Advert

Backbencher’s comment affects leaders’ debate

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi (left) and Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat shaking hands after the debate chaired by The Sunday Times deputy editor Herman Grech. They said that despite their political divergences they both had respect for one another. Photo: Jason Borg

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi (left) and Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat shaking hands after the debate chaired by The Sunday Times deputy editor Herman Grech. They said that despite their political divergences they both had respect for one another. Photo: Jason Borg

A debate between the political leaders took an unexpected turn yesterday when MP Franco Debono reiterated his position to timesofmalta.com that “the crisis will only be over once the oligarchy is dismantled”.

Dr Debono’s comments, which were read out aloud mid-debate by the moderator, The Sunday Times deputy editor Herman Grech, came minutes after the Prime Minister had said he was “optimistic” about the chances of overcoming the current political impasse.

Pressed to say whether Dr Debono’s comments meant government or party resignations were now inevitable, Dr Gonzi simply said: “My door is always open to constructive solutions that are in the country’s best interest.”

Hosted at the Intercontinental Hotel in St Julians, the discussion formed part of The Times To Debate series and was titled Is The Political Crisis Over? It saw Dr Gonzi and Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat trading political blows and rehashing arguments.

Dr Gonzi pointed to the economic figures – relatively low unemployment, a decreasing deficit, increased investment in education – as evidence that, rather than “crisis”, the situation was merely “a challenge” that was part and parcel of political life.

Dr Muscat insisted the situation had left Parliament frozen, with the government avoiding parliamentary votes for fear of losing them. Quoting Dr Gonzi’s predecessor, President Emeritus Eddie Fenech Adami, Dr Muscat said that “economic growth can only come from stable government”.

The two political leaders ran the gamut of political hot potatoes, from energy tariffs to public debt, constitutional reform and government bureaucracy, without, however, saying anything they had not mentioned before.

Depending on one’s political leanings, energy tariffs were either unavoidably high (Dr Gonzi) or capable of being reduced (Dr Muscat) and government debt was either “used to generate work” or “unsustainable”.

Dr Gonzi brushed aside his rival’s accusations of indulging in political rhetoric – “Are the EU’s seals of approval rhetoric?” – and repeatedly asked Dr Muscat to spell out what sort of government bureaucracy he would eliminate if in power.

“What does eliminating bureaucracy mean? Running an entire country requires administration. Is the Malta Environment and Planning Authority ‘bureaucracy’,” Dr Gonzi asked.

Despite being pressed to do so, Dr Muscat avoided giving a direct answer, saying instead that the Prime Minister was “completely underestimating” the strength of the private sector.

“The money is there, what is lacking is the courage and trust to invest,” he said. A Labour government would place great emphasis on public-private partnerships in all economic sectors and give the private sector the trust it needed to flourish, Dr Muscat added.

At one stage, Dr Gonzi let slip that “a major Brazilian company” would be relocating to Malta shortly, although he declined to give any further information.

Both leaders took the opportunity to condemn personal attacks and below-the-belt reporting, noting that, despite their political divergences, they both had respect for one another.

“Certain contributors and opinion writers go over the limit,” Dr Gonzi said.

Dr Muscat felt it was broader society itself that needed to send out a signal that such attacks were not acceptable.

There were a couple of parting shots on either side.

“The Prime Minister wants us to think that the current situation is normal but he is simply buying time and, ultimately, without stability you cannot have growth,” said Dr Muscat.

Dr Gonzi quipped: “I came here not knowing what the Labour policies were and I’m leaving none the wiser.”

Advert

8 Comments

Post comment

Comments are submitted under the express understanding and condition that the editor may, and is authorised to, disclose any/all of the above personal information to any person or entity requesting the information for the purposes of legal action on grounds that such person or entity is aggrieved by any comment so submitted.

At this time your comment will not be displayed immediately upon posting. Please allow some time for your comment to be moderated before it is displayed.

Your User Profile is incomplete.
Please click here to complete your profile before posting comments.

Mr Andrew Camilleri

Feb 9th, 12:17

And your comment says a lot about your lack of knowledge of parliamentary practice.

J.C. Borg

Feb 9th, 12:54

@ Mr Camilleri - It was not the first time that an Opposition 'did not vote against' a money bill. I put 'did not vote against' in inverted commas as on occasions the Opposition instead of voting against just do not vote (sort of abstaining). And now we have the Education Act, which is so important.

Mr Andrew Camilleri

Feb 9th, 14:30

Mr. Borg, don't worry. I am sure Dr. Muscat - just like Dr. Gonzi did in the divorce vote in parliament - will be whipping out his 'democracy calculator' (borrowed from Dr. Gonzi) and make sure that while the Opposition votes against, the Govt votes in favour and the bill will become law. Voting against a money bill is purely symbolic and appropriate.

Advert
Advert