Politics

Dalligate avec du recul – (Part II – Regrets they have a few)

The day Dalli resigned from the Commission (or was forced to resign if you prefer) I got a call from Malta. “They’ve just mentioned his resignation on RTK. Is he preparing for the election too?” You couldn’t fault this way of thinking if you wanted to. A man had just resigned from probably one of the highest posts within the European Union and the first thought that probably sprung to the mind of many Maltese was in relation to the forthcoming national elections. Will Dalli be back like a latter-day Schwarzenegger? Slowly, as events unfolded it became more and more clear that Dalli was out through no choice of his own but this did not assuage the thirst for Melito-centric interpretations of the goings-on.

Again, we were still in “hazy-fact” land when the tribal delineations began to take shape. It wasn’t hard to second-guess really though in some cases the conclusions drawn could be surprising. Dalli was the man kicked upstairs by the nationalist party to what he seemed to uncannily consider his “Siberia”. His rather frequent raids into the Maltese political scene were at best described as indecorous (for a Commissioner) and at worst clumsy. Three issues stick out like an ugly wart on a halloween mask: (1) first there was the questionable business in relation to energy and SARGAS (in apparent partnership with a future labour government), (2) then there was his intervention as a witness for Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando in the little farce court held at Dar Centrali, and finally, on a rather different (and perhaps more crucial level) was (3) his baffling intervention during the Libyan Spring that had Barroso fuming at the collar.

Dalli had definitely positioned himself firmly away from the “ungrateful” (in Franco Debono terminology) PN constellation and was busy cosying up to the rebels on the one hand and the opposition on the other. He could have let this all go by and concentrated on fulfilling a prosperous term as Commissioner. This would have done his CV a load of good, even in Melito-centric Malta, and who knows whether by the end of his term he would not have preferred pastures new far away from whatever counts for politics on the island these days. We won’t know though, and never will, and one of the reasons is that John Dalli has Silvio Zammit as an acquaintance, probably has him down as a business partner, more probably still as some form of confidant. I insist on the probably at this stage because I prefer to wait for the concrete proof to come out (as always).

So yes. We were saying. Dalli resigned and next thing we knew it was connected to charges of fraud and trading in influence. What happened next was very telling. I’ll try to summarise a few of the positions:

The Greater PN Benefit

I couldn’t really fathom this one, but that’s probably because I try to think in logical order and not through conspiracy theory smoke. Essentially there were varying degrees within this faction but the underlying theme seemed to be one: Dalli’s disgrace is PN’s gain. Funny that. No matter how much acrimony Dalli had shown to the PN in the past months, he remained a Commissioner nominated by the present Prime Minister. A disgraced commissioner is a disgraced nominee for the country. I had immediately blogged on that point  (The Surreal Case of (ex) Commissioner Dalli) and pointed out what seemed to be the obvious, namely that not only was PN’s nominee disgraced but this was compounded by the fact that it was evident to many that this nomination was the result of the party putting its interests before the nation’s.

The We Told You So Brigade

Which brings me to the “we told you so” brigade that numbers among its ranks the heavyweight blogger on the Runs. Daphne was in a way proved right to have pointed out that Dalli was a problem that should never have been exported. With hindsight the nomination of a volatile figure such as Dalli seems counter-productive. The underlying reason for the nomination was very evidently the exportation of an inconvenience (best encapsulated in the phrase “kicked upstairs”) than the result of a search of the most suitable person for the Commission post. In macchiavellian, “The Thick of It” terms, Dalli had already turned into a sort of untouchable outcast politically speaking and by nominating him to the Commissioner’s post this problem would not simply vanish.

The Conspiracy Theory

Inevitably you had the usual suspects hanging on to John Dalli and praying and hoping that this was some weird conspiracy theory by those evil schemers at PN HQ who needed to rid themselves of this evil economist before the actual election run up. Needless to say that if the people in Pietà are really that stupid to hoist a petard under Malta’s reputation abroad simply to get John and his retinue out of the national election equation then really this country is in the pits. You did have what would become the MaltaToday line of journalism (coupled with ONE News and its corollaries) trying hard on the “entrapment” line – nothing to do with Paul Borg Olivier slyly laying an email trap on Silvio but rather the “Evil Tobacco Industry” pulling a smart one like, you know, they do in Hollywood movies. That case remains a weak case – two days on and is fast running dry of ideas. I still have one question in this respect though: What is John Dalli’s level of interest in MaltaToday? I’m not holding my breath for any answers.

So those were the main battle lines. Poor Dalli was doomed in most cases as a nation of sleuths set to work trying to delve deeper into Dalligate. Interestingly the Dalli bomb relegated many many issue to a secondary level. Parliament and its convoluted agenda were momentarily forgotten, no “iggranfat mas-siggu tal-poter” and no calls for early election. Even Joseph Muscat learnt his lesson and announced a “cautious approach” to the matter.

The first indication of the transmogrification of Dalligate into electoral spin came, unsurprisingly from the nationalist corner of the ring. It was inevitable because Labour were still reeling from the obvious problem of guilt by association. For too long now had they courted the disgruntled Dalli and, worse still, they had often hinted that part of their energy plan involved Mr Dalli and his Nordic contacts (oh sweet irony of ironies). The Nationalist party should have been reeling too. As I explained earlier they were the nominating party for BOTH persons involved in the scandal. A Nationalist Commissioner and a Nationalist Deputy Mayor hailing from that great college of upright councillors that is Sliema. So in the first place we got silence. A whole bloody wall of it.

Which left space for the usual noisy bunch. The first indication of a plan, a suggestion, for making use of Dalligate to PN’s advantage came from Daphne Caruana Galizia on her Thursday column. The plan was the tried and tested “guilt by association” and was built very much on what Labour probably feared the moment Dalli’s resignation came out. It was simple really – Dalli, thanks to his recent dealings and appearances was not really a nationalist Commissioner. No siree, Dalli was to be slammed with the worst label in the nationalist political book: he was “Labour”. It’s just like the Franco treatment of late. You know “he deserves to be with Joseph’s skip, dak Mintoffjan”. The equation worked out the logical leaps for you. Dalli is Labour. Dalli worked with Labour. Dalli’s plans for a future Labour government make him even more Labour. So Dalli’s resignation is tantamount to a full blown Labour loss.

Which is in part true and reasonable. From a Maltese point of view and if you were to ignore all the happenings at Commission level (and the fact that the offer, the bribe and the report relate to many things but to nothing Labour) the recent appearances by Commissioner Dalli made him in the least a “non-nationalist” and at the most someone who comfortably beds with Labour. The script was there for all to see and the Runs made sure that regular postings reminding us of Dalli’s recent supposed ills reinforced this theory. Little surprise therefore that after a trip to Brussels for the latest information Malta’s avant-garde investigative journalist returned to produce a programme sans-guests that seemed to have been ghost written by Daphne Caruana Galizia. I needed more than one ‘kerchief to stop the tears from flowing when Lou spoke of his “witnesses” who could place Dalli and Silvio at Peppis between March and May. Really Lou? Your “eyewitnesses”? Pity Daffers blogged about them first.

Slamming Dalli and slamming Labour might be convenient but it misses one major participant. It depends on Lawrence Gonzi admitting that his nominating John Dalli as Commissioner was with hindsight an error of judgement. You see, no matter how pro-Labour Dalli’s slant had begun there is no denying that he was in Brussels (with Silvio) thanks to the kicking upstairs by our PM. It would seem that the pitch by the DCG-Bondi duo was not to be taken up by Lawrence Gonzi:

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi vehemently refused to pass any comments on Commissioner John Dalli’s resignation but said he is not sorry he took the decision to appoint him Commissioner instead of Joe Borg in 2010. Asked to give his reaction on the negative impact on Malta’s image due to Mr Dalli’s resignation, the Prime Minister only said that he did not want to pass judgement. (…) Asked whether, with hindsight, it was a mistake to appoint John Dalli  Commissioner, Dr Gonzi defended his decision and said he was not sorry for his decision. (Times)

There you go. No regrets. Which means that the prodigal son was not refuted. Once again I agree with Daphne and believe that this is a statement that Dr Gonzi might come to regret – even on a purely political level. Our Prime Minister has other pressing issues in mind though – first among which is the nomination of a new commissioner.

The New Commissioner

First of all let us simply agree that Labour’s calls for a “consensus commissioner” are ridiculous at this stage. They come from the same school of constitutional law as Franco Debono’s or Robert Musumeci’s. The interesting bit is that notwithstanding the fact that the PN might have learnt its lesson about putting the party’s interests before the nation it might find itself in the unenviable position of being unable to do otherwise.

Why? Simple. Whoever gets sent to Brussels is almost definitely out of the running for next election. Not to mention that whoever goes to Brussels is also out of campaign planning. The most suitable candidate has been tainted by the kangaroo court parliament show. Yes, I’m speaking of Ambassador (emeritus) Richard Cachia Caruana. Should Lawrence Gonzi nominate him as Commissioner (a post he is undoubtedly suited to perform) this would be the end of the nationalist campaign and the opening of an unassailable gap in the polls. Worse still, Cachia Caruana is a crucial behind the scenes participant in PN electoral planning and it would be hard to replace such a player at this stage.

Other suitable candidates from among the party giants could also be considered a “waste” in party terms. A Chris Said or a De Marco for example would be an unhappy wastage for the PN. You could consider an outgoing politician but do you really imagine Austin Gatt in Brussels? The good thing is that he would take Delia with him. Or maybe not. Michael Frendo? Tonio Borg? Possibly. Definitely not Simon Busuttil – too many votes to be lost with him away though again his would be a perfect fit. Which leaves us with the least controversial option. Louis Galea, currently sitting at the Court of Auditors, would slide into the job without so much as a whimper. He’s already been assessed for the suitability of holding a high profile EU post, is already up to date with EU institutional workings and hey, he’s a smart politician, which is not so common these days. In a way Galea’s nomination would lessen the impact of what would otherwise be a case of PN priorities trumping national priorities.

Preliminary Conclusions

It’s a tough call and there’s much more to write but this post is already too long for my liking. (A call back to the days of my Indy columns). There’s much more to mull about but one thing is for certain… Dalligate is not short of repercussions on the Maltese side of the scandal.

 

 

 

Dalligate avec du recul (Intermezzo – European Update)

What was the nickname that Labour had for (then) Minister Dalli a while back? Johnny Cash no? This was back in the time when Dalli was a successful nationalist party heavyweight who imported the much maligned Value Added Tax and bulldozed budget after budget until Sant’s government and CET came along. That was a good 17 years ago. My oh my does time fly when you’re having fun and people do change. Dalli is far from being a nationalist party heavyweight now and this latest fall from grace will seriously test his quality as a political cat of nine lives.

Part one of this post looked at the European dimension of Dalligate – particularly the effect it has on the lobby industry and on the institutional set-up of the EU. Today’s developments deserve a little addendum before turning to the other side of the Dalligate equation that deals with matters closer to Qormi. So here is our intermezzo before part two.

An Intermezzo European Update

The Swedish paper Aftonbladet seems to have reliable information that Silvio Zammit’s price tag in order to influence new tobacco legislation in favour of “snus” was €60 million. That’s right, go make some tea… I’m here waiting with the rest of the story.

Does this change much of what we already had from the OLAF briefings and Dalli press statements? Well, yes and no. We somehow already had the feeling that Silvio Zammit was the one who initiated the contact with ESTOC (remember the RE: business in the email – the one you read here first and then read elsewhere a day later?). We now have a figure to go along with the proposal. Silvio Zammit, purportedly acting for and on behalf of Commissioner Dalli asked for 60€ in order to influence EU legislation.

Now here’s the thing. I have no problem in believing the Swedes on this – they are after all Lutherans and Lutherans never lie. They would have no interest in lying because the documents to corroborate this are in the hands of Malta’s AG and in the hands of Mr Kessler (OLAF Chief). One fact does not everything prove though. You see the problem is that Silvio Zammit emerges from this story as a cowboy  amateur lobbyist (see Noel Grima on how Silvio is nowhere to be seen in the official lobby list). What he is offering is for one Commissioner – Mr Dalli – to actually influence a huge package of EU legislation.

Liars they are not (the Swedes) but stupid? Did they really believe that this vendor of fried date pastries could actually deliver the goods he was promising? It’s not like the Commissioner sits in a tiny room at the Berlaymont and cuts and pastes directives to his (or his lobbyists’ liking). Even if Zammit had obtained the go-ahead (and if Dalli were in on it) it would have been a Herculean task for the duo to convince a long line of obstacles: their own Directorate-General, other Directorate Generals during inter-service consultation for starters and later on down the line the European Parliament and the European Council when voting on the final format.

So if Zammit DID make the offer (and it is looking increasingly likely that he did) then it makes him a very, very naive go-between (I hestitate to call him a lobbyist). You never make a deal that you cannot deliver. We still have no conclusive proof that John Dalli sanctioned the offer (or even that he was aware of it) beyond OLAF’s claims of circumstantial evidence. So much for fools rushing in.

On a European level an offer such as Zammit’s would be manna for a company like Swedish Match that was at the wrong end of Tobacco consultations. Prospects did not seem to be too bright for any pro-snus legislation so their coming into possession of this bungling offer from what turns out to be a naive go-between was a blessing. This is what I meant when I wrote that the Zammit-Dalli tandem (if and when the lien is proven) could have inadvertently left too wide a door open for a lobby group to take advantage. Anybody in Swedish Match’s position would have done the same.

They did not just have one reason to do so… Zammit gave them sixty million.


 

 

Dalligate… avec du recul – part I (European Lobbying)

I did say yesterday that the (ex) Commissioner Dalli case smacks of the surreal. With a little less than twenty-four hours time for reflection and with a flurry of statements and press conferences to look at (not to mention the early-worm analysis) we can safely conclude that the case is less surreal and more multi-dimensional.

Strange as it was seeing Lou Bondi among the legion of journalists querying the Commission’s move following the OLAF report, it was a fitting reminder of the (at least) dual dimension of this case. Bondi’s questions (and those of a few other journalists who bothered to research the Malta dimension) represented the Maltese interest in the affair. The TVM talk-show host is undeniably partisan (a “renown fact” some would say) in his approach and this element of partisanship was present in the Brussels Q&A. Even from our point of view, watching the events unfold yesterday we could not resist wearing Maltese partisan glasses – whether you formed part of the “we want Dalli to fail (see we told you so)” brigade or the conspiracy theorist “the evil clique has hit him hard” clan. It is inevitable in our Melito-centric way of thinking: this was happening in Brussels because someone in Malta needed it to happen.

But that is not necessarily the case is it? Here’s why.

European Lobbying after Dalligate

I spoke to a few colleagues who have worked closely within and around the lobbying industry in Brussels. Tucked away as I am in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg I cannot claim to have first hand experience of lobbying (and thank heavens for that since my work depends on not being influenced by outside lobbying  – it IS a court of law you know). Insider information has therefore been crucial to better understand the works.

First there is the business of lobbying. Commissioners meet companies, associations and lobby groups regularly. It is not a hidden fact. You can actually check out a Commissioner’s agenda for such meetings -they are public knowledge. John Dalli has himself shown that he met most of the Tobacco Industry groups in preparation for his next Tobacco Directive in which he has invested much of his time. The trick here is to try to understand and find out exactly how far the Dalli-Zammit connection took this particular type of contact and lobbying. What the journalists were legitimately querying yesterday (particularly to the enigmatic OLAF chief Kessler) was “where is the wrongdoing”?

Industry experts will tell you that lobbying to meet a Commissioner is legit. That a go-between asks for money to set up a meeting “is neither here nor there”. The no-no bit comes when you “trade in influence”. If I understand this correctly it means that the Commissioner and his entourage don’t only deal with access to the Commissioner but also put a price on “changing legislation itself”. Which is where the whole business of proof remains hazy. Kessler told us that the proof was circumstantial and the OLAF report actually concludes that no legislation was influenced while adding that Dalli was aware of the dealings. The emails – the few that have surfaced (one actually) are neither here nor there. What is holding Dalli/Zammit back from publishing all the correspondence with Swedish Match?

An ex-colleague of mine at the Court, now busy on the lecture circuit blogged about Dalligate and its repercussions. Here is what he has to say about Dalli’s position:

These findings of the OLAF do not seem to prima facie warrant Mr Dalli’s resignation and contribute to make its sudden move appear as an overreaction to the questionable behavior of an individual foreign to his office. However, the language chosen by the Commission to convey the findings of the OLAF report is quite ambiguous and opens to speculation: to what extent Mr Dalli knew that he was the object of lobbying by a member of his Maltese entourage? OLAF seems to suggest that he was actually fully aware of this fact. Did he take any action to limit these lobbying efforts? And more importantly: to what extent Dalli’s behavior, even though a inert one, has been such as to breach the duty of integrity to which he was bound under Article 245 TFEU?

These questions cannot be answered easily and without the appropriate proof. In order to build a case for his defence, John Dalli would have to probably do the following:

  • prove that the draft Directive was not influenced by the smokeless tobacco clan (no legislation effected)
  • publish the full exchange of correspondence with any lobby teams (correspondence made in his name and to which he had access)
  • procure a list of witnesses to any meetings that occured
  • show a list of other companies/associations that he met
  • possibly provide a timeline that could show that Swedish Match’s dealings turned sour after a possible rejection.
Until that happens we must bear in mind that lobby relations in Brussels have now shifted to a new paradigm. Dalligate  will have endless repercussions on the lobbying industry in Brussels, because it will mean that a company/association really has to watch out how to approach any Commissioner, how to word emails and more. Meanwhile, the Commissioners and their staff (thousands of them) will have to revise the conditions for meeting industry reps, something which until now has been done, according to industry practitioners with ease and without any stains.Comparisons are being drawn to the “Cash for Access/Lobbygate” scandal in the UK in 1998. (Incidentally it takes quite a desperate bit of research to rely on the impressions of a Daily Mail blogger to gauge impressions abroad on Dalligate -baksheesh? really? Is 1998 really that far back Synon? Rule Brittania fejn jaqbillhom dawn l-iStricklandjani).
On the face of the information that has been made available until now – and barring any prova regina that might still be hiding in the OLAF report – the Commission (and Dalli) seems to have been an easy target for entrapment by an angry lobbyist combined with the presence of an OLAF that is enthusiastic to prove its worth. Dalli and Zammit might be eventually found to be guilty of over-enthusiastically engaging in “cash for access” dealings (not exactly baksheesh Synon) and thus leaving the door wide open for an industry specialist to work it to its advantage. Alberto Alemanno asks a few questions in this respect:
In these circumstances, the sudden resignation of Mr Dalli is somewhat surprising as it is likely to weaken not only his personal position but also that of the EU Commission. While the EU Commission emerges as the looser of this ‘situation’, the prima facie winner seems instead Swedish Match, one of the leader producer of smokefree tobacco products. One may legitimately wonder what has been the exact role played by the company in the birth of the professional relationship between the Maltese entrepreneur and the company. Was Swedish Match a victim or the creator of such a relationship?

Should it turned out that it has been the latter, the trap that Swedish Match seem to have successfully tended to Mr Dalli could turned out to be counterproductive: the benefit it could gain in messing delaying the preparation of the revised directive might be offset by the negative image it gained in originating this scandal. Should instead turned out that Swedish Match was the innocent victim of a fraud (read its yesterday’s press release), nobody will feel very sorry for a company selling tobacco products and willing to hire somebody who was ready to leverage on his personal relationship to steer the outcome of the policy process.

In any event, this episode, although unfortunate for everyone, has the merit to bring to public attention the limits of today’s tobacco control efforts : the lack of an open, evidence-based and non-ideological debate upon the future of tobacco (including snus). My claim is that should such a debate exist neither Swedish Match nor Commissioner Dalli would have fallen victim of the snus’ trap.

 So to conclude part one. Dalligate issue goes far beyond the preoccupations of our navel-gazing island. An important European institution has been rocked by the scandal – the practices of the lobbying industry are bound to be revised and many questions have cropped up that remain as ye unanswered. Prominent among which is the distinct possibility that a lobby group that is sufficiently motivated and irked by a current Commissioner might find a way to use the EU’s own mechanisms to rid itself of an uncomfortable interlocutor.
If this is the case there is much reviewing left to be done.
* J’accuse would like to thanks the persons who under the veil of anonymity provided relevant insight into the world and workings of lobby-groups in Brussels. The next post will focus on the Malta repercussions of Dalligate – from nominating a new Commissioner, to the effect on an electoral campaign to the suspension of Dalli’s “interference” in local politics.

 

The Stereotypical Joke

A homosexual, a woman, a Gozitan, a farmer, a patient, a hunter, a student and an election candidate walked into a room. Is it the start of the latest viral joke? No, it’s just work as usual at Labour’s Congress about the future that unites us. Progressive Labour seems to be fuelled by cliches and stereotypes to no end. This Congress that regurgitates tautological guidelines by the dozen is proving to be a huge confirmation of this facet of Joseph Muscat’s “politics”.

The art lies in the conversion of “bandwagon” politics into a demonstration of apparent democracy. Always intent on seeming to be the man whose heart beats at a popular rate, Joseph’s style is dramatically simple and as accommodating as possible. How else could you describe the evolution of a political position that can be summed up as simply as “you tell me what you want and I promise to consider it”? (Non c’è problema… tu mi dici quello che devo fare e io lo faccio).

Here’s Anthony David Gatt (One News Journalist) expressing his pride (on facebook) about the goings on at the Congress:

Cyrus Engerer gabni fiha… Persuna gay u Musulmana flimkien jitkellmu dwar l asperazzjonijiet taghhom fuq l istess sufan. Nassigurakom…ma saritx bi hsieb jew biex nezageraw. Minna nfiha din hi r realta ta dak li qed jirnexxielu johloq l PL din l gimgha. Spazju shih ghal kullhadd ghal skambju serju u li jghodd.

What better than a ONE News reporter to gauge the feeling and feedback that exists within the walls of Labour’s tent gatherings? In Labour’s weird way of thinking, the gatherings are not made up of individuals, of persons, but of labels. You are “a gay”, “a muslim” – a token representative of the latest minority that is going to be fed the spiel of how Labour “cares” about them because it is a progressive movement.  Gatt’s sentence is very telling because he assures us “it is not done with forethought or to exaggerate” but this is the REALITY that Labour managed to CREATE this week – a gay person and a muslim speaking together on a sofa discussing their aspirations.

I’ve spoken about my misgivings regarding the modus operandi of this Congress in a previous post (The Wrong shade of Green) and this stressing of stereotypes only goes to reinforce my suspicion that this is one hell of a Potyemkin Village that the Labour planners have got going. We’ve all seen how much the PLPN are capable of using the “dialogue with the people” spin to their advantage. Remember the “tinda tad-Djalogu” of Fenech Adami fame? That was around the same time as Eddie Fiducja.

Don’t get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with putting out feelers and listening to what people have to say and what they wish. All the good will in the world though requires more than a bit of mascara marketing and a splash of token stereotypes (from all walks of life as perceived by the seriously obsessed with pigeonholing labourites). Joseph Muscat’s party remains non-committal on most issues and is now hiding behind the tautological guidelines that are neither here nor there.

Meanwhile we are still denied concrete positions on anything factual – just hedging and camera posing. Ramona Depares expressed what is flawed with this reasoning very clearly in one of her blog posts (PL stating the obvious) while MaltaToday’s Wednesday editorial (Manifestly asburd) hit the nail on the head when it came to pointing out why Labour’s foot shuffling about producing a proper manifesto is completely non-sensical.

The charade and parade of the various “sectors of society” goes on. The Congress of Stereotypes tends to look more and more like a series of meetings scheduled by Professor Xavier. And Labour insists on deliberately missing the point – so long as the sofa is there and the “gay and muslim” can chat openly about aspirations then surely  a future that unites us lies ahead.

I’d hate to look into a crystal ball right now.

 

P.S. Have you taken a peek at www.josephmuscat.com yet? Much has been made of the “not so cool” photos decorating the banner on the site but how many people have noticed that if you zoom out on the front page (“CTRL & -” on chrome) you get to see many more faces… and hidden away you will also see the sweet token lady with the hijab. Labour eh… couldn’t miss out on any stereotype…

 

The wrong shade of green

I must admit to being surprised. My duties elsewhere keep preventing me from blogging with a more teutonic regularity but I still take a peek at what is being said ‘ere and there just to keep abreast of the latest developments. Seems like a November election can all but be ruled out as in the latest development in the amateur chess game between the PN strategists and the Honourable Blogger from Ghaxaq there seems to have been a tiny impasse reached. Franco has (finally) sussed out that the PN strategy involved pushing him to the brink of voting down the government and has retaliated with the usual aplomb:

“Gonzi, dik ix-xi haga se naghmilha meta rrid u meta jidhirli jien! Grow up!”

There you go. Grow up Gonz. Meanwhile Varist, Leo and the merry band of Joseph’s movement creators have taken a break from blaming everything on GoNZiPN because they are very into the latest discovery that is “The Congress”. It deserves a capital C because it is apparently a revolutionary idea for the Labour party – the first of its kind. Basically what is happening is that the Labour posse uproots itself and goes to the “specialists” in every field and asks them what they think about a particular topic. Now I’m not sure whether it is apocryphal or whether it is a fact but it seems that the modus operandi involves a general show of hands indicating the IRL (in real life) equivalent of a contemporaneous multitude of LIKES for a particular idea.

Such ideas as pass muster during these very public plebiscites are then incorporated into a set of GUIDELINES that will be presumably taken into consideration when the Labour party finally decides that the time is ripe to actually lead people and come up with a real plan. In the meantime this marketing gag has us all in awe at Joseph’s unlimited capacity to come up with obvious tautologies on a regular basis – healthcare to centre around patients, business not to be obstructed, Gozo needs work etc etc. We’d seen it all before, only now there is the confirmation among folk who “understand” the subject. Can you imagine asking a taxpayer what he thinks we should do with taxes?

Great marketing move by Labour though. This way we get to forget that we STILL have no concrete plan beyond the usual medley of buzzwords. We forget that Karmenu Vella and Assistant Aaron Farrugia have still not produced the goods and in case we were wondering here is Leo spelling out the main reason why we should not expect a manifesto any time soon (on Facebook – where else?):

Meta ser nkunu nafu x’fih il-manifest elettorali tal-PL?
Twegiba f’waqtha ta’ Joseph Muscat illum. Fil-MALTA TODAY.
“Ahna ser naghmlu preciz kif ghamel Gonzi fl-ahhar elezzjoni generali. Nippublikawh BISS wara li tkun thabbret id-data u rrankat il-kampanja nnifisha….”
Din il-gimgha nhejju ir-Road Map u l-Linji Gwida ghall gejjieni

So there you go. Screw  you voter. If  Gonzi is bad enough not to give you his plan before an election is called then we will do the same. You’re screwed anyway because it’s not like you’re spoilt for choice. Meanwhile we get this Congress – a cross between Potemkin Villages and the People’s Jamahiriya of Libya Collectives. People being conned into thinking they count because they are giving “linji gwida” to a party that is mostly prone to never taking positions. I wonder whether there will be Linji Gwida about gay marriage or immigrant policy? Which public show of hands will count?

That was my surprise incidentally. That no one hooked on to the uncanny similarity between Joseph’s congress meetings and the concept of collectives, committees and conferences that underpinned that load of trash that was Muammar Gaddafi’s Green Book. Then again… Karmenu Vella MIGHT have been working on something all these months after all….

“The democratic system is a cohesive structure whose foundation stones are firmly laid one above the other, the Basic People’s Conferences, the People’s Conferences, and the People’s Committees, which finally come together when the General People’s Conference convenes. There is absolutely no conception of democratic society other than this.” – The Green Book (Muammar Gaddafi)

The Green Book announces to the
people the happy discovery of the way
to direct democracy, in a practical
form. Since no two intelligent people
can dispute the fact that direct demo-
cracy is the ideal -- but its method has
been impossible to apply -- and since
this Third Universal Theory provides
us with a realistic experiment in direct
democracy, the problem of democracy
in the world is finally solved. All that
the masses need do now is to struggle
to put an end to all forms of dictatorial
rule in the world today, to all forms of

                  [28]

what is falsely called democracy --
from parliaments to the sect, the tribe,
the class and to the one-party, the
two-party and the multi-party sys-
tems.
  Democracy has but one method and
one theory. The disparity and dissimi-
larity of the systems claiming to be
democratic is evidence that they are
not democratic in fact. The people's
authority has only one face and it can
be realised only by one method, name-
ly, popular congresses and people's
committees. No democracy without
popular congresses and committees
everywhere.

 

Din l-art ħelwa

Donnhom jagħmluha bi ħsieb. Tasal elezzjoni u jzeffnu  l-art fin-nofs. Tkun se toqrob elezzjoni u min forsi ikun xi ftit marid b’dik il-fissazzjoni dwar valuri, ideat u politika ta’ prinċipji isib ruħu imdawwar bi kronaka kriminali, psewdo-kriminali u allegazzjonijiet ta’ attivitajiet korrotti. Ħa ngħiduha kif inhi – il-politika imkien ma hi abjad fuq iswed. Ma tantx ser issib okkazzjonijiet fejn għażla bejn sew politiki/ideat differenti ssir b’diskussjoni denja ta’ fakulta tal-filosofija.

Bosta drabi f’pajjiżna innutajt illi l-qafas pre-elettorali għandu ħabta jiġi iddominat minn xi kwistjoni li tinvolvi bejgħ jew xiri ta’ artijiet. Niftakar żmien ilu (m’inix żert kienx id-96 jew id-98) lil Fenech Adami iħambaq għal ħin twil waqt mass meeting ġo Triq Psaila. Kien dwar xi kuntratt li mar żmerċ. Xi Charles Mangion jekk minix sejjer żball (imma jaf li iva sejjer zball). Li naf li moħħi kien jintefa wara ftit. Din it-taħlita ta’ psewdo-investigazzjoni u allegazzjoni pubblika kienet ittellifli kull sens ta’ interess. Filli kont nissaħħar wara dak li instema bħala proġett mibni fuq sisien ta’ xogħol, ġustizzja, liberta, solidarjeta, u sussidjarjeta… imbagħad filli qed jitkellmu dwar kuntratti, korruzzjoni, fottimenti, klikek li jagħmlu flus, art li mhux tagħhom eċċ. (titwiba) eċċ.

Għal bidu ma stajtx nifhem xi bżonn kien hemm li jingħataw tant importanza lil dawn l-affarijiet. Iva mela le, investigahom, u hekk, imma mhux madonna taħlili siegħa diskors fuq kuntratti u ftit (ftit wisq) fuq il-ħsieb tiegħek għall-ġejjieni u fuq liema prinċipji se jsawru l-pjan prattiku tal-gvern futur. Imbagħad kelli nidra. Għax bejn Sant u d-diskors kontinwu dwar barunijiet (li kienu ukoll imprendituri, spekulaturi fl-art) u bejn kuntratti li minn sena għal oħra kienu ikunu qishom il-pern li fuqhom tinbena politika ta kritika kelli nidra li f’din l-art ħelwa, l-art kollox.

Hemm għalfejn immorru l-bogħod? Tinsewx li l-elezzjoni tal-2008 (l-aħħar waħda biex niftehemu) intrebħet u intilfet fuq biċċa art il-Mistra. Pullicino Orlando u d-dmugħ falz tiegħu ssussidjat mill-klikka tal-ispin nazzjonalista kellu sehem importantissimu fir-riżultat finali. Daqstant ieħor kellu sehem it-timing hażin ta’ Alfred Sant li forsi ma għarafx iġestixxi sewwa l-mument li jikxef l-għawar fuq l-aħħar kuntratt mbażwar li kien ser iniġġeż lil din l-art ħelwa. Jekk hux art kbira li se tinbiegħ lil intraprenditur jew xi abbuż mill-kriterji tal-ippjanar (ah xi kriterji) tagħna bħal Manwel Arriva Delia li jiftaħlek offiċċju fir-raħal imma għadu biss bil-permess li jbiegħ il-ħaxix (ifhem).

Iddur fejn iddur tispiċċ titkellem fuq art. Mhux ta’ b’xejn li waħda mill-ikoni tal-politika Maltija inbniet wara Perit. Fejn issib biċċa business fl-art kull ma trid tagħmel hu li tfittex ftit. Hemm issib il-ħaxi. Jekk mhux verita għallinqas hija sewwa magħrufa (fis-sens ta’ “mhux kullħadd jaf, mhux ovvja”). Għax hekk għallmuna naħsbu. Issa ħarġu waħda ġdida. Perfetta. Għall warm up għall elezzjoni li jmiss għandna l-kuntratt bejn it-Tfal tal-Perit u ċ-Ċaqnu. Bellezza.  Tal-alternattiva ilhom imsieken jaqbżu għal din l-art ħelwa u isejħu għal politika miftuħa, nadifa u trasparenti fil-qasam tal-art. Anki f’dan il-każ indunaw illi dal-kuntratt jinten miż-żewġ naħat. Kif jista ma jintinx… għandu storja li tinbet fl-aħħar xhur tal-politika soċjalista u tkompli tul il-perijodu ta’ gvernijiet nazzjonalisti.

Din l-art ħelwa. Stennew botta u kontro botta dwar il-kuntratt, il-ħaxi, il-fottimenti, in-nuqqasijiet li bihom qed indardruha. Fuq kollox stennew li kull naħa toħroġ ta’ kavalliera protettriċi ta’ dan il-wirt tagħna u tas-suppost prinċipji li inħaddnu biex nindukrawha. Stennew storbju, stennew frakass u allegazzjonijiet. Stennew, bħal ma kien qal Rupert, l-għaġeb bħal ma sar fil-każ tal-bajd tal-fkieren. Imbagħad tgħaddi l-elezzjoni u kollox qisu ma hu xejn. il-bajd jintesew u l-ħaxxejja jibqgħu jaħxu – huma min huma.  L-art fejn tal-Barrani tinbena plottijiet u jgaqwdu minnha ulied Mintoff u ulied Fenech Adami. Mhux it-tfal ta’ … uliedhom – fis-sens ta’ ulied Mose… dawk li ħaddnu l-istess modus operandi tul iż-żmien. Li waqt li jkantaw dwar din l-art ħelwa u kemm jgħożżuha ma refgħux id biex iħarsuha minn kull deni.

Id-dehen lil min jaħkimha? Forsi ilu li għadda ż-żmien meta jmissna indunajna li l-ħakkiema kollha ta’ l-istess pezza.

Il-Ħadd it-tajjeb.