So they set up a Foundation to organise national festivities. So far so normal. This is after all the Malta of Saints and Fireworks where every raħal worth its globigerina limestone has at least one Kumitat tal-Festi. This is the country of the xalati and illum il-festa tagħna so the setting up of a Kumitat tal-Festi Tagħna Lkoll was just waiting to happen. No surprises there. It was even less of a surprise given how Joseph Muscat has been harping on emptily about some kind of breaking of barriers insofar as the “us and them” is concerned. The fans of the PLPN crowd have long obsessed about the greatest national holiday and about how divisive their respective celebrations can be. In truth the approach to each of our nation’s dates with history simply betrays a shallowness bred out of partisan ignorance and stereotyped fallacies.

Back to the Foundation though. The news causing greatest ripples across all the media was the appointment of Where’s Everybody main man Lou Bondi to the same Foundation. Oliver Friggieri would be chairing the committee and one sincerely hopes that his current health  situation will allow him to provide a decent input, whatever that may be, given the already limited (and doomed) remit of the Foundation. What really I found really jarring at the moment of the announcement of the committee members was the importance given in Malta to a new kind of professional – “the TV personality”.

Back to Bondi though. The net – especially the net – exploded with expressions of dismay bordering on angst as many a hardcore Labour supporter expressed his disdain that a member of the EvilGonziClique had been given a place in the wider court of this government’s workings.Everybody knows that Lou Bondi would  feature close to the top of a Labour hate list – trumped only by the one they refer to as the Witch from Bidnija and a close competitor to Lawrence Gonzi himself. And here he was – Lou Bondi – entrusted with the organisation of the nth anniversary of Jum il-ħelsien. Horror. Surely Dom would be turning in his grave.

The beauty of it all was also the reaction from the nationalist side of the national whinge fest. Apparently Bondi had just lost his credentials as a decent journalist. Really? Caruana Galizia even attempted to twist and turn the argument on its head by affirming that Bondi was not a partial journalist and that it was his impartiality that was being rewarded. In a world gone mad it was only another hapless voice to add to the chorus of dismayed and angered oohs and aahs.

The real winner in all this? Joseph Muscat. Not only has he set up a Foundation that is basically there to perpetrate the mental masturbation of an idea that is “reconciliation through celebration of all our national days”. Not just that. He has appointed one of the most hated personas in the Labour, chip-on-the-shoulder based, psyche to the very same Foundation that is supposed to be a stepping stone towards the breaking down of the “us and them” barriers. Chapeau. Really. A magician’s hat from which to extract the rabbit.

 Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called “The Pledge”. The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course… it probably isn’t. The second act is called “The Turn”. The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you’re looking for the secret… but you won’t find it, because of course you’re not really looking. You don’t really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn’t clap yet. Because making something disappear isn’t enough; you have to bring it back. That’s why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call “The Prestige”. – The Prestige

We all saw the object. The object was the inherent contradiction. “What? Lou Bondi appointed onto a board by the Prime Minister himself? Had we missed his billboard where he expressed blind belief in everything Joseph does?” We were supposed to be awed. Stunned. The wizard behind the curtain had his eyes on a bigger picture. Most talk and criticisim in the first 100 days of Labour rule has been about the way meritocracy was thrown out of the window. Merit was scratched from the vocabulary as billboard folk were appointed to government posts and most of the Super One workforce shifted to ministerial salaries. What happened next came as a surprise. All of a sudden you had the most nationalist of nationalists – a hated journalist, friend of the witch, cousin of one of the most disliked Ministers – elevated to a government appointed position.

It’s one big distraction. The biggest yet. While everyone and everybody complained we would forget the Marshalls, the Testas, and the Micallefs of this world. Muscat became the magnanimous. Too magnanimous. Under Muscat EVEN Lou Bondi gets a blessing. We even forgot to ask what this committee is really about and how important it really is. Prestidigitation took care of that. Just like the idea of building a bridge to Gozo. Now that’s a project that could only be conceived or supported by a Baldrick or an equivalent turnip. Muscat has not built the bridge and I am prepared to wager that it will not be built. What we have is the prestidigitation – the signing of contracts with the Chinese and the illusion that “we are thinking about it”.

All you needed to complete the magic trick was the couple of hired hacks who would sell the tenuous argument that all the unmeritocratic change that has been happening is normal and should have been expected. Give them the chance to look shocked and slightly angry that Muscat went so far as to appoint Bondi – it gives them an amount of cred doesn’t it?

The truth? The truth is that a wave of politically motivated appointments should not be normal and is not to be expected, no. That’s bullshit – particularly coming from supposed pundits and ex-columnists. When combined with all the talk of reconciliation and new way of doing politics, the wave of appointments simply confirms that the Labour government is one big magic trick that only needs a not too particularly alert audience to notice the scam that lies beneath the surface.

So while you whinge and whine about whether Bondi should have been appointed to a post by Muscat, or whether he should have accepted, remember that you are wasting your time.

Try to stop looking at the rabbit and the hat or at the magician’s eyes… look at his lips instead… that smirk on his face will speak a thousand words.

“The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”

When the party in government fails to notice that it is actually in government after more than hundred days that it has been warming the seat of power then what you have is a bomb that is ticking away waiting to explode. While the nationalist party’s Rapport tat-telfa (Election defeat report) was published last week, the future Labour party’s report is actually a work in progress – being drafted daily by the government, the party and its apologists.

The ethics of convenience

The Franco Mercieca affair was a perfect litmus test to illustrate what is going on. The red lights flashed at so many levels that it was impossible to keep up. First of all, and most importantly, was the blatant disregard of the concept of a Code of Ethics and how it should work. A code of ethics, by its very nature, works only when there is no waiver. A “waiver” – whatever that means in Taghna Lkoll talk – flies in the face of the very purpose of why a code of ethics exist. [Note: I do not question whether the waiver was justified or not. I question whether the power of the Prime Minister to grant such a waiver does or should exist. It should not.] A code of ethics needs to be applied in a blanket manner. Should the need to apply a “waiver” arise then that should set the alarm bells ringing because what that really says is that a person appointed to a position within the cabinet has an ethical conflict of interest. The question is not whether he should get a waiver but whether he should still hold that position.

Much has been made of the unique healing qualities of Franco Mercieca. Even if it were so and this Gozitan turns out to be more efficient than the Ta’ Pinu Sanctuary votive section that should only mean that Franco Mercieca’s place is more valuable in his clinic than on a seat in the patchwork cabinet  formed at the Taghna Lkoll horse-trading market. Joseph Muscat can glare at the questioning press all he likes and qualify his Imperial Waiver with all the postillas and caveats that he may invent on the spot. He may even come up with witty retorts about past deeds of the Evil Gonzi clan. None of that lessens the fact that this cabinet’s operation insofar as conflicts and interests are concerned seems to be fast requiring a Manuel Mallia Amnesty – or better a box of amnesia pills. Thank god that the Taghna Lkoll Pills seem to still work on the general congregation.

Before you accuse me

There’s a story in the Indy this week. It’s a follow up to the saga at San Vincent de Paule residence where the order of the day seems to have been a series of musical chairs and “politically motivated” transfers. SVDP is not the first, nor the last, of workplaces where “meritocratic” moves are being put into effect. I know of a particularly jarring story of a career diplomat in the foreign affairs who found himself plonked on a desk rubber stamping papers from one day to the next – you know because in this case meritocracy means: “if you run for a local council on the PN ticket then you deserve to be demoted to nothingness”. Back to SVPR. The botta e risposta by the two parties is interesting if only for the manner in which it throws us back aeons in political development. The race to  mediocrity is still on ladies and gentlemen.

Having first transferred some workers then returned them to the original job after reactions from Unions (UHM of course – we’re back to the blue and red union delineation) the Labour party issues one of its Newspeak reactions peppered with TaghnaLkoll talk. The useless transfer and re-transfer were apparently made because “the government listens” and “is working to find solutions”. The TaghnaLkoll release continues “The decisions taken were all in the best interests”. Really?

It all makes sense now. “Jiena nemmen f’Joseph ghax hu jemmen fija”. You’d be surprised how many people there are out there ready to believe the shoddy explanations coming out of TaghnaLkoll HQ. The nationalist party better pull its socks up and stop flirting with the marketing politics of Joseph Muscat. Forget the TeamPN cock and bull and get down to some real team building. The country has had enough of rhetoric…  in fact it is drowning in it and risks becoming a lost Atlantis.

The Nationalist Party has called on Social Solidarity Minister Marie Louise Coleiro Preca to apologise to workers who were transferred and later returned to their original job, rather than boast that the decision was reversed because the government listens. In a statement, spokesman Mario Galea said that the transfers were withdrawn after pressure from the UHM and the Opposition, and some are still to be reversed. On another matter, Mr Galea said that the government should stop the clique who had taken over the running of the hospital. It is a shame that the home has been turned into a political football with employees working with fear and tension. In a reply, the Labour Party said that the PN has not learnt the lessons of the election and is still a negative party. The PN had left the situation in shambles and was now criticising the Labour government for working to find solutions. The decisions taken were all in the best interests and agreed to with the union, the PL said. (The Malta Independent)

I only started using the Sliema – Valletta ferry after I had moved to Luxembourg for work. When I still lived in Malta the ferry was something that only tourists did. They had time. They could afford to take in the splendid views of Marsamxett. Not for me the dilly-dallying. My commute to the city was for work and time was money, so I dutifully got in line with the hundreds of other sensible car-owners (one per-car) and sucked in on the carbon emissions all the way through the Porte des Bombes and Saint Anne Street.

These days whenever I come back home I always make it a point to use the ferry. At least once. Sure it’s not the same deal as walking into the majestic city through its main gate but the arrival by boat seems to be so much more fitting for the city built for gentlemen. This was, after all, the city built by a sea-faring order that threw its weight around the middle sea. Ignoring Valletta’s littoral element is like thinking of London without the Thames or Venice without its canals.

Majestic the city may be but its majesty exists also because of the sea. At the foot of the bastions that skirt the Humble City lie the lapping waters of the Mediterranean – a constant reminder of the place of the Most Proud city in time and space. The sea wraps the gated peninsula – alternating idyllic moments of calm with sudden bouts of fury, when Poseidon and Aeolus unleash their power and besiege its walls all over again.

Gates. The city does not hide its nature. It will always remain a fortified city – no matter how modern it can get. Internationally renowned architects may do away with doors and barriers and introduce open spaces but you will always have a sense of foreboding when you approach the Proud City.

Will it welcome you once more? Will it let you walk lazily through its deserted streets on a hot August afternoon, and allow you to stop at one of the myriad eating joints that have sprung along its streets? Will it engulf you in the darkness of the night as you drunkenly attempt to quit its narrow streets and newborn drinking holes? Will the ghosts of Valletta past entrap you in a winding desolation of brothels, murders and intrigue?

Or will Valletta be itself and gracefully adorn every step that you take on its streets with memorable  moments of historic ecstasy – from the smallest nook to the grandest palazzo? Will its church bells toll happily to welcome the many sons and daughters of the nation who find refuge in its proud symbolism? Will it let the sweet winds cool you as they breeze through its narrow, shaded streets? Will Valletta be the capital for everyone?

I have never left Valletta feeling  unsatisfied. The sense of foreboding is quickly replaced with a renewed sense of belonging. I was not born or brought up in Valletta but it is my capital. Any street in Valletta is my street. Our street. Every cobbled step down Republic Street, every mooring place near the waterfront, every smell on Lascaris Wharf and every balcony on Saint Barbara’s Bastion. They’re all there to tell you that no matter how far from Malta you may be, the city of gentlemen is there to remind you that there is a place that you can call home.

This post first appeared as a guest post on the Valletta 2018 Foundation’s Official Blog.

If it is up to the victors to write history then the losers are busy writing reports. That is just what the PN has just finished doing and it has published an executive summary of this analysis of the 2013 election result. Chaired by the papabile Anne Fenech the committee produced a litany of reasons divided into three parts: Why the Nationalist party lost, Why the Labour party won, and a part that includes suggestions for the future. Unlike the trend in Labour documents the executive summary does not have an obsession with numbering (check out the Law Commission’s latest report for a veritable OCD of numbering) but contains a list all the same. In the words of Eco “We like lists because we don’t want to die“.

In actual fact the first two lists are just a survey – a sort of vox pop  the likes of which could have been obtained by any kind of survey company operating on the market. They are not in themselves the reasons why the nationalist party lost the election (or why Labour won) – they are the reasons why people did not vote for the PN and voted for the PL (sometimes, but not always, “instead” could fit at the end of that sentence). It might seem to be the same but it is different. A survey company would only have omitted those grating praises of the outgoing nationalist party and its achievements (the truth is hard to swallow indeed).

As a political party (and for heavens’ sake don’t give me the movement crap), the Nationalist party is duty bound to look deeper into its soul than simply listing the ills of the people in a quasi-maniacal manner. Idiots without a clue about politics had come up with such lists and polluted the facebook pages with obsessive statuses much before the commission could even start applying its enigmatic PESTLE approach (Ghallinqas kelli ragun fuq din). Worse still the report falls short (but only just) of blaming an ungrateful electorate for not rewarding a highly successful administration – admittedly the temptation is always there (just look at AD).

The report also risks glorifying Joseph Muscat’s “success” notwithstanding the jibes and qualifications that are present at every point in part two. The two lists  - the anti-PN grievances and the analysis of the carrots that Labour distributed for its success – are dangerous in that they seem to push the PN into the ugly ground of emulating the Taghna Lkoll formula. That formula is not about politics but about marketing and building on dissatisfaction. It is the push towards the most mediocre of “political” methodologies represented by a manipulation of people’s needs in order to get into power (promising Turkeys to abolish Christmas) followed up by a display of ineptitude, abuse and lack of direction once such power is achieved.

The PN is in a much luckier position than AD in that it holds the lucky seat of alternation and the dice are seriously tricked in its favour when it comes to having to convince a Labour voter to switch back to itself. The committee is aware of this and has grounded its third part on that type of recommendation – of bringing voter into the fold of this “familja nazzjonalista”. J’accuse has always found this hermeneutic apartheid that grounds our political thinking both distasteful and counterproductive. The labour backlash in government is also a result of this way of thinking.

What the PN needs is to think different. To think outside the box. It risks wasting lots of precious time falsely “rebuilding” by thinking in the same terms as its Commission. What the PN really requires at this point is a look within itself – a hard thought evaluation about what the party means and what it wants to achieve for itself but more importantly for the nation. it needs to ask important questions that define its value and ethical make-up and build upon that block. As the Golden Circle goes it needs to be asking less about what it does or how it does it and focus much, much more on Why.

Once that message is clear Chris Said’s horses and men can begin to put Humpty together again.

Dan l-aħħar innutajt li “tal-liġi” reġgħu qed itellgħu bosta statuses dwar l-eżamijiet. Ma tantx tgħid “O żmien ħlejju” x’ħin tiftakar l-istress u t-tensjoni dwar x’ħiereġ għall-eżami jew kemm jiflaħ il-moħħ uman jiddiġerixxi informazzjoni u jikklassifikah. L-impossibilta tal-isfida tittaffa biss b’markinġenji varji li suppositament jgħinu biex issalva sal-eżami li jmiss. Bejn bott nutella, litru kafe u xi erbat ikratal redbull (kelma waħda) suppost taf ittawwal dawk l-iljieli koroh ta’ qabel l-eżami. (come fanno le segretarie con gli occhiali a farsi sposare dagli avvocati).

Jien kelli ħafna ritwali dak iż-żmien. Fosthom bejn superstizzjoni u bżonn tar-ritmu kont nitfa erba klassiċi. Minn Grieg għal filgħodu, Ravel għall-estasi Tereżjana, Vivaldi għall mumenti ta’ raptus ċivili u l-iprem wieħed il-crescendo goljardiku tal-William Tell ta’ Rossini. Għax tgħid kont dejjem nagħlaq għajnejja u nimmaġinah rqiq u sportiv lil Ġwakkin Rossini. Il-mużika tiegħu hekk tagħtik x’tifhem. Qatt ma kont fittixt xi immaġni tiegħu imma bilfors dawk ir-ritmi ħlejjin li fi żmien ieħor kienu jakkumpanjaw lil Zorro f’xi telenovela ma setgħux ikunu xogħol wieħed mogħni b’sovrappiż.

Eppur fu boċċu. Sibt ritratt tiegħu u ma setax ikollu wiċċ iktar ta’ wikkiel minn hekk Ġwakkin. Rossini kien Rossone. Imbagħad ftakart. Hemm dak il-pjatt famiġerat li tant jagħmel ħsara lill-arterji iżda tant jagħti pjaċir lill-palat – it-Tournedos Rossini. Rossini u ngħid. Fittixt fil-Wikipedia u sure enough.

Tournedos Rossini is a French steak dish, purportedly created for the composer Gioachino Rossini by French master chef Marie-Antoine Carême. The dish comprises a tournedos (filet mignon) of beef, pan-fried in butter, served on a crouton, and topped with a hot slice of fresh whole foie gras briefly pan-fried at the last minute. The dish is garnished with slices of black truffle, and finished with a Madeira demi-glace sauce.

Hemm aħna. Fillet moqli fil-butir, itfagħlu crouton u żejnu bil-fois gras li għallgrazzjatalmulejalla kienet hi ukoll moqlija. Żiedilha truffle u naqa sauce u għidli x’mintix tiekol. Allafaccia ta’ William Tell. Jekk il-ktieb ma tiġġudikaħx mill-qoxra lanqas m’għandek tiġġudika kompożitur mill-mużika tiegħu. Imbagħad skoprejt li Rossini kien iħobbu u kif l-ikel (ara link isfel). Sar jogħġobni iktar.

Awguri għall-eżamijiet ,…iġri jgħaddu ħa tgawdu il-ħajja u l-pjaċiri tagħha.

I know of no more admirable occupation than eating, that is really eating. Appetite is for the stomach what love is for the heart. The stomach is the conductor, who rules the grand orchestra of our passions, and rouses it to action. The bassoon or the piccolo, grumbling its discontent or shrilling its longing, personify the empty stomach for me. The stomach, replete, on the other hand, is the triangle of enjoyment or the kettledrum of joy. As for love, I regard her as the prima donna par excellence, the goddess who sings cavatinas to the brain, intoxicates the ear, and delights the heart. Eating, loving, singing and digesting are, in truth, the four acts of the comic opera known as life, and they pass like the bubbles of a bottle of champagne. Whoever lets them break without having enjoyed them is a complete fool. – Gioachino Rossini

iktar dwar Rossini  u l-ikel jinstab hawn: Gioachino Rossini’s Haute Cuisine

Much like what happened in the case of his new clothes, the emperor’s purse and his dealings with it tend to be talked about in a very circumstantial manner. The norm is either that of criticising the corrupt wastage or applauding some genius plan – much depends on which side one’s bread is buttered. There are a few reflections to be made as to recent developments in matters relating to the Emperor’s purse.

First up, the Emperor in government. We read that the Commission has recommended the opening of an Excessive Deficit Procedure against Malta and that Malta is the only EU state that will be facing this predicament. What it means is that since Malta has exceeded the 3% deficit threshold it will have to succumb to recommendations and suggestions by the Council as to how it could reduce that figure to below 3%. Still geared in “opposition” thinking, the Taghnalkoll government is eager to put the blame on its predecessor – insofar as the existence of the excessive deficit is concerned (and this even after Muscat claimed that he did not want to make a political football out of it).

There is a contradiction that was identifiable early on – while cost-cutting measures such as creating the world’s first part-time eternal flame were still being announced  (and less than 10,000 euros will be saved by the cabinet that is costing the citizen 60 million 6 million euro more than the previous per year) we heard this absolute gem from the government in reaction to the Commission’s assessment:

Although Malta is the only country set to be placed under fresh EDP, the Maltese government insisted that the Commission’s recommendations were a positive sign for its own economic and fiscal plan in its reaction to them this afternoon. It pointed out that the Commission did not impose additional measures on the country’s budget, stating that this showed its confidence in the new government’s plan.

Which is great no? Only there is one big flaw. Everybody who is anybody knows that the budget referred to in this quote is the same budget that was first voted against by the current government (disguised as a constructive opposition) then approved quickly once it was in government (disguised as a progressive government). Whatsmore that budget is the very same budget devised by that devious and scheming ex-Minister Tonio Fenech – yep, the Nationalist Party In Government Budget. So the emperor is lying… because if anything the fact that the commission did not deem fit to impose additional  measures on the country’s budget only goes to show that the previous stewards of our financial ship had steadied it in the right direction.

Which brings me to the stewards’ current predicament. The appointment of Ray Bugeja to head the PN commission on party finances has been hailed as excellent because the commission is supposedly full of competent people. The whole hand clapping and back slapping exercise might still prove to be futile because what many people are failing to see (or to want to see) is that this is not the case of a company with a profitable product needing tweaking. This is a political party that operates very much in the PLPN tried and tested system of bartering that is only another way of trading in influence.

Short of recommending a complete meltdown of debt-carrying party “resources” there is little that any bunch of King’s Men could do in an honest fashion to put this particular Humpty Dumpty together again. Though the work of Bugeja’s commission is shrouded in economic terms (Sibna sponsor!) the truth remains that it is an issue of party finances and financing – one that has recently been pushed to the discussion table without any particular happy ending in sight. It is a political and maybe even a constitutional issue that will only be solved superficially by an internal party committee. Bugeja’s work seems doomed to be a rubber stamp for more bartering systems, more trading in influence… in short more of the same.

Unless of course the PN gets serious about the business of politics and abandons that very damaging route of politics of business. Int taf x’ifisser!

Kemm idum Malti il-Malti ta’ barra? Hemm xi sustanza fl-eteru li żżommu Malti għal dejjem jew hemm xi punt li minnu ma jistax jerġa’ lura? Malti tibqa’ għal dejjem għax Malta art twelidek u Malti l-ilsien li tagħtek ommok (jew forsi xi sekondarja wara ħafna tlaqliq, like). Imma hemm xi mument allura meta l-Malti barra minn Malta isir il-barrani li kien minn Malta? Teżisti differenza? Tagħmel differenza?

L-expat li ma jitħammilx f’pajjiżu huwa klixe li drajna mill-bidu. Erħilhom jironiżżaw bil-filosofija taż-żewġ ċenteżmi dwar l-iben il-għaqli li telaq għal għonq it-triq. Se nagħlqu disa snin fl-Ewropa. Disa’ snin li fihom bosta bint u iben artna telqu lejn Brussell – mhux Brussell il-belt mind you imma Brussell l-idea li tfarradna bilmod.

S’intendi fejn jaqbel lill-Malti l-esperjenza fi Brussell m’hawnx bħalha. Ara Dossier Muscat u Dossier Busuttil għal iktar dettalji. Imma grossomodo jibqgħu fuq l-istonku dawn l-erbat ifriefet li ittajru ‘l hemm. S’issa qajla impurtana li konna nissemmew fil-batal. L-ironija u s-sarkażmu dwar xi gravy train ftit kienet tinfluwenza ħsibijietna (minbarra l-ovvju tal-”jaħasra miskin” dedikata lil min tenna jew kanta dik l-insinwazzjoni).

Imma issa l-gravy train tagħna lkoll. Ma hemmx għalfejn tmur Brussell biex iddawwar sold. Anzi ta’ Malta aħjar minn ta’ barra għax flok concours u eżami kemm tippoża tnejn fuq billboard u prattikament taħlef  li temmen f’Joseph. Joseph wara’ kollox prodott ta’ Brussell hux hekk?

Le ta. Mhux hekk. Aħna dawk li tkażajtu bina għax għażilna naħdmu barra. Dawk li “bgħatnikom taqilgħu sold waqt li aħna inħallsu t-taxxi”. Dawk li “issa tiġi btala b’xejn minn fuq darna biex tivvota”. Aħna dawk li “issa int f’hiex tifhem għax mort ygħix barra”? Dawk li issa wara disgħa snin mhux talli jiddarrsu meta jisimgħu miġemgħa ilħna Maltin f’xi ajruport tal-Ewropa Tagħna Lkoll talli bdew jistaqsu imma aħna Maltin ta’ barra jew barranin minn Malta?

U fil-pront tiżbokka blog mimli nejk veritier (pastizz.tumblr.com) illi jurik li xi affarijiet ma jiġrux lilek biss… Għax forsi Malta qiegħdha f’moħħna u jekk konna mitt bniedem mitt fehma meta konna għadna fuq gżira gremxul ma jfissirx li se nwaħħdu fehemitna issa li ħriġna barra.

Imma xi ħaġa inbidel żgur. Xi ftit iktar barrani sirt. Forsi għax infsadt mill-fosdqa kennija tal-ħsieb ġewwa l-għar irnexxielek tistkenn mill-mard mentali li kull ma jmur qed jikber. Ma xrobtx mill-bjar tal-għerf li wasslu biex ikkonvinċew l-eluf li wasal żmien il-bidla biex imbagħad reddgħulhom kazz daqsiex.

Għaddew disa’ snin u ħsieb il-Malti ta’ barra baqa’ jhewden u jvenven mal-imħuħ. Forsi huwa dak il-ħsieb stess li jagħmlu daqshekk differenti u li fl-aħħar mill-aħħar iżommlu l-passaport malti imnaqqax fil-vini u fl-arterji.

Il-logħob tal-pajjiżi ż-żgħar waslu ġewwa d-dukat. Jgħidulhom logħob, isejħulna żgħar… kemm ma jafux jaħasra.

A news item on a Belgian radio last week spoke of how students were turning to new forms of income to subsidise their studies. One form of income was a new service being provided whereby students agreed to perform cleaning services (the French term is “technicien des surfaces”) while wearing sexy underwear. Persons buying the service presumably got their kicks from watching scantily dressed women perform household chores. The company providing the service had strict rules including “no physical contact” and would cream 30% of the charge for having provided the contact.

The debate was obviously centred around whether this was a form of “proxénétisme” (another funky French word for prostitution). Apparently the issue of voyeurism does not fall strictly into that category. Another issue was whether this amounted to exploitation (or sexploitation) of the fairer sex and the reply by the company was that they were also planning to introduce male versions of the service.

Back on the island for a short break I have just come across a new report from the Maltese courts. A magistrate has just held (in the reported words of the press) that “Baring breasts while lap dancing not a scandal“. To begin with, it is not strictly speaking a business of the law whether or not a “scandal” exists so the title is more than just misleading in this sense. The real fact of the matter is that a court of law in Malta has finally held that what goes on in strip clubs is not exactly secret and that it is up to a mature person to decide whether or not he wants to go there or not.

In many a way this can be seen as an important development and not just for strip club issues but also in situations like drama or theatre where the question of censorship might have been brought into play. The first thing that came to my mind was the “Stitching” question which could have benefited from that kind of assessment in the first place – once you are warned that a play will have adult/mature content you should not then complain about the content being offensive to your particular morals.

In the case of strip clubs we might be spared the pathetic “my bra fell off” kind of defence that made a mockery of the very public secret of why people frequented the kind of establishment such as Steam. Such as this one:

Camilleri herself testified and said that she works as a lap dancer and the Police had gone in. She was wearing a bikini top and boxer shorts.  She said that her bra had loosened a bit because she had been dancing, and when she noticed what had happened she immediately put the bra back into place.

The case in question probably does not itself solve the issue of the legality or otherwise of strip clubs in Malta. The legal twist lies in the fact that prosecution of such “offences” hinged on the notion of “public indecency” and “performing immoral acts in public”. In both cases the “public” element of the offence was crucial and what this case seems (again I only comment on the press report) to do is to confirm that the offence does not exist once it is carried out in a private establishment – where as the court report goes: “mature people should know what a type of club “Steam” and others similar are. It is the person who chooses to go in or not.”

So as far as legalese goes what we have is a confirmation of the fact that what goes on in strip clubs does not violate the provisions of public indecency or public offence to morals. What remains to be seen of course is whether the country has a policy on stripping in private places or whether the hypocritical lacuna will remain as it is. Businesses have spread across the red quarters of Paceville and there’s no denying that it is a booming trade.

The dangers of exploitation and what is called white slave traffic remain rampant and now that the traditional form of discouragement – the prosecution on the basis of public indecency – seems to have fallen there should be an informed and responsible attempt at proper regulation (which does not necessarily translate to banning the Full Monty) in order to ensure that all actors in the trade are sufficiently protected. The business of strip clubs cannot and should not remain the elephant in the room that is only mentioned to contribute to some form of  voyeuristic entertainment in the media industry.

The man is an icon worldwide. An idol for many. There’s no doubt that this retiring 38 year old millionaire who is apparently in line for a knighthood is one of the most recognisable faces on the planet. Kudos to the soon to be Sir David. Since he hit the scene as a young teenager he has been an incredible sensation. His first goal for United was in a 3-1 loss to Villa – a loss that prompted the great Alan Hansen to mouth the words he’d always regret “You can’t win anything with kids”. (Incidentally Hansen too announced his retirement from Match of the Day this week).

Yes, Beckham was part of an incredible line up of youngsters that would have a brilliant future ahead of them and there’s no denying that the generation of Fergie’s babes went on to perform some magic culminating perhaps in their extra-time scrap victory over Bayern Munich. Beckham spoke in an interview with Gary Neville shortly after his announced retirement and it was immediately obvious that the shadow of his “celeb status” was an uncomfortable burden of which he was only too painfully aware. He knows that he’ll be remembered for “other things” but would prefer to be remembered as a hard-working football player.

The thing is that apart from a hopeless taste in women (Victoria? What were you thinking Becks?) and kicking off a  penchant for funny names for kids, Beckham the man shows a great charisma and personality. His shy presence (and yes, apparent charm for the ladies) work wonders for his PR – and what a brilliantly managed PR that is. What about Beckham the footballer though?

No doubt he is above average. He’s no Messi , no Cruyff, no Pelé. The guy could deliver a cross magnificently and could take wonderful free kicks. Outside the celeb and paparazzi world he probably would not be such a highly ranked player. He could never skip his opponent but when he caressed the ball to pass it, it would generally obey him. You do have to factor what his charisma brought to a changing room as part of his sporting prowess but when it comes to magnificent free kicks and good wing action I believe the football factory in Brasil would suffice to provide a myriad others who could have qualified for the same calibre of ranking.

If you really need names I’ll give you Roberto Carlos, I’ll sell you the Juninhos (both Pernambucano and Paulista) and of course Ronaldinho. Looking a bit backwards there’s the inimitable Rivaldo and free-kick wise I’ll throw in an Eder, a Dunga and the inimitable Branco. That’s just Brasil. They might not have had the charisma that rode on the wave of the “three-lion” marketing of a UK-focused world sport media but hell did they have the quality. This is not to diminish the sporting qualities of Beckham but rather to put this skewered paparazzi-bloated image into perspective.

As for the “numerous great teams” Beckham played with. Well, sure there’s United and Real. After that it’s an abyss of cameo appearances in a Milan struggling to find some sort of shape, a league double with – yep, the mighty LA Galaxy – and finally the dismal showing with Paris Saint Germain (13 appearances, 1 assist, 0 goals, 1 red card). When you are David Beckham you can still talk about going out when on top after the PSG performance. The press will believe you. They want to. Because your face is money. Your image is money. The football does not really count at that point.

Yes, Beckham’s career deserves a nod and a bit more because the lad had an undeniable talent. Jamie Carragher too announced his retirement this week after 737 matches for Liverpool. Another indefatigable player will be hanging up his boots and he too deserves the praise and respect – in a way his story of loyalty makes him much more of the traditional, dying breed of footballing star than Beckham.

So respect to David Beckham for his footballing career. Another above average player leaves the stage. And in many ways football’s loss is ours too… though the celeb status that the likes of Beckham rolled into football will surely not be missed.

At least not for the real football fans.

MaltaToday carries a report about a man who was arraigned in court for having made what turned out to be false claims about ex-PN leadership contender Francis Zammit Dimech. The man had made these claims on Facebook and Zammit Dimech considered them to be sufficiently injurious and false as to take legal action in this regard (an action for defamation). The outcome is a slap on the hand for the man and apologies that were accepted.

When the law works like a properly oiled machine every citizen gets the service that he deserves. Not only that though, you also have to consider that the correct balance of different freedoms will eventually finds its natural or legal course. Unlike the Paywall Paper and the Indy, MaltaToday does not seem to carry the controversial reports with regards to George Vella’s statements about wanting to rein in the media. Nobody seems to have bothered to transcribe the controversial part of his address so J’accuse has gone and done that for you:

Ejja let us rein in, ejja nikkontrollaw il-media taghna. Mhux inbilli nghidu” ahna le m’ghandna xejn kontra dak u ahna pozittivi” imma imbaghad nafu li l-media taghna (stampata, viziva whatever)  tibqa’ ssawwat tibqa’ ssawwat u tikkritika…hija parti minnha. Ma nistax nghid jiena “le ahna nirrispettaw lil dak li jkun m’ahniex aggressivi” u jkollok il-midja aggressiva u min jifhem fil-midja jghallimni illi taf tkun iktar aggressiv bil-midja milli b’ilsienek u  bil-mod kif inti titkellem imma naraw illi ikun hemm dak l-element ta’… forsi jghiduli “x’ghandek kontra l-media”, il-media allahares ma kenitx, hija r-raba kolonna tad-demokrazija… però il-media responsabbli ukoll u ma nistax jien nuza l-media biex inkeskes biha minn taht biex tohloq l-opinjonijiet minn taht biex naghmel character assassinations minn taht imbaghad nigi nghid “le imma ahna irridu nikkoperaw”. Dawn huma affarijiet illi sfortunatament matul is-snin li ili hawn gew jien rajthom, ghaddejt minnhom u inhoss illi ma gewx ikkontrollati ghal kollox. U irridu noqghodu attenti ghaliex jekk kemmildarba ahna ma jkollniex kontroll fuq dawn l-ghodda illi (gustament ghaliex le) il-partiti illum ihaddmu halli jkunu jistghu iwasslu l-messagg taghhom inkunu qieghdin xorta niffomentaw id-disgwid, niffomentaw il-bad blood u ha nghid wahda halli inkun qed nirrepetiha ghall-miljun darba din : Jekk ahna l-politici ma nirrispettawx lilna infusna, il-poplu ma jirrispettaniex.

It’s a ramble that taken out of context seems to be the fruit of a sudden afterthought in the middle of a speech. Vella’s call to “rein in media” was quickly the subject of newspaper headlines – at least the Independent and the Times. The Independent now carries a clarification by Dr Vella who stated that he was referring to “self-regulation”. There was talk or mention of “breach of privilege” though that seems to have died down too. Some reflections can be made though of what actually was said (and was not said) in those few lines by our Foreign Minister.

1. The forum

George Vella chose to utter these ambiguous words in parliament. True “media taghna” presumably refers to “the media that we own” – which basically could mean the party propaganda machines. Why do so in parliament? Why mention “media” generically in the next statements? The use of phrases such as “character assassinations” is either naively stupid or an attempt at being smart. There is only one type of media that has been constantly pigeonholed as being the main culprit of character assassinations and “attakki fahxija” and that is not one owned or accountable to any of the parties.

2. Practice what you preach

If the problem were limited to the ridiculous state of the party propaganda machines Vella could do nothing better than start cleaning up the act in his own house. Assuming any journalists are left that are not currently in the employ of government then one would expect Vella to be addressing his party’s media lackeys and giving them a new task and set of standards that he so dearly aspires to. After that he could invite the PN to do the same with their own house. A speech in parliament about “media needing to be reined in” that speaks of the “fourth estate” can only be alarming because any excuse is possible to suddenly have parliament assuming the role of regulator and censor.

3. Publish and be damned

Vella’s outburst can be excused because it seems to have been an off the cuff, unprepared set of remarks. Then again this is the foreign minister speaking in parliament. He may have the fault of not being a lawyer and not understanding the import of each and every word that he will utter but that is no excuse at this level. It could only get worse should he really consider to unearth the tool (weapon?) of parliamentary privilege rather than use a press conference to clarify his statements (hopefully in a credible manner). (see Indy report on breach of privilege)

4. Intellectual cowardice

The fear that the parties and their followers have of the power of some sections of the media is incomprehensible. The elephant in the corner in Vella’s speech is another Vella (albeit née Vella). The obsession with the Caruana Galizia’s and Borg Cardona’s of this world has become one gigantic ridiculous mountain. It has led people to confuse free and open discussion, to ignore the basic protections that exist at law should they require them and above all to ignore the fact that blogs and bloggers only have power when people give much value to what they write.

Unlike many of my colleagues I will defend the right of every single blogger to publish and be damned especially if there is an infinitesimal risk that through some rare moment of insight shining from among  a myriad bullshit posts  that blogger could function as another tool in this fourth pillar of democracy.

The gullible willingness of sections of the population who would willingly accede to Vella’s requests to “rein in and control” shocks me a million times more than some ridiculous pink magazine style blog posts about the latest antics of one of our public figures. Even more shocking is the intellectual cowardice of many who would fear speaking out openly against any attempt to introduce regimes that stifle thought and expression with some pithy excuse of protecting the public.