Saturday, 27th December 2008
ON THE CUSP
As you read this, recovering, like me from the excess of Christianity most of us who profess that faith, and many of us who do not, demonstrate at this time of the year, you will probably not have reflected on the fact that we are on the cusp of (yet another) election campaign.
I’m not talking about the Local Council elections – this time around, these will interest me not’ardly, because if my locality is going to the polls, I’m not going to vote. I don’t bother voting to elect members in an institution that doesn’t bother to do anything in my area while being only interested in fining me for parking in a manner that does not please the institution while doing nothing about the parking problem in my area. None of the vehicles my family runs has ever, to my knowledge, obstructed the free flow of traffic or pedestrians, yet we get done for a ticket or two every week. Fair enough, the (few) places we can park are clearly marked but the idiotic measures the two neighbouring councils have taken have cut down on the available spaces and nothing has been done to sort the problem.
In fact, pretty much nothing has been done in our bit of the locality, so it’s time for a spot of a plague on both your houses – in fact, on both the houses in both the localities that affect me.
So the election campaign about which I write is the one where we will be asked to elect MEPs – whether this will be a punishment or not is, Boring Europolis being what is, debatable, but let’s assume the people contesting actually want the job, for the purposes of this discussion.
As ever, before you cast your vote, you take a primary decision – are you going blue, red (are they still red?) or green? I’m taking it that you are an intelligent, discerning type, since you are reading this, so the notion of wasting your vote by casting it for Lowell (are convicted criminals allowed to contest MEP elections?) or that Muscat bloke (and I don’t mean Joe, but Josie) will not have crossed your mind.
The received wisdom is that the PN will again suffer at the hands of the PL (MLP as was) which is hardly an earth-shattering notion. A government at the beginning of its term, doing what it can get away with in the popularity stakes before having to start thinking about the next General Elections, is hardly likely to gain in popularity, and the current economic disaster, while not being the fault of Gonzi and his lads (though to read Orizzont or Kull Torca, you’d think it was) sure ain’t about to give them a fillip.
This having been said, the received wisdom before the last General Elections was that the PN would get whupped and that proved to be a load of bunkum. Of course, had that Sant fellow not timed the JPO story so badly, it might have proved to be true that the MLP would get in, reversing the reverse in the polls that the PN’s masterly campaign had pulled off, but the fact remains that even after 20-odd years in Government, the PN still got the nod, slight as it was.
This does not mean, however, that realistically there’ll be a reverse of the previous MEP result of 3 – 2, though stranger things have happened at sea, of course.
As in the Local Council elections, the populace at large doesn’t give as much importance to the MEP elections as it does to the General Elections. People who have quite cheerfully not bothered to turn up or who have experimented with going red or green have made it pretty darn clear, when the important poll comes around, that they would prefer their writing hand to wither away, just to be Biblical about it, rather than have it scribble in any way that would raise the spectre of Labour getting into power.
So it’s not really likely that the PN will reverse the third Labour (just can’t call them PL, it doesn’t roll off the keyboard) seat – to be honest, there are those who think, generally because they can’t read the numbers, that the Greens are threatening the PN’s second seat, leaving the most hardworking Maltese MEP as the only representative of his party, ironically.
Let’s just put that one to bed once and for all, shall we? The Greens, with their calculated grab for some sort of power, vestigial though it would have been had it worked, at the General Elections, have hardly enamoured themselves to an electorate that remains, pretty much, split down the middle between the two parties. Last time around, in the MEP poll, they rode on the pro-Europe, simpatico wave that their manner of conducting themselves had engendered. This time around, plenty of water has flowed under the bridge, and while plenty of their guys remain simpatici, more than a touch of real-politik has crept into the equation, leaving them out in the cold reality of finger pointing and acrimony.
So the smart money, assuming you can find anyone to take it, will be on PN 2 – Labour 3, which will give Joe Muscat’s boys and girls something to crow about but which will be relatively unimportant in the greater scheme of things.
As to who will be voted for within the party lists, working out that will be an interesting exercise to which space will be dedicated when the picture is clearer.
RSS
Comments
Not that gentle readers bother much about Andrew’s titles and I wonder how we got on to lecturers instead of the customary mud slinging between those whose banner is “My party right or wrong”.
Although Andrew digresses somewhat I gather that he has in mind MEP elections. Both in Malta and the UK the appointment of MEPs seems somewhat haphazard, idiosyncratic and peculiar but I think the subject is more important to Malta than it is in my country (UK) and is worthy of further discussion.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090103/local/students-to-protest-at-impasse-between-university-and-lecturers
"andrew will not change. only one way track. how could you sir remain so attached to the pn. tell us what is the true connection... think outside the box. i am sure you can"
What do you expect from a PN-political-agenda-basher ?
"but in international politics, threats of vetoes do not always work to a country's advantage"
That is a good point, but sometimes, our only choice isn't between a bad thing and a good thing, but between a bad thing and a very bad thing. This is where courage comes into play. I said that there's an easy solution to our problem not that there isn't a price to pay for that solution. The Irish vetoed the new EU constitution and the EU is now willing to give them what they want. We should follow their example and the Gov should let us people decide through a referendum whether we are willing to pay the 'price' required to solve this problem or not.
"How do you prevent 'more' from coming in? Shoot them at sea?...Not supply them with fuel when they run out?..."
You must have missed what I wrote so let me quote it again: "We assist those in distress by giving them what they need and let them decide if to continue northwards or southwards". But to be able to do this we must first update the relevant unfair laws like the Dublin II Convention.
" I refuse to debate with someone who sees only the blue side of reality" Read that statement again David and you will find it is contradictory because adding 'of reality' at the end, destroyed its intended effect. 'Reality' encompasses all hues including Blue, Green and Red and all hues we know of.
The reality you wrote about is that all parties are equally uneasy about the influx of immigrants but in international politics, threats of vetoes do not always work to a country's advantage because one voice against many will invite retaliation about other matters sometime down the road.
Slamming the doors shut after a certain number is attained is both discriminatory and impossible to do. How do you prevent 'more' from coming in? Shoot them at sea? Abandon them to perish in inclement weather? Not supply them with fuel when they run out? Not provide them with water when they are parched in 40 degree weather?
I particularly love your last comment about the traffickers taking the business elsewhere !? Some solution!
The problem with comments on these blogs are the over simplicity of solutions offered.
Problems are never that easy to solve.
I usually don't criticize our Parties because they do that by themselves quite well, but on this important national issue the story is different. The Opp isn't criticizing the Gov, at least not as much as they do on minor issues like the skirt of a lawyer. So, the Opp didn't pressure the Gov, and hence the Gov remained comfortably complacent. It seems to me that as long as the PL will not score political points on this subject, this subject will remain of secondary importance to the Pn Gov. Talking about national interest. The Opp left us on our own on re this issue. At the next MEP election, it will be our responsibility to do something about it because ultimately, the real responsible for this country isn't the P.M., but the Maltese People.
"I refuse to debate with someone who so readily criticizes"
You started this debate with me not vice versa, and if you refuse to debate with someone who criticizes, I refuse to debate with someone who sees only the blue side of reality.
"One question, though. What is your 'easy solution'?"
We must pressure the Eu, with the veto if necessary, to amend the Dublin II Convention (The law that OBLIGE Malta to take them in all irrespective of; their number, our limited land space and our overcrowded population) to set a LIMIT on the 'intakes' - for example 3 per square km. Once we reach the limit, we close our doors and take no more. We assist those in distress by giving them what they need and let them decide if to continue northwards or southwards.
Since fixing Africa is farfetched and burden-sharing is out of the question, the only solution is to keep them out. Once the human traffickers get to know that it is useless to bring them to Malta they would take their lucrative-illegal business elsewhere.
Happy 2009 to you too!. 2008 has morphed into 2009.
Get busy Peter and you will find that 2009 will not drag at all.
I am really surprised by some of your latest comments but I refuse to debate with someone who so readily criticizes, makes statements such as, ' Our politicians failed not because there isn't any easy solution to this problem', and 'because they lack the determination ' and, ' that's why the Gov will legislate the new Anti 'anti-immigrants sentiments' bill'
One question, though. What is your 'easy solution'?.
Our politicians failed not because there isn't any easy solution to this problem, but because they lack the determination to take courageous measures. They know better than me how to solve this problem but prefer to be more loyal to some international organization rather than its people. Talking about national interest. The next MEP election is the opportunity for all those against illegal immigration to give our big Parties the shock they need to wake up from their hibernation. Only a wise vote from us can give them the courage they lack. And please don't compare our burden with that of Italy, they differ by at least a couple of magnitudes.
"To say "Both big parties ignored the 'sentiments' of the majority of the Maltese" is pure nonsense"
You may be right, they didn't ignore our 'sentiments', that's why the Gov will legislate the new Anti 'anti-immigrants sentiments' bill.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish you all (immigrants included) a prosperous new year.
Looks like you misread my lips, I Was merely (or maybe merrily) being a bit sarcastic but never mind. Happy New Year.
Your question to me sounds almost identical to the one I posed to David Seychell.
Surely you can do better than that, Charles.
@ David Seychell
" At least in theory, you can't have the national interest on top of the list and at the same time having on top of your allegiance list a political party instead of the people". (!)
What are political parties for? What are governments for, if not to look after the National interest first? You may not always agree, but surely whichever party is governing hopefully tries its best to move the nation forward.
If both parties (and MEPs) failed in the Immigration issue, is proof that the problem is beyond their means. Please don't quote me the Italians who are deporting Egyptians back to their country. You can raise the issue again if they start deporting Somalians Eritreans etc.
To say "Both big parties ignored the 'sentiments' of the majority of the Maltese" is pure nonsense. Both the Government and the Opposition have the same attitude towards illegal immigration however they both are somewhat helpless in this kind of situation.
If someone has a reasonable solution, let him/her come forward.
HAPPY NEW YEAR AND HAVE A HEALTHY KWANZA.
"If in your opinion some of them did not put the National interest first, why not name them?"
Our 5 MEP's are an extension of their party. They owe their allegiance -at least primary- to their Party not to the citizens who voted for them. And yes, I was incorporating Dr. J. Muscat too. They all do/did what their party tell them to do and not what the people want them to do. At least in theory, you can't have the national interest on top of the list and at the same time having on top of your allegiance list a political party instead of the people.
The biggest threat to the national interest, in this first part of the century, is illegal immigration. Both big parties ignored the 'sentiments' of the majority of the Maltese and offered no real solution. Some of them (one of them is an MEP), no need to name them, treated us like retarded donkeys and took us for a ride for a long time.
Are you implying that David implied that the present MEP's, who included Dr. Joseph Muscat until lately, did not put Malta's interest on the top of their list?
Surely you can do better than that Joe.
You wrote: "I care that at the next MEP elections the winners will be Malta and the Maltese and to achieve this we should vote for those that are really willing to put the National interest on top of the list, just unlike what happened till now".
Are you implying that the present MEP's, who included Dr. Joseph Muscat until lately, did not put Malta's interest on the top of their list? If in your opinion some of them did not put the National interest first, why not name them?
True. Too true. Bocca's favorite nightmare will soon be back to haunt him like a hound in 2009.
He may still hold on to his Balzan residence (yet) with sporadic forays up north to escape the heat of illegal migration at home threathing to engulf him and his neighbourhood.
However, being the greatest of government (read impotently hopeless) apologists known to inhabit this side of the southern archipelago, he may still fight tooth and nail to defend (being the good law advocate that he is) the indefensible.
At the end, when all things are accounted for and the dust of the saharan desert and its southern hinterland have settled (alien-like) on our (once) fair land, Bocca may have found a safe haven in....Brussels. No doubt to continue serving in his sterling ways the GonziPn until its natural expiry day!
Who ever said 'National Interest'?
Group includes 10 pregnant women" -T.o.M, today.
I predict you will have a tough year next year bocc, trying to, as per your political agenda, convince us to vote again for those that made our HOME country 'free' for the taking by anyone who wants to come here -as long as he comes without documents though!.
"National Interest"; " Public Interest" and "Self-Interest" go hand in hand, and it is the collection of all three that guarantees the survival of a nation including politicians and journalists no matter what their political colour. For example: it may be in the "National Interest" for a journalist to expose corruption in the government/opposition. However, a government/opposition spokesperson may argue to the journalist that the story should be delayed in the "national interest", thus protecting the ruling/opposition party's immediate interest and not upsetting their supporters or providing ammunition to their opposers. Thus this is self-interest in order to protect its image and not in the "National Interest" at all.
On the other hand, a journalist/blogger may "mis-quote" or expose certain facts of the corruption in the name of "public interest" but with "self-interest" being the real motive vis-a-vis getting his/her story onto the front page and selling more newspapers for his boss.
In any event - it is my view that if people are being really honest - self-interest is the top of everbody's list.
A Happy 2009 to you all :)
The EP is not made up of PN (PPE) and PL (Socialists) only, in fact the Liberals and the Greens amongst others have a very crucial influence.
Now, without going into the merits or demerits of individual candidates, on which it’s practically very difficult to reach any consensus, it is logical to agree that it would be in Malta’s interest to be represented in as much political parties as possible – obviously provided that these political parties advocate sensible policies and that the individuals running on that party’s ticket exudes credibility, integrity and competence.
Thus, dear ABC, if we really know what national interest is, let’s stop this petty talk about the self defeating pique between our village bands of PN and PL, and start assessing matters with a wider and unattached frame of mind.
"Does it involve discriminating against anyone, perchance?"
There are many forms of discrimination but basically there are two types: (1)discrimination based on prejudice and (2)discrimination based on merit/demerit, the latter is desirable.
"Could someone define "national interest", incidentally?"
That which is beneficial to the Maltese in general is in the national interest while that which is detrimental is not in the national interest. Illegal immigration, for instance, is not beneficial to the Maltese and hence not in the national interest.
"As ever, before you cast your vote, you take a primary decision – are you going blue, red or green?"
I suggest to everyone not to vote for a candidate just because of his colour (type 1 discrimination), as someone has suggested here, but to vote for those that represent your will (type 2 discrimination), otherwise you will very likely spend another four years grumbling in the ignoratorium.
"Can't be talking about me, then - I've never pretended to be anything but opinionated"
I will let your "intelligent" -or should I say floating voters, perchance?- readers judge for themselves whether you have a monochrome political agenda or not.
Now since you have come up with the MEP election as your next crusade to pave the way for your obscure agenda (read PN apology again) I never bothered to vote before now.
And since the 'criminal' you have implicated has been unceremoniously barred from contesting, the only alternative for anyone who has a semblance of national pride (not you Bocca, granted) to vote for must be 'that Muscat bloke (and I don’t mean Joe, but Josie) .
At least he is not ready to sell Malta's soul to the foreigner!
...and that does not mean discriminating against anyone perchance. At least not against the tax-paying Maltese as things stand now!
I don't consider people particularly intelligent just because they read your articles but on the other hand, I consider people to be "discerning" and particularly intelligent if they are able to distinguish between objective and independent opinionist AND biased hypocrites who write with a political agenda in mind and pretends to be independent so as to have a better chance of converting the floater voters.
"The received wisdom is that the PN will again suffer at the hands of the PL"
I don't care if the PL will win again or not, 3-2, 4-1 or whatever. I care that at the next MEP elections the winners will be Malta and the Maltese and to achieve this we should vote for those that are really willing to put the National interest on top of the list, just unlike what happened till now.