Berta Sullivan
We need to know how now
The shadow minister for government investments and gender equality, Helena Dalli, has alleged that “the PN has this fixation with wanting to know the policies of a party which can only be implemented in 20 months’ time or so” (October 3). May I assure the author that the Nationalist Party is not the only entity wanting to know the policies of a government-in-waiting. The Times had this to say: “Labour constantly accuses the government of being incompetent and that much of the island’s economic ills are due to its bad planning or to the wrong way it is tackling problems. But it has distinctly failed to show its competence by presenting its own workable alternatives” (October 18).
The author wrote that Labour will not give any details because: “conditions are bound to change, thus making policies Labour may be considering today irrelevant in the scenario of two years from now”. So is the electorate really expected to vote for a party without policies and vision? Is the author suggesting that the PN government should not plan beyond a couple of months, say? Simply incredible!
The joke is that when her much-loved leader was elected to head the party he alleged that “he had mapped out a15-year project for the party and the country”. So if, according to the shadow minister Labour’s policies are irrelevant in two years’ time, imagine how irrelevant her leader’s 15-year project is! What hogwash!
Recently, Dr Dalli’s beloved Labour leader told us: “The party would be proposing a constitutional convention with the ‘ambitious target of giving birth to a Second Republic’” (October 5). When a political leader makes such revolutionary declarations, the least thing he could do is illuminate us why he feels he needs to initiate a Second Republic à la Napoleon sporting the official motto Liberté, égalité, fraternité. Can he also elaborate why, as a progressive leader, he wishes to regress so? Anyway, what is wrong with Labour’s First Republic, born on December 13, 1974?
In fits and starts, without telling us how, Labour has suggested that it will solve all our problems. It will transform this island into a little nirvana and all the people will be really happy. Imagine the scenario: Overnight we will all become filthy rich. We will not receive any more painful utility bills to settle. We will pay less VAT and fewer taxes. All administration fees will be reduced drastically and the government will subsidise everything we need: our water, electricity, petrol, gas, bread, even fees charged by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority! Education and health services will remain free for all. And that’s a Labour promise!
Our power station will run without fuel and we will have wind farms all over the island and the surrounding sea. Pollution will be eradicated and immigrants will stop fleeing to our shores.
There will be no school-leavers and illiteracy will be non-existent. Our students will have two universities to choose from and their stipends will be increased. Obviously, each and every village will offer health services and there will be no waiting lists at Mater Dei Hospital. Free child day-care centres will sprout all over Malta and every mother will join the labour force. There will be no crime, pensions will be doubled and pension age will be dropped down back to 60.
When the Budget comes along we will all receive a juicy weekly bonus just in case we need it for the rise of the “low” cost of living! Our unemployment rate and our deficit will go down to zero per cent. We will have no inflation. Our national debt will also go down to zero per cent.
All this must be true because Labour promised.
Back to Malta under a PN government in the real spinning world. All of us who live on this earth are very concerned, what with the international financial disaster, the eurozone crisis, countries and banks going bust, the soaring cereal and fuel prices. We are all feeling the pinch and the going might even get tougher. We are not happy bunnies and we are all dreading a double-dip recession, if not a great depression, which is looming on the horizon.
Keeping mum on what magical treatment Labour will be whipping up to cure all our ailments, it insists on lambasting the government at every turn. But, thankfully, in spite of Labour’s cynicism and lack of cooperation Malta is weathering the storm well.
Our deficit, nearing the two per cent, is now under control and our exportation in the first six months of this year increased by 54 per cent. In the second quarter of this year Malta registered the fastest growth rate in the eurozone; the latter’s average was 0.2 per cent and Malta’s was 2.8 per cent. We also have the fifth lowest unemployment rate. The average for the EU and the eurozone is 10 per cent with Spain spiralling up to over 20 per cent. Malta’s rate lies at 6.5 per cent. Malta’s national debt level is 68 per cent whereas the EU average stands at 85 per cent (October 7).
“The point then is that all these factors would have to be taken into consideration in criticism as, otherwise, the motive for such criticism becomes suspect” (The Times editorial, August 30). I could not put it any better myself.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
8 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
G Borg
Oct 30th 2011, 20:41
So, our dear Berta is at it again. Always with the same song, PN is always good and right whilst PL are always a stupid bunch of idiots etc etc.
I have to wait until mid-November until I will formally know what are the contents of the coming Budget and I do not think that the Hon Minister will forward all the details if I contact him on the matter.
So I am sure that the PL will forward all their proposals in due course and when the time is ripe for them and then I will carry out an analysis of same in detail. I will do the same with that of the PN. And whilst I am on this issue, my dear Berta , can you please ask the PN to issue immediately their electoral programme etc since I assume that they have everything ready to go for the election, so I will have ample time to analyse same and check whether they include empty promises.
I always contend that every party in government tried its best for Malta, some were more successful than others. So my dear Berta, if you want to be not only read but also to be taken seriously, start forwarding balanced views, since these will help each and every party to think seriously on the contents. I am not saying that you will be totally impartial but at least not totally biased.
Looking forward to start reading your balanced article on various issues such as whether will these deficits and national debt, Euro crisis, excessive and uncontrolled spending sprees etc etc will eventually hit hard on my standard of living and my hard earned savings.
And whilst we are on this subject, I would like the PN to start indicating amounts and not percentages of GDP, debts etc etc since the ordinary citizen will understand the figures much better and therefore be able to decide who can be trusted in future with the "national coffer" if there is still one!!!.
Mr ALBERT LEONE GANADO
Oct 29th 2011, 17:28
I would not say that Berta Sullivan raises an irrelevant issue when she queries the reluctance of the PL leader to show his hand. However I fully understand the reasons of JM for refusing at this stage to disclose his future plans to the public at large. Some reasons I would put forward are the following:
(i) As the leader of a party almost out of power for 25 years his primary objective must be to get elected. Disclosing his plans will only lead to an army of partisan supporters, the biased media and the usual columnists who see nothing right in the PL to come up with reams of statistics to prove JM's profligacy intentions and his lack of responsibility. He is doing much better in trying to gain votes at the grass roots and his promised social easing through reducing utility bills is already a generous concession to voters being currently financially squeezed and closer to what grass roots worry about.
(ii) A whole list of promises which are then shelved after the election as happened with the over 350 list before the last election has left voters not only suspicious but unlikely to be influenced with empty promises aimed to win votes.
(iii) When recently JM made a very important statement regarding his belief in continuity of government which is the sort of statement which foreign investors care about it was totally ignored or downplayed by the local media who are only interested in exploiting some inaccuracies in a detailed plan. Let us remember that our Maltese style of democracy is still very far off from civil servants holding regular confidential meetings with the leader of the opposition to help plan and prepare continuity of government scenarios in anticipation of a change of government.
(iv) In the absence of an effective freedom of information Act there must be civil servants who privately consult with the leader of the opposition and provide information necessary for his future plans formulation. We all know what would happen if such persons are identified from the information revealed and required to formulate such detailed plans.
I could go on and on with such justifications although one could see some contrary arguments which I leave the pr army of the pn like Berta to keep on marketing.
Victor Laiviera
Oct 29th 2011, 13:21
Ms Sullivan writes, "our exportation in the first six months of this year increased by 54 per cent".
It has been shown that this figure is based on fuel exports which, as Malta is not an oil producing country, is not possible.
Once you remove that factor, the real increase is about 0.5%.
The fact that the government is having to resort to outright falsehoods in its PR is very telling.
Godfrey Camilleri
Oct 28th 2011, 16:40
Please note that the 54% in exports was a gross mistake; it seems you have not read about it. The real increase in exports was 0.5%, not a very pleasant figure to have. The Finance Ministry is to be careful to scrutinize the export figures given in the statistics. How could they include re-exports, in this case oil. Re-exports should be reported as a separate figure. It may be a fact that there is some value added in re-exports, hence there is probably the need to define a certain percentage of value added for an item to qualify as a re-export. But still, re-exports should be reported separately.
Wenzu Vella
Oct 28th 2011, 14:32
The spin goes on and the spin goes on. How dizzy are you dear Berta ha ha
Wally Vella-Zarb
Oct 28th 2011, 11:00
What a sheer and utter waste of prime column-inches! The entire article could well be summed up in one word: 'Hogwash!'
pat muscat
Oct 28th 2011, 09:45
' Carry on' Berta Sullivan!
Mr Albert Dimech
Oct 28th 2011, 09:14
The the 54% increased in exports has been ridiculed by Economist, since it includes oil exports and Malta is not an oil producer. What is incredible is how gullible the PN think we all are. So next time, explain your figures if you want some credibility.
This is the usual propaganda bla, bla, bla.