So, Adrian Delia got himself elected PN leader. Democracy, and all that. I have been following his statements and speeches before and since his election. It is true that new political leaders need to grow into their role and should thus be given due slack. But I am sorry to report that the misgivings I had when he first entered the PN leadership arena have only increased.
There is no doubt that he is a potentially gifted speaker. His first big oratorical test at the PN Independence mass meeting had better rhetorical flair and pacing than most of his predecessor’s efforts (but no comment on the hackneyed content). It seems that “kemm jaf jitkellem!” (what a good speaker he is) was sufficient justification for the thousands of tesserati who gave him their confidence.
But was the passion that the faithful heard on the Fosos resonating a deep conviction, or was it the clichéd reverb of an empty vessel? For the few thousand discerning floating voters that still believe in the politics of service, the real litmus test is not kemm jaf jitkellem, but that of character. By that test Delia has not yet passed muster.
Some months ago I excoriated Joseph Muscat and co. for their inability to appreciate that in a democracy, the standard for political integrity is higher than the bar for criminal culpability. Well, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Delia’s frenetic verbal sword dance over the alleged money-laundering of the proceeds of prostitution does not cut any ice. Did he, or did he not, have ‘that’ bank account? “I don’t remember” and “I did nothing illegal” is just so much slippery lawyer-speak.
A potential prime minister cannot cower behind the fig leaf of ‘client confidentiality’ when the claims being made are so serious. At least, not one who is trying to claim the moral mantle of Eddie Fenech Adami, Lawrence Gonzi and Simon Busuttil.
Is he, or is he not, beholden to third parties because of his personal debts? A financial report written by someone with clear potential conflicts of interest, that leaves more questions than it answers, and that is released when it cannot be properly scrutinised is no tribute to Delia’s transparency and accountability.
Delia says that these allegations should be ignored because their source, Daphne Caruana Galizia, is a mere hate-spewer. Really? Is that what he was thinking during the Panama and Egrant protest marches? Did he contribute to the crowd-funding when Chris Cardona tried to paralyse her financially and the government tried to gag her? I did.
If Delia wants to win the trust of the discerning floating voter, he needs to start his New Way with some good old-fashioned personal and professional ethics
Mixed in with Daphne’s acerbic wit, scurrilous innuendos and exasperating (sometimes plain outrageous) bite-backs are solid-gold nuggets of information that would not otherwise come to light. The correct response in a mature democracy it not to shoot the messenger, nor to smother the information with Maltese blarney, but to open oneself to proper scrutiny so as to allay any fears and concerns.
Peppi Azzopardi asked Delia to do just this, and he refused point blank. Now we discover that he had no real plan to secure a parliamentary seat. Had Delia been duped, or was he lying shamelessly all along?
Have all these been the initial slip-ups of a leader still finding his feet? If so, Delia is still in time to rectify them, pronto. I find it insulting that I am being told to suspend my reasoning and stifle my concerns for the sake of party unity.
If Delia wants to win the trust of the discerning floating voter, he needs to start his New Way with some good old-fashioned personal and professional ethics.
Presidential balm
The uneasy coexistence between the Maltese and migrant residents of Marsa has been causing friction for years. The Maltese residents complain that they feel less safe. The migrants complain that they feel marginalised and neglected, with no effective integration policy. The post-electoral ‘solutions’ of our political class only serve to stoke these fears: the government wanted to shift the ‘problem’ to another place, while the Opposition wants to distribute it evenly all around.
In both scenarios the dehumanising narrative is the same: the migrants are the problem, a burden to be shared, something to get rid of (once they have done all the underpaid and unsafe work we give them minn taħt, of course).
Why is it that the only sane voice in this mess is that of the President? Her office took the first really useful initiative in this whole sorry saga: getting both sides to simply meet and talk together. As always happens when dialogue replaces fear and suspicion, the two sides could understand much more each others’ plight and concerns.
Rather than use the Marsa situation for political mileage, our politicians should follow the President’s example. The way forward needs to be found by talking to and working with the Marsa residents – all of them.