Categories
Environment Politics

The Lie of the Movements

liemovement_akkuza

When Joseph Muscat came up with the idea of backing a Jordanian builder’s plan to try his luck with owning a university, and when Joseph Muscat agreed to place this trial run uni on public ODZ land, he had no idea of the movement that would build up against him. This is the generally accepted storyline as it is evolving. Muscat makes a pact with the devil and sells off another piece of prime national land and suddenly everybody who counts is up in arms united against the tyrant’s move.

The question of whether or not the university is a legitimate educational enterprise or whether it is really a trojan horse for well-heeled arab youngsters to get their temporary visa into Schengen as a bonus add-on to a pay-as-you-go diploma has been mostly set aside. The political debate as it is has almost entirely swallowed the spin that this is a bonus for education in Malta (or as Varist infamously put it  – breaking of the university monopoly in Malta).  Some academics have started to rumble about the lack of transparency in this regard but most of the rumbling is and has been about the violation of Malta’s ODZ – outside development zone – rules.

Muscat helped push the disdain factor to new limits with his “by hook or by crook” approach early on. This managed to unite a number of different lobby groups under one banner – the newly formed Front Harsien ODZ (Front for the Protection of the ODZs). It’s a simple banner to fall under – if you have Malta’s ODZ and their preservation at heart then you can join. The founders were quick to point out the apolitical nature of the front – in the farcical Maltese style of apolitical that still defies real definition.

The actual political milieu had also begun to have its say. While the Front could boast of the support of various NGOs and of course of Alternattiva Demokratika – ever consistent in its environmental battles – its ranks were soon boosted by the rationally vociferous Marlene Farrugia and her husband Godfrey who is also the whip of the Labour party. We also had the admirable Desiree Attard – a Labour councillor in Marsascala who joined the ranks of those opposing the rape of ODZ land.

Was this a Movement in the making? Is this the opportunity to plant a Podemos or 5stelle? Probably not. The only way the Front Harsien ODZ could rally sufficient support is by staying out of actual politics. Popular movements in Malta – real ones with political stands not faux movements glued together with the sole aim of achieving power – can only be created around issue-specific moments. They can be partially successful if they prove not to have a long term ambition of becoming a party (as in contest an election).

Front Harsien is an important reaction of civic society. It is destined though to remain an issue specific blip on the political spectrum. Which brings me to the party in opposition. A number of backers of the Front Harsien have been quick to shoot down any attempt by the PN to make the issue its own. Their reasoning is that the PN track record on development does not allow it to take a stand now.

In many ways this antagonistic approach is flawed. Given that the Front Harsien has no aspiration to become a political movement, the second best thing it could do is to engage directly with the parties in their respective roles. Right now engagement with the party in government means opposing its plans to ruin ODZ whenever they crop up. Engaging with the PN intelligently would not mean acting as though it is the same antagonist as when it was in government. This is the time to get clear, precise commitments from the PN about how it would act when it inevitably – one day – is in control of the reigns of power.

Getting the PN to clearly commit to protect ODZ’s in the future is as much of a victory for the Front Harsien as would be preventing the PL government from ruining the ODZ at the moment. Exponents such as AD’s Cassola and Cacopardo would do better than rant about PN ‘hypocrisy’ because in realpolitik terms when it comes to safeguarding the ODZ it gets them nowhere.

Get the PN to commit and commit clearly and half your work is done. The other half is more difficult. Get Muscat and his jordanian partners to keep their hands off the ODZs… then the work of the movement is done. And the lie of the land will have taken a good turn.

Categories
Politics

The last boathouse standing

Is it ironic, dramatic or downright farcical that in all this hullabaloo and with the two main parties completely at sea and in full panic mode, the AD can only* come up with a challenge regarding the boathouses at Armier? Throughout last Friday’s Xarabank Arnold Cassola seemed to provide the only reconciliatory potential for all the other members of the panel. They were at each other’s throats most of the time and Edwin and Michael had their tongues so far up Debono’s behind that they had trouble speaking but the moment Cassola attempted to use the precious space on public TV to highlight the deficiencies of bipartisan thinking and logic he was drowned by a concerted chorus of denigration.

I only watched Xarabank today and you may be surprised to find that even I thought that Franco was coherent in his arguments. I said coherent not justified. I particularly like his idea of a holistic approach to institutional reform intended to sanitise the business of government and democracy from the impending rot caused by the PLPN. I cannot not like this kind of thinking. It’s what J’accuse has been on about for a long long time. The retorts from Edwin and Michael were obvious – from the denial that PLPN act in their own interests to the dismissal of the importance of a role for other parties and forces in the country.

Then again it will be back to business once the election is called. As Arnold pointed out mid-program no reforms will take place before the next election. Forget a law on party financing, on data protection of individuals and other similar safeguards. Protect you from the parties? Ma tarax. I am told that NET TV reported today that the PL has started taking action in court to deprive expats from their votes. I am still waiting for the denial from Muscat. Who knows we might constitute an additional danger to the “instability” of the country. So yes. No changes before the election. Which means no new thresholds. No nationwide district. No tweaks in favour of proportional representation. AD are still up shit creek with no paddle and with no visible candidates to attract the protest voters who cannot get it into themselves to vote PL.

Which brings me to the boathouse challenge. It’s a legitimate challenge. AD wants PL and PN to commit to remove boathouses in Armier. Here’s Cacopardo:

With a general election seemingly on the radar, the Nationalist Party and Labour Party should take up Alternattiva Demo­kratika’s challenge and openly declare their stand on these boathouses if they want to gain credibility with the local environmental lobby, which has advanced into something more than a simple lobby.

It’s an important matter. Of the kind that has often the potential of exposing PLPN’s duplicity in these matters. Remember Gonzi’s letter to boathouse owners? Remember the pandering of PLPN to hunters? Last minute promises to specific sectors such as the LGBT movement are rumoured to have swung the last election. So AD is asking for something simple. A commitment. On paper. Will the big parties take up the challenge? Will voters give the challenge any importance?

My guess? AD will be ignored as they have always been. Because they are a non-entity. Like the last standing boathouse they are too small to be noticed. And anyway we are busy voting for the next party that is to become our permanent grudge. Busy shooting ourselves in the foot.

Because we have been taught to believe the stupid lie: if we want everything to change, then everything must remain the same.

Fuck you Tommasi di Lampedusa.

 

*not really only but it’s what is in the news right now.