|
I don’t fancy Nationalist ex-MP Michael Falzon. He’s spoilt far too many of my jogging expeditions. To be fair, the moustachioed Chairman of the Water Services Corporation is no stalker of amateur athletes. Neither is he one of those annoyingly competitive runners who raise their isotonic drink in smug satisfaction as they sprint past you. But he still manages to take my breath away, leaving me gasping in futile anaerobic exercise mode, every time I happened to chance on his newspaper scan on the radio. Under Falzon, what could at best be an innocuous review of headlines with just a hint of spin is turned into obvious, heavy-handed PN propaganda pieces which have me reaching for the dial on my discman and searching for a decent work-out soundtrack.
Since I’m always shaking my head in disbelief at Falzon’s party pieces I was surprised to be in complete agreement with a statement of his. He is reported to have said, “I am one of those who have given up on consensus politics ever being possible in Malta. It seems to be in our small island nature to indulge in rivalry. This characteristic can be seen not only in politics, but in various aspects of our social life.” It is true that rivalry or ‘pika’ is evident in different strata of Maltese society. There are the pagan feuds between band clubs within the same village, the exaggerated and sometimes violent competitiveness between football clubs of neighbouring towns, and countless other manifestations of envy which have come to form part and parcel of Maltese life. While lower-level ‘pika’ gets you a lot of drunken youths in vests swearing at each other at the village festa, the upper end of the ‘pika’ spectrum results in puerile politics where the two major parties prefer to try and hurl insults at each other rather than engage in any constructive action.
A clear illustration of this occurred on a recent episode of Xarabank. The Leader of the Opposition criticised the Prime Minister for the exorbitant increase in the price of kerosene. Lawrence Gonzi immediately hit back – not with devastating logic or an explanation for the budget measures, but with the irrelevant reminder that the Labour party had proposed precisely the same measure when in government. Gonzi justified the questionable price hike by stating that the Labour party had been as bad. In the surreal world of Maltese politics, decision-making is turned into a limbo-dancing competition with the words “How low can you go?” being a very apt commentary on the whole process. The PN justifies many of its most criticised blunders by pointing out instances when the MLP lowered the limbo stick a little further to the ground and made even more spectacular gaffes. So the Nationalist government’s responsibility for the Mater Dei fiasco is shrugged off with a reference to Alfred Sant’s opposition to EU membership, the imposition of a surcharge on water and electricity by a Nationalist government is permissible because of a corresponding tax imposed in Labour times. The unsavourily close associations of certain building contractors with the PN is tolerated because of corresponding MLP contractor cronies.
This lowering of the limbo stick plumbed to ridiculously pathetic depths when Nationalist MP David Agius said it wouldn’t be fair on the PN government if it had to push through reform of the unjust rent laws without the agreement of the MLP, because this would mean a loss of blue votes.
You couldn’t have a better example of how politicians of the two major political parties have completely lost sight of the big picture. The whole aim of having elected representatives is for them to legislate wisely and well and sometimes to take decisions which are just though unpopular.
The return of David Agius and his ilk to parliament is a by-product of democracy and not it’s final aim. Yet, both the PN and the MLP continue to try and instil a mentality where the ultimate disaster scenario is that whereby the other party wins the election and not the present dreary state of affairs where each of them can continue to score pints off each other rather than engage in constructive action. Accepting this situation would mean that those citizens who do not agree with either of the PN or the MLP’s stand or the conveniently common platforms which they sometimes adopt are left out in the cold. So the owner of a property which is being leased for a pittance under the antiquated rent laws, would find no help from either of the major political parties, because as David Agius said, it might cost them a few hundred votes. Similarly, pensioners who use kerosene to heat their houses cannot complain about the Nationalist government’s price hike because a Labour government had done the same thing in the past. There are countless other instances where citizens who have interests which are not perfectly aligned with either the PN or the MLP have become a voiceless majority. Defeatists masquerading as pragmatists insist that is the way it is meant to be, that the only way that the country can function is with a bi-party system. What they don’t realise is that the once voiceless majority are sick of having to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea. The chasm in between is widening and being thronged by people who prefer a less partisan and pika-fuelled politics. The past year was ample demonstration of this. The coming year should prove to be even better.
cl.bon@global.net.mt
|
