Editorial
Attempts to take Malta back to times past
When the General Workers' Union changed its logo, some people may have thought it was on its way to start changing its tactics too. But they were very well mistaken as Sunday's protest in Valletta, in which it took part together with a number of other unions, showed in no uncertain manner.
Not only did it not change its tactics but it all seemed that its general secretary, Tony Zarb, was taking his union back in time when political bluster, threats and bullying were the order of the day. His speech was inflammatory and brought shivers down the spine of all those who may have listened to excerpts of it on television.
In a clear bid to put pressure on Nationalist MPs to vote for an opposition motion calling for the revocation of the new utility tariffs, Mr Zarb decided to interpret a vote against the motion as betrayal of the people and held those voting against responsible for their actions. The protest walk may have been "decent and peaceful", as one union leader put it, but the tone and language used by the GWU general secretary were not. In fact, Mr Zarb sent the wrong message to those who believed the time for such antics were long over.
The other unions taking part in the protest were completely overshadowed by the GWU and it would be interesting to find out now how many of their leaders and, more importantly, their members concurred with the threatening language used. The Għaqda Unions Maltin condemned the insults hurled at the Prime Minister and Nationalist MPs on Monday but it should have known that the protest was bound to be turned into a political manifestation.
Besides all this, the protest has also done great harm to the trade union movement, already split with the sharper division between the GWU and the Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin and the departure of the Malta Union of Teachers from the Confederation of Malta Trade Unions. The rift has now widened even further, a matter that goes against the interest of the unionised labour force. But what is most sad is the unedifying manner in which the unions have attacked each other.
Since the GWU is Labour's strongest ally, or privileged partner, Labour leader Joseph Muscat has a gargantuan problem on his hands now: how to make the growing legion of uncommitted voters believe in his talk that he is out to introduce a new way of doing politics. Dr Muscat's problem is even greater as he is making it a point of talking about the transformation of his party into a movement eager to draw into its fold what he calls the moderates and progressives. Where, exactly, would those who fall into these categories stand now? That is why The Times said in one of its leaders last week that the biggest loser in all this is the Labour Party. The union is dragging Labour into the past with it.
The way Labour has tackled this issue, its support to the GWU in the protest and the kind of arguments used in the debate in Parliament have exposed the flimsiness and fragility of its thinking, making it appear unprepared as yet to take over responsibility for the country's administration. For, if the government were to follow its advice, the country would be saddled with a wider deficit and a higher, not lower, national debt. This would go against the direct interest of all.
20 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
C. Zammit
Mar 4th 2010, 00:33
Here we go again. The usual biased Times Editorial...Far from an Independent Newspaper!! I say an English version of the PN comic newspaper!
I ask the editor, where were you when the UHM organised a national protest against the then PROPOSED (not issued like this time around!!) water & electricity tariffs by Alfred Sant's PL Government?? The same UHM leaders who today beleive that solutions are only found by 'discussions around a table' were not of the same opinion then. Not only did the UHM protest but it even ordered a strike at the freeport. Can the editor enlighten us what connections had the freeport with enemalta or water serviced by that time?? What role did the PN play in that particular situation?? Can the editor give us details of when a similar editorial against those UHM & PN actions was published?? I guess that intelligent and open minded people know the answer!!
Dear editor, if the UHM actions then were good why are the GWU, MUT and the other Unions actions wrong now??
Your biased editorials make me beleive that this newspaper has hidden agendas. Luckily the majority of Maltese are now aware of this!!
CATherine Desira
Mar 3rd 2010, 22:36
All those who are writing or saying that the W&E bills of Dr. Sant’s administration did not materialize are simply lying. I still have the bill which I received in 1998 and was for Lm 98 (approx. €230) when at that time as a single person I only used to go home late at night simply to sleep. Additionally, in those days oil was only at €12 per barrel (not over €80). Luckily I did not pay the bill as, thanks to Dr. Sant himself (and no one else), his days in government were numbered.
lgalea
Mar 3rd 2010, 20:41
We sure are back to the past. The past where the PN Governments had bankrupted Malta to such an extent that there was not even money to pay the government employees when PL was elected in 1971. This is exactly the present situation to which Malta has been led by successive PN governments, only this time it's much much worse.
B Sant
Mar 3rd 2010, 20:37
its disappointing to read this article. Politcians managed to set an earthqauke and splt malta into half and half. Now even the union sector is totally divided. When it is labout government UHM will take the people down to the streets and when it is NP govt its GWU s turn. Shame on this country , the people should start setting a mind of their own and send politicians and their political divide to the,,,,,,,,,,,
Carmel Cilia
Mar 3rd 2010, 19:18
Dear editor nobody has any doubts that the things of old have not changed in this country. Your very editorial confirms it. You should be ashamed ; always ready to take the slightest opportunity to help your masters. The tariffs are what they are so that this innocent government would not let future generations pay is that not so. Do you mind telling us dear editor who made all that debt. How much you would like to say it was labour. May be you would in twenty years time when maybe the present can be twisted for political advantage. Your editorial shames you Bye Bye.
Maria D.Sacco
Mar 3rd 2010, 17:24
@ Albert Farrugia: Alfred Sant's term in office was the only PURE democratic Labour government in these last 50 years, and yes, I agree with you, it gave ample proof of its democratic credentials. However, please refrain from making comparisons with regard to violence, namely that committed during 1971 to 1987 (violence committed under a Maltese democratically elected government, that is). It's like trying to persuade a soccer fan that Malta has a good chance of winning the FIFA World Cup. I admire Alfred Sant exactly and specifically for this reason: he had the guts to REALLY stand up and say NO to the violent elements within his party.
laurence schembri
Mar 3rd 2010, 16:12
Salvu is not worth commenting on, his contributions are as shallow as Ghadira Bay.
Maria D. Sacco, the Editorial is about Unions, when Alfred Sant came out with his proposition for W&E charge of tarrifs, which incidentally never materialised, the UHM were out there in force protesting. There is hardly a difference between the words `Traiditur` and `Gagbin`, that is what the UHM protesters were shouting out at Alfred Sant. Two wrongs don`t make a right, they remain two wrongs.
laurence schembri
Mar 3rd 2010, 15:59
Attempt by The Times Editor to alienate people against the GWU. The UHM has always been at the GWU `s throat since its inception, the late Mr, Agius, first General Secretary of the UHM was a diehard Nationalist, that is how the fued started. Why try to enlarge the issue when it has been there in the open for so long. It is simplicity in itself, the GWU is pro-Labour and the UHM pro- Nationalist. End of story.
victor zarb
Mar 3rd 2010, 14:53
tajjeb wisq! mela ha nibdew minn li inghad rigward certu tghajjir li sar waqt il protesta,jien nghid li huwa hazin,avolja forsi kien hemm min kien frustat u urtat li wara li gejna mwieghda par idejn sodi u finanzi fis sod,gara bil kontra,imma nsomma wara kollox x tistenna minn min huwa professur li jwieghed il kastelli fl arja? mela nsejna meta dr sant gie mghajjar l universita minn marmalja li,suppost ha jiggradwaw biex ikunu professjonisti! insejna meta efa akkuza vilment lil dr sant li ma halliex lit tifel tieghu jidhol l universita,u nsejna wkoll dik l ewforja barbaristika,u tal misthija wara r rizultat ta l elezzjoni tat 2003,fejn saret herba fit triqat ta malta,kollox imhallas minn flus il poplu? u l ghajta fejn huma l laburisti? qishom il laburisti xi kriminali? qabel ma taraw it tibna f ghajnejn haddiehor,araw ic cangatura f ghajnejkhom jekk joghgobkom,grazzi.mis sema l isfel kulhadd listess,u s siegha tasal ghal kulhadd.
Muscat. Pat
Mar 3rd 2010, 14:34
Yes that's right! PN and UHM hypocrisy revisted! So much for the crocodile tears of "kunxjenza socjali" We could have made with a little sagrifice in 1998; now, because PN hypocrisy, it will take a whole generation to fix the mess cooked by Dr Fenech Adami and GonziPN. Many parents are feeling that their kids will be worse off than themselves, and that tomorrow will probably be worse than today! This is FenechAdami and GonziPN legacy. Compare and contrust this to the multitude of ladders and opportunities that the Labour Party gave to its citizens to reach up to the sky, whilst now, the only thought we all get ,is that of the bootomless pit!
Peter Borg
Mar 3rd 2010, 13:27
@Maria D. Sacco
Did you not hear the PM and minster Fenech call the ppl and unions "pulcinelli" when they had and still have the right to protest against this whole situation? Do you not remember what happened during the race for the last general election, how students insulted respectful members of our parliament?
Respect is a two way process. Government should be ashamed about how it is handling any criticism that is not inline with its OWN ideas!!
Joe Busuttil
Mar 3rd 2010, 13:24
Another biased editorial from an 'independent' paper.Mr Felice Pace,I would prefer to call puppets and poodles, etc etc,those who voted against their conscience to burden the people with the utility bills which exploded due to the mismanagement of Enemalta. (Also those who aided Gonzi PN by doing nothing and offered no support to the suffering masses.) You can apologize for your GonziPN till you are hoarse and blue in the face (no pun intended) but it won't distract the people from their everyday problems brought upon them by said govt. As for the privileged partner of the GWU being the PL who is the privileged partner of UHM? No prizes for guessing the correct answer.
albert leone ganado
Mar 3rd 2010, 13:18
It is most unfortunate that the Labour Party hijacked the demonstration the way it did. It will in future make it much more difficult for independent Trade Unions to participate in similar demonstrations.
Unfortunately on both sides of the political divide both parties want total control of any citizen initiative. Whether it is as trivial as the opening of some event or the broadcasting of any news they simply want to hog the lights and control it.
Citizen protest and participation to raise issues which are hurting the man in the street should serve to highlight real general concerns and convince Government to reflect and not be used as tools to advance the claim to political power.
Unfortunately it seems there are too many puppets being controlled from the glass palaces of both political parties and when these happen to be Trade Unions it is a sorry sight indeed.
When will the citizen learn that power in glass houses is fragile and does shatter.
Albert Farrugia
Mar 3rd 2010, 13:15
@Maria D Sacco
I am sure you have seen footage, which to my surprise surfaced only recently, of a UHM demonstration in 1997. People are show chanting aggressively against "gakbini"...which means the MLP government of the time. Moreover, careful observers of this footage will notice that this action is taking place right under the balcony of the MLP Club in Valletta. Provocation at its worst. Yet, what happened that day? Nothing. Maybe the demonstrators were actually HOPING that something might happen...but...as we say...qatghu l-ghatx bil-perzut.
In 1996-1998 Labour gave ample proof of its democratic credientials. I know of Nationalists who were angry that not even one single piece of decorative paper was torn by those celebrating the MLP victory in September 1996. This contrasts sharply with the burning down of all Labour billboards after the 1998 election.
But who cares about the truth? The Nationalists? Ah-em...
C.camilleri
Mar 3rd 2010, 13:11
Why do you always mention the GWU , when there were eleven unions taking part in the demo?
You have a right for your agenda, but we have a right to protest against the Higher utility tariffs and the brand new sewer tax and the explosion in the price of gas plus the present inflation.
If the PN is happy with the fact that it defeated the PL motion, you can rest assure that the absolute majority is not.
Comments like your editorial speaks volumes against what the working class is up against.
Pierre Fiorentino
Mar 3rd 2010, 12:48
The usual 'objective editorial'. For this newspaper its judgements change according to who does the protest! unbeleivable stuff! Rest assured that by now everyone has understood the usual tactics adopted by this newspaper and takes them with pinch of salt!
Joseph ( Joe ) Grima
Mar 3rd 2010, 12:29
The Times is right. We are back in the past with the Times leading the provocation of people who are suffering and whio are unable to make ends meet because of the gross mismanagement that this country has been subjected to by an incompetent government made up of arrogant Ministers, Prime Minister included. The Times should learn from its past mistakes and refrain from more provocation under the guise of free speech beacuse, if this delicately balanced bubble will finally burst, the Times will have no one to blame but itself.
Maria D.Sacco
Mar 3rd 2010, 12:04
@ Albert Farrugia: words like "Guda" & "tradituri" are very inflammatory, don't you agree? After all, even the old co-architect of independent Malta (I use the word "co" having in mind the other political architect, Borg Olivier) found offence in the word "traditur" as used by Mr.Sant himself. So yes, even though I myself yearn for a change of government, I would not feel comfortable having the LP (as it is acting presently) having the reins of the govenment in its hands
Salvu Felice Pace
Mar 3rd 2010, 11:30
The moment of truth arrived earlier than we expected. We have seen the hypochrisy of the Labour leader Joseph Muscat when he speaks about doing politics in a new way and about being progressive and modern. His antics these last few days have removed his mask. He stopped a govt. minister attending a meeting in Brussels about competitiveness yet he claimed that the new tariffs were about reducing competitiveness. He put the Party and the privileged relationship with the GWU first and country last. His presence last Sunday was an approval of all the insults that were hurled against the elected representatives and now he carries the responsibility of censuring Tony Zarb for his language. And why did he allow the Labour Party to deal with the logistics and security related to the protests? Nothing has changed with Labour. They missed an opportunity when they rejected George Abela only to end up with a Dr Sant's poodle turned puppet of Tony Zarb.
Albert Farrugia
Mar 3rd 2010, 11:20
Funny how memories fade! Almost two years ago to the day, a certain Alfred Sant accepted an invitation for a "debate" at university. For two hours he was heckled, abused, insulted, called names, ridiculed. Constantly. In an organised fashion. Noone said at that time that we were going back to an ugly past. On the contrary, many from the PN praised the "students" for "making their voice heard". And anyone who expressed an opinion that the audience´s behaviour was uncivil and inappropriate was condemned as someone "who wants to silence the students". Even Dr Gonzi himself had said this.
So why is it a problem now that a few angry citizens let out their anger? And anyway, of course this protest was political. Everything which has got to do with how a country is governed is political. The role of trade unions is that of a large lobby group which puts pressure on politicians - the lawgivers - when they are deciding on matters which affect their members. Why this is being regarded as some sort of Maltageddon beats me.