We need dignity and substance in politics, not PR stunts

A reel was doing the rounds this week of the prime minister’s wife, Lydia Abela, who was invited for an interview with Ricky Caruana on his podcast.

Giggling and blushing like a school boy in front of his childhood crush, he brings out a mallet which in Maltese is called mazza—it is also a slang word for someone who is sexy and hot. She too was blushing, twirling her hair and acting almost flirty at this compliment.

Now, there is no doubt that Dr Abela is a beautiful woman, but she is above all an accomplished, intelligent woman in her own right. She also holds a very high position in the country which I believe demands dignity and respect. I have always admired the way she carries herself so well in all situations, poised and elegant, and saying just the right thing.

So, I admit that seeing that clip was very disappointing. Does she really need validation by a man dressed like a disco ball, just because his podcast, which is strewn with expletives and banal rhetoric, gets a lot of likes and attention?  And why are we still judging women, not by their brains, but by their attractiveness?

I can already see the same type of treatment being directed at Sarah Bajada, the partner of the new PN leader Alex Borg. She is another beautiful, elegant woman but her worth should not just be about her appearance (just like our assessment of Alex Borg should not just be about the fact that he is young and attractive). I truly hope Ms Bajada and Dr Abela are not going to be pitted against one another by the more frivolous sections of the media, as if they were WAGs.

The curse of social media is that it has glorified superficiality and looks, while lowering the nation’s (and the world’s) collective IQ. It has also rendered politics into PR stunts.

Another case in point is one of Alex Borg’s first media appearances after being elected. He agreed to take part in a game on a radio show where he had to guess a variety of snacks which were fed to him, with the inevitable innuendos, while he was blindfolded. I kid you not.

I know he is only 30 years old and is perhaps trying to appear cool and ‘with it’ so the young ones will vote for him, but for me this is all just fluff and about as substantial as cotton candy.  What exactly is going on with our politicians if they think that this is the way forward? I don’t know about everyone else but I have about had it with all these gimmicks and am yearning for some intelligent discourse from someone aspiring to be the next PM.  We do not need leaders who act and speak like your average teenager, but someone who understands the weight and gravity of their new role. This is not a game; politics affects our very lives.

These types of silly stunts only serve as a smokescreen which alienates us from what is really important, namely, how are you going to be any different from the current administration?  A least when he went on the programme Xtra, Alex Borg spoke as a leader should, with a certain gravitas. He stood by his personal beliefs against genetic testing on embryos but said he would retain the law passed by the Labour government. Recreational marijuana for personal use would also remain legal but he would ensure more enforcement. And while being against euthanasia himself, he would give a free vote on the issue to his MPs.

Alex Borg also spoke about incentives to encourage more Maltese students to enter the nursing and the caring professions and said he would back trade schools. He also mentioned a labour force study to identify the gaps that will need to be filled in by foreign workers. Personally, I would like to know in real, concrete terms, how Alex Borg plans to solve two of the most crucial challenges facing the country which are directly linked: The over-reliance on a foreign workforce, and the out-of-control construction all over the island. Do we really need any more studies when it is crystal clear that the most important vacancies, we absolutely cannot do without are in our hospitals and care homes?  Will he, for example, stop the practice of stuffing government departments with unnecessary Maltese staff, so that they will have to find employment in the private sector instead? Will he have the spine to stand up to the construction lobby and tell them “issa daqshekk”?  Now that would really be a revolutionary announcement.

What clearly emerged from what he said is that being young does not guarantee someone is more liberal... and you have to read/listen to what a politician says to assess what their stand is on certain issues. There is another point which I find many continue to overlook—the PN by its very nature and its founding principles, leans more towards right-wing/conservative policies. So why do some continue to expect it to re-invent itself and become more liberal (for which read, left-wing). That would be a contradiction in terms. I'm not saying being conservative is a bad thing, but I feel this really must be said. Alex Borg is currently walking a tightrope trying to bring back the more moderate Nationalist faction while not alienating those who are firmly conservative. It is this divisive split which has not allowed the party to heal since Lawrence Gonzi’s era. 

All one has to do is read the contrasting opinions by PN (as well as Labour) voters following the murder of conservative Christian activist Charlie Kirk to realise that on certain issues we can no longer neatly separate people into boxes, according to their ideological beliefs. Even when it comes to Trump, I find it fascinating when self-acclaimed leftists proudly tell you that they agree with him.

Perhaps more education is needed about the political spectrum so that we can better size up a politician but also to understand our OWN politics (for example, you can be liberal or moderate on some issues and more conservative on others). I think this is crucial to open up a healthy, mature conversation on a wide variety of civil rights and social/environmental issues in order to make the best decision when it comes to electing those who will represent us. We need to assess politicians not just on what is on the surface but on what their core values are.

That is what the electorate should be questioning and what politicians should be telling us—not whether they can distinguish food while blindfolded.