Postulating polling premises

It used to be the case that you could tell when the country had gone into election mode. Labour (MLP as was, though the more time passes, the more it’s obvious that it’s only the M that has gone, otherwise tout ça change) would start levelling charges against the government while the Nationalists would keep trying to get Labour to tell us what it is they’re proposing, so the electorate can compare.

It’s not as if, incidentally, the electorate can compare Labour in government with PN in government: those of us who haven’t chosen to forget what that lot were like don’t even need to give a second’s thought to knowing which we prefer, while the others, generally the smug and self-satisfied “it’s about time we had a change” brigade, wouldn’t bother troubling their little heads by thinking about such things.

And, anyway, it’s a bit unfair on the Leader of the Opposition to compare him to his predecessors, except the immediately preceding one. Joseph Muscat is no Dom Mintoff or Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, which, believe me, is no insult. Whether he compares favourably or not with Alfred Sant is another question: an analysis of the way Dr Sant thought and acted is not impossible because we have plenty of evidence but we have little on which to base an analysis of Dr Muscat because the message at the moment is “yah, boo, sucks to you, I’ll tell you what I’m going to do when I’m good and ready”.This, with all due respect, I have to translate as “I have no idea what I’m going to do, I’ll tell you when all the promises start coming home to roost”.

Coming back to the premise postulated in my first two paragraphs, then, we’re in full election mode but the fact is, Labour have been accusing the government of all manner of heinousness for so long that I have to come to the conclusion that Labour have been doing this since they lost the last one and, consequently, you can’t tell any more.

Why Labour do what they do is not immediately understandable.

You might think, and I wouldn’t blame you, that they have to camouflage the stark fact that they don’t have - or aren’t capable of having - viable policy alternatives. Why else would Labour’s statements consist in a combination of declarations of what can only be called the obvious, (I mean, “we should have a national policy on suicide”, for Pete’s sake, as opposed to what, pray, actively encouraging it?) and an appeal to the basest of base “us and them” mentalities?

To take Labour’s statements at face value, you would think that Lawrence Gonzi and his ministers spend their time sitting around trying to devise strategies to make the populace at large miserable and deprive each of us of the greatest number of euros possible, simply out of spite. That Mr Mintoff and the Muammar Gaddafi-admirer who succeeded him used to give the impression that they were doing just that doesn’t actually justify Dr Muscat and his folk from charging Dr Gonzi and the government with the same nastiness because it patently isn’t true. It appeals to the tribal mentality that forms the backbone of the vote but that’s about as far as it can go.

Does anyone – apart from out-and-out diehards who would vote for Dr Muscat even if he told them he would devour their first-born raw – really believe, for instance, that the government’s change of direction on income tax was motivated by anything other than the international economic situation? This is the wool that Dr Muscat’s keeps trying to pull over our eyes but it only raises the question: Is he trying to woo the electorate whatever the cost or does he genuinely not understand the international situation? If the former, “oh well” is the correct response but if the latter, he’s relinquished any claim to govern because he clearly doesn’t get it, by a long shot.

The same can be said for many other areas of socio-economic activity. Does Labour really think we’re all dumb enough to believe that utility prices are what they are simply because Dr Gonzi and Finance Minister Tonio Fenech are doing their level best to make “families” (Malta’s mom and apple pie concept) suffer? And that if Dr Muscat is given the key to Castille he will wave his magic wand and start paying us to use electricity rather than the other way round?

The Maltese phrase “Ħallina, Ġuż” (loosely, “leave it out, Joe”) fits nicely, as does pull the other one, you’ll hear jingles.

It’s still darn hot (another statement of the obvious) but we managed a couple of excursions to nourish the soul. One was to an exhibition by a young artist, George Eynaud, at Lily Agius’ gallery at the top of Cathedral Street (that’s in Sliema), which will repay the time you take if you decide to drop by. Very striking work.

The other trip was a schlep down south to Macbeth in the Palace Courtyard – it could have been shorter, given the heat and less than comfortable seating, but it was an enjoyable enough experience.

Insofar as concerns (lovely phrase) the other nourishment, we followed the Scottish Play with dinner at Chez Cyrille in Old Theatre Street, Valletta – quite apart from the graciousness of the service considering we turned up even later than the booking said (Shakespeare’s fault), the food itself was universally superb, so much so that I’ve made a bet with a Man U supporter that if they win the Premiership, it’s dinner for four on him.

We ate at other places over the weekend, of course, but I’ve mentioned them so many times before that it would be overkill. And I can’t mention the rather excellent brunch we had on Saturday because our hostess would be somewhat puzzled if you turned up wanting one.

imbocca@gmail.com

www.timesofmalta.com/blogs