Weak and strong points in leaders’ speeches

The time was when few would miss watching live on television the Budget speeches by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. It is no longer so, with many preferring to watch popular television series EastEnders, Casualty or whatever.

The novelty of having leading politicians rubbishing each other mercilessly, as Lawrence Gonzi and Joseph Muscat did last week, has long lost its appeal. Quite justifiably too, for most of the time they simply repeat what they would have said many times before either in Parliament or at their political clubs in towns and villages. In the eyes of many, the Budget speeches are far too long and boring.

Seemingly responding to the mounting national criticism for the Labour Party to wake up to its political responsibilities and start beefing up its talk, Dr Muscat reeled off no fewer than 51 proposals when he made his speech last week. But voters would not be interested in the number of proposals a party rolls out but in their substance, their feasibility and, in short, whether they make sense or not.

Dr Gonzi exuded confidence, no doubt built up out of his experience in the job of Prime Minister both in relatively tranquil times and in the most difficult period that has been brought about by the financial turmoil in the eurozone. His delivery may not have been as strong as that of the Labour leader but he was devastating in his rebuttal of some of Dr Muscat’s arguments, especially when he came to dissect his pledge to reduce water and electricity tariffs.

He was weak in other arguments, particularly when he spoke about the national debt and the salary rise Cabinet ministers awarded themselves without anybody knowing. Few would be against building schools, but it is unwise to spend beyond one’s means.

Bringing down the debt to a reasonable level is not so easy, especially in times like the present when countries are taking austerity measures to check their financial deficits.

Dr Gonzi’s reaction to the Labour leader’s searing criticism of the way the Cabinet handled the salary rise was unconvincing and, in a way, sad too for he tried to wriggle out of a politically-incorrect move in a way that does no honour to a party that has tried to make transparency a byword in its political vocabulary for so many years.

What was particularly interesting in the Prime Minister’s speech was his announcement that the European Union is looking positively at Malta’s request for funds for the laying of a gas pipeline. Even though it may take years for the project to come about, the laying of a gas pipeline and of the interconnector would eventually put the generation and supply of power in Malta on a much sounder basis than it is today.

Dr Muscat was unconvincing and evasive when he repeated his pledge to cut water and electricity rates for he does not say, for instance, by how much and – key question this – when he would be able to bring the rates down. And would he not have to put up the gas tanks first? How would he be able to finance their building? The Sargas proposal has yet to be fully assessed before it could be considered as a feasible way of reducing the rates.

Perhaps Dr Gonzi was more convincing than Dr Muscat but both had good and weak points. However, Dr Muscat now needs to go a step further and beef up most of the proposals he made if he wants to be credible.