 |
|
|
|
Who are we to believe, Sant or
Dalli?
The statistical baggage that has been thrown at the public is
sad. As in all things, the public is divided down the middle.
If Alfred Sant says one thing, then expect half the population
to repeat his assertions.
If Lawrence Gonzi or John Dalli says another then the other half
will follow suit.
A small more important electorate thinks for itself or could not
give a hoot.
But the latest charade is making compelling psychotherapy.
The opposition has ripped apart statistics and in doing so has
made a two-fold mistake.
The first one is that they question statistical methodology, something
not done when Dr Sant served as Premier.
The second, is that Dr Sant has made the mistake of focusing all
his energies on the veracity rather than on the content.
But with the government, the PN and the news media against him,
Dr Sant stands little or no chance other than making his henchmen
become more vociferous and beady eyed about the whole matter.
The turning of the tide happened on Wednesday with an unprecedented
hard-nosed attack on Alfred Sant by Lawrence Gonzi.
That delivery was very similar to Alfred Sants hyberbole, it was
not top heavy on the data but it proceeded to decimate the allegations
made by Dr Sant.
The sad things in politics is that we are assisting in a trench-based
debate. The good fellows get confused with the bad fellows and
the bad arguments bury the good arguments.
It is tragic that all that is said and carried out by the government
is incorrect, and all that is uttered by the Leader of Opposition
is hogwash.
Yet, we are at the crossroads, where one cannot for the sake of
independence argue for an argument that does not have one foot
to stand on.
Dr Sant has simply shot from the hip and carried this thing just
too far, truly and surely the Torca and Kullhadd columnists will
be pouring incense on his declarations – but in all fairness
this cannot be the right approach.
If the government needs to be castigated and in this case we refer
to Mr John Dalli as Finance minister, it should deal primarily
with his promise that a tax compliance unit will be functioning
soon.
The GWU and others argue that this is pie in the sky, and yes
– queries over this should continue to be addressed. But
here, the Minister has promised that he means what he says.
Perhaps the pundits and critics should take a backroom position
and start figuring out if their politics is to be reactive, visionary
or destructive.
|
|
|
