have decided to vote AD long before today. One does not change one's voting habits on the basis on one letter published in a newspaper. I hope that Miriam Galea and likes will not be to first people to start grumbling and moaning in the event of an MLP government when a consequential downturn of Malta's prosperity starts taking place.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Feb 8th 2008, 11:36

Sure, Ms Galea - go ahead and cut off your nose to spite your face and everyone else's. That's what being a grown-up is all about. Try to think of people other than yourself, like those at the bottom of the food-chain who are the first to suffer when the economy takes a downturn. You don't seem to realise than when you're spiting what you call the MLPN, you're also spiting real, live people to whom the current burgeoning economy is making a real difference, the difference between the breadline and a decent life.

miriam galea

Feb 8th 2008, 10:17

Thanks to Michael Falzon (PN) for informing us that the 'secret agreement' between MLP and PN was to give Labour the next government. Well done. For this reason alone I am now going to vote for Alternattiva Demokratika