
Sunday, 9th November 2008
MLP activity today is 'manifestation', not a protest
Labour leader Joseph Muscat has insisted today's gathering in Valletta is a manifestation, not a protest.
Dr Muscat yesterday said the event would give the MLP the opportunity to put forward its "ideas" about water and electricity rates.
The Labour leader said the manifestation, which takes place at 3.30 p.m., aimed to instil courage and hope in people who may be weighed down by the government's new water and electricity tariffs.
He said this was a national activity open to people of all political beliefs. However, last Friday, social partners - who have harshly criticised the tariffs - declared they will not be attending as they perceived it to be a politicised activity.
A number of social partner representatives said they believed such manifestations would not solve anything. The Nationalist Party has criticised the MLP for slating the new tariffs without making any proposals itself.
Addressing an annual general meeting for Labour veterans, Dr Muscat said the party's parliamentary group met to discuss the budget yesterday morning.







RSS
Comments
Yes, I also recall Gonzi saying that a crisis is on the horizon...which makes his plethora of promises stranger, would'nt you of neutral and objective disposition agree?
As to Government spending, and how this spiralled out of control just before the last election...well...thats an argument for another day...
So you heard him say he would send electricity bills sky high? That he would savagely let fuel prices to soar? That he would add more taxes on all of us. Could you kindly quote chapter and verse? We're most curious.
I don't think the labour party is victim here. I think the victims are those who will slide into fuel poverty. Maybe you don't count yourself amongst this group Joseph, good luck to you, maybe that is why you 'afford' to take a partisan outlook on this and 'worry' about PN and MLP public perception. I'm sure there are others out there who's worries are about whether they will be affording their fuel bills and their cars. It is here that one would have wanted to rely on the social partners to tow the line, given that they agree with the MLP on this! It seems to be a case of: 'I disagree with PN, but I cannot get myself to agree with MLP'. Well, we couldn't call them partners then could we, even if they fail to agree when they agree.
Surely, your enlightened brain can think about both issues...