Karaoke journalists and politicians

There is some furore at the moment over the press club known to most local journalists as the IĠM. It all started when a Times of Malta photojournalist was accosted by security guards at Malta’s state hospital, Mater Dei. 

The public relations and marketing guru representing the company is Malcolm Naudi. A nice and affable guy by all means, but someone who has more or less appointed himself to represent the journalist community, even though he is no longer a journalist and when at the same time he has vested interests in defending the interests of his clients… against payment, of course.

I have always objected to the present press club. I am not a member and I refuse to participate in their contests – which I regularly describe as a masturbation session for the same group of journalists from The Times and The Independent – and I have also pointed out that their committee is represented by people who are no longer journalists.

Typically of The Times, the issue of Mr Naudi’s conflict of interest only surfaced now, when it finally concerned one of their journalists. Before that, they never bothered to point out that the press club is in fact a farce and is sponsored by big business (Tumas Fenech Foundation) and that its committee hardly has one active journalist on board.

Probably because the same posse of applicants would nominate themselves and win awards for being ‘the best’ in this-and-that category (of wankers).

The reason that I have decided to return to a subject I raised 10 years ago is because this very week, Mr Naudi – representing yet another client – contacted our newsroom to complain that we had mentioned his client (a hotel) in a news article. 

Our crime was mentioning the hotel in which a fatality had taken place.

If you’re looking for a real-life Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, look no further.

Mr Naudi – a former deputy editor at The Sunday Times who left after being replaced by a new brand of journalists – appears not to understand that his position is simply untenable.

How can we as journalists report or analyse the political and business class when they expose themselves to conflicts of interest?

The whole debate about conflicts of interest has dominated this particular election campaign. Mr Naudi must go, and with him the clan of non-journalists who stand around him (and who must be made aware of their unsuitability).  The very fact that The Times has decided to draw attention to this issue is significant.

It may actually be healthier for all involved if the IĠM died a natural death, paving the path for a true journalist to reshape it into a relevant entity.

The whole conflict of interest argument has been captained, needless to say, by PN leader Simon Busuttil, who in my view lacks the right credentials to even express an opinion about this subject. He is not as ‘fresh’ as he makes himself out to be – he remains an extension of the former administration, which, let’s face it, was ultimately a big let down.

And this is the problem: Busuttil continues to foment the impression that the Gonzi years were pretty okay. In fact, they were not – they were actually really bad.

Busuttil is right to expose the element of nepotism which appears to be part and parcel of Muscat’s political agenda. But he cannot position this as his number one battle cry since he has absolutely zero credibility on this front. In the years before March 2013, the Nationalist administration imposed an apartheid policy that was not only apparent but enshrined in its thinking.

And as usual, they will say that they also employed Labourites. They will of course mention the same two examples over and over again: George Abela and Louis Grech. But I am not talking about George Abela – who was rather anti-Labour at the time anyway – nor Grech – who was certainly more interested in money, cigars and… – than politics at the time. All this is beside the point, because that kind of reasoning is as warped as Muscat’s riposte when he claims he is meritocratic because he appointed Lou Bondi.

That particular example makes me puke, because we all know to what extent Lou Bondi approached politics with his partisan outlook, and we all know that Lou Bondi’s silence was only sealed because of a handsome remuneration.

(An amount which, incidentally, Muscat’s spokesman Kurt Farrugia refuses to disclose since he knows it would anger the public.)

I am of course very happy that Lou Bondi probably earns around 40K to 70K – at least I know he genuflected to lick Muscat’s ass, not yours truly. Despite all the vomit he and his beleaguered sorceress – sponsored by The Independent – said or insinuated.

More so when he referred to MaltaToday – in his capacity as a TVM host – as “MaltaMLPToday” as his cousin Austin Gatt and Lawrence Gonzi laughed in the background and Nationalist cronies rubbed their hands with excitement.

Simon Busuttil has no alternative but to hit out at Labour. But his assertion – or his argument – that the present situation shadows the ugliness of the Gonzi administration is grossly exaggerated. Not even his claims that PBS have become a PL station are correct. PBS has not in fact replicated the one-sided journalism that existed before 2013.

And because of Busuttil’s lack of credibility, I sense that those who are unhappy with Labour today will still not vote for the PN.

When they see the likes of Beppe Fenech Adami, Jason Azzopardi and George Pullicino addressing press conferences, they do not see a new look but ‘karaoke politicians’ trying to imitate the real thing.

The other sad development in our style of politics is the depressing lack of profundity found in many of the parties’ proposals.

I cannot help but return to the motion presented this week by the PN, and quickly embraced by Muscat. The motion addresses the issue of waiting lists and presents the option of Maltese patients using private clinics and hospitals to circumvent the waiting lists at Mater Dei.

Neither Busuttil nor Muscat have any wish to irk the public on the ‘waiting list’ problem, so they have come up with a solution, which means our taxes are now to be siphoned to private clinics to keep everyone happy. In other words, instead of bringing in some managerial expertise and investing in more resources at Mater Dei, we have decided to take the easy option and ask the private sector to make pots of gold from our taxes.

It is diabolical – more so when we know how much was spent in the public health sector and when we know that the tariffs imposed by the private sector are exorbitant.

Busuttil and Muscat should be focusing on improving Mater Dei, not holding press conferences with nervous-looking owners of private clinics.

Unlike Busuttil and Muscat, I do not believe that the private sector is the solution to our health sector.

Today, the situation is so bad at Mater Dei because of gross incompetence (not funds), forcing people to wait for hours at private clinics.

I’ll just mention one example – that of some people suffering cardiological problems. Their appointment was at 11.30pm.  There were two bills – if with a health insurance €150, if without, €70. The consultation session lasted a grand total of 7 minutes – running between 11:57pm and 12:06am.

That’s all for this week… and by the way, next Saturday is election day.

Have you decided?

I haven’t.