‘I am a voice for people who are afraid’ | Arnold Cassola

At your campaign launch, you argued that this election was not just about choosing a government: but also, choosing a ‘strong, vociferous opposition’. Yet you are effectively a single independent candidate, vying for a single seat. How would your own election to Parliament ‘strengthen the opposition’?

It’s very simple, really. If you look at what is happening in the country right now: for example, that [developer] Joseph Portelli comes out in an interview, candidly saying that ‘he gives money to both parties’; because he needs the help of both, so whoever is elected, he ends up getting whatever he wants…

Did you see anybody speak up, from the Nationalist or Labour Party? It was the same with the ‘DB’ issue [the controversial re-development of ITS in Pembroke]. First there was a lot of hullaballoo… then we found out that [Opposition MP] Mario de Marco was the lawyer negotiating that contract…

So basically, there are certain things on which the Nationalist Opposition is permanently tongue-tied. Hunting is another example. We now have Opposition leader Bernard Grech telling us that ‘il-kaċċa hija mħabba tan-natura’ [‘hunting is a love of nature’]. What does that tell us, about the Nationalist Opposition’s stand on hunting: if not that it is exactly the same as the Labour government’s?

Then, we have the sale of passports. What is Bernard Grech saying about that? That a Nationalist government would remove [the ‘Golden Passport’ scheme]? No! They will just leave it there. They might tweak it a little… but they still want to continue selling Maltese citizenship.

Now: I want to be a voice – hopefully, with other honest, third-party candidates – trying to break this mould: where, for 56 years, we’ve only ever had two voices in Parliament; and where the ‘winner-takes-all’ mentality, is the only thing that prevails. That is what I want to change.

Instead of ‘winner-takes-all’, what I want to see is ‘give-and-take’: a compromise mentality, where we discuss things; where we don’t just bulldoze over people… and where we have at least one vociferous part of the Opposition, that is actually speaking out.

So what I’m telling people is that: whether we like it or not, the Nationalist Party is going to be in Opposition [after the next election]: and it will be a much weaker Opposition than it is today.

Today, [former PN leader] Adrian Delia has ‘zero votes’ – in the sense that he did not win his Parliamentary seat in an election – and yet, just look at the power he wields within the PN… and the frictions that exist in that party, between his people, and the other faction.

So despite having zero votes, ‘Team Delia’ is very strong within the Opposition: resulting in all these divisions, and in-fighting. Just imagine, then, what the situation will be like, after Adrian Delia gets elected on two districts, with 6,000 votes. We will end up with an Opposition that is much more divided, and much weaker, than it already is; and this will only give more strength to Robert Abela, to keep simply bulldozing over a divided Opposition.

What I’m asking, then, is: do people want this situation to continue? Or do people want an Opposition that – apart from the PN, which we know will be there anyway – also includes one, two, three, or more other voices… people who are not afraid to speak out against the likes of Portelli; who are not afraid to speak out against hunting; who are not afraid to say, ‘No, we don’t want passport sales!’

Why should people be afraid to speak out against these things? I am a voice for the people who are afraid, in Malta…

You certainly do ‘speak out’ – and frequently, too – but to what extent are these sentiments actually shared by the wider public? When you say ‘you are a voice for those who are afraid’… do you feel you are genuinely representing the fears of a ‘silent majority’?

Let me put it this way: 90% of my social media posts, and the things that I reveal, are given to me by other people…. people who are afraid of speaking out themselves.  Yesterday, for instance, I posted about [Nationalist MP] Chris Said’s brother, who has been dumping construction waste into a Nadur valley for two years. The video footage I uploaded – which shows the dumping taking place – was given to me by someone, in secret. Why should that person be so afraid to speak out?

And just this morning, I posted something else: in the square where [Gozo Minister] Clint Camilleri lives, there are 50 designated parking spaces. So what has Clint Camilleri just done? A reserved, yellow parking space, right outside his front door. Who gives out permits for reserved parking spaces? Transport Malta. Who is director of Transport Malta in Gozo? Clint Camilleri’s wife…

Now: do we need people in Parliament to speak out about these things? And if the Opposition that we have, cannot speak out because it is ‘doing other stuff’ itself – or because it is sponsored by the same contractors, and financially dependent on the same interests – then what choice do people have, but to come to someone like me?

Having said all this: there are other reasons for wanting more diverse voices in Parliament. It’s not just a question of exposing scandals, or maladministration; it is also a question of proposing different ideas, and different ways of doing things. Would the Nationalist Party – or Labour, for that matter – ever propose a ‘two-year moratorium on tall buildings’, for instance?

This is why people also approach me for other reasons, apart from ‘revealing information’. There are people out there, who do want an alternative to the ‘winner-takes-all’ mentality: and I am lucky enough to have a team of young volunteers, who have all approached me, separately, to help out with my campaign: among other things, with the IT aspects. Like setting up my new website, www.arnoldcassola.eu.

Because for some reason, these young people – mostly between 30 and 40, and all professionals in their respective fields – look at an ‘old man’ like me, and maybe see someone who is actually reflecting their own views…

On that subject: there have been many (mostly derogatory) comments about your age. At the risk of an unkind question: do you feel this ‘age-barrier’ may indeed work against you, among younger voters? (Bearing in mind that this is the first election in which 16-year-olds can vote)

I’ll be honest with you: when I get together with my (younger) campaign team, and we look at certain indicators – even silly things, like Facebook graphs of ‘how many people watched our online video’, etc. – what emerges is that my weakest score is among the 16-24 age-bracket. That is my lowest ebb; no doubt about it. My highest, on the other hand, is 24-44… and then it goes down again, slightly, among the older categories…

How do you interpret that, yourself?

[Shrugs] Obviously, being old, I am less known by younger people. That is, after all, a fact of life: younger people would definitely identify more, with candidates who are closer to their own age…

But thanks to social media – and to the team that manages it for me: from Instagram, to Twitter, to the new website… it’s all the work of young, talented professionals, who have volunteered to help my campaign – my message is now reaching many more people… and I am getting feedback.

On that basis, I also think that my age works to my advantage. I see it as a plus, not a minus. Because whether you agree with me or not – and whatever my faults, my mistakes, and my strengths-and-weaknesses – I have a track record. Unlike younger candidates, who can only promise ‘what they will do in the future’, I have 32 years of political activism to look back on.

And it was mostly environmental: I was there to protest against the Verdala Golf Course, 25 years ago; and later, the Majjistral issue. I went to jail, because of Ta’ Ċenċ… and I was there for all the more recent environmental protests and campaigns: the ODZ extension; Fekruna; Żonqor Point; Marsaskala…

So I do have a track record: not only in environmental activism, but also in politics. And not just because I contest elections… but because I factually act. So if [Transport Minister] Ian Borg was condemned for his ‘Ħaqqalanqas’ [outburst].. it was because of me. If [Education Minister] Justyne Caruana resigned… it was because of me. I was the one who flagged those issues, and reported them to the Standards Commissioner.

But… should it have been me? Did it have to be me, to take the action that nobody else wanted to take?

Speaking of the Standard Commissioner: in the last two years, you have quite literally bombarded George Hyzler’s office with complaints…

I’ve just sent him another one this morning, in fact. This time, about the discovery of national heritage on Anton Refalo’s private property…

At your launch, however, you also said: ‘I don’t have the luxury to bring the Pope to launch my campaign’. But… isn’t that what you are doing, with all those complaints to the Standards Commissioner? Aren’t you similarly using George Hyzler’s office, to gain public recognition in the build-up to an election?

I see the comparison as a bit of a stretch, myself. But if I’m ‘using’ George Hyzler’s office for anything, it is to try and help with the clean-up, of the moral and ethical decay that has gripped our country. And if I do it so often… well, what other choice do I have? And why Hyzler, anyway?

I was about to ask that question myself…

… because he acts! Unlike so many other people, George Hyzler is not afraid of taking action, when it needs to be taken. Now: to be fair, the Standards Commission is not the only recourse. Depending on the issue, the complaint might be to the National Audit Office, or to the Ombudsman. Both those offices take action, too… but only on specific types of activities: and in the NAO’s case – while they do very good work – it can take up to three years to get results.

Elsewhere, you might not get any results at all. I have also been, for example, to the Commission Against Corruption. It is toothless, and useless. Don’t get me wrong: they are good people; honest people; but in practice – mostly because of lack of resources - they are just toothless… and useless.

When I went to them with the case of [former MTA chairman] Johann Buttigieg, for instance: I went with all the Whatsapp messages, that proved his involvement [in dealings with Yorgen Fenech]. And yet, a year and a half later… nothing.

Meanwhile, it’s been two and a half years since I complained to the Commission about [Labour minister] Michael Farrugia, meeting Yorgen Fenech, and – half an hour later – writing to Johann Buttigieg, to insert Mriehel in the high-rise zone… eight weeks after the high-rise policy had been concluded.

And yet, all this time later… still nothing.

So… I have to go to Hyzler! No other option, really: as long, by the way, as the issue concerns ethical behaviour among Members of Parliament…

Earlier, you said that you intend to ‘break the two-party mould’. But hasn’t this already happened, in practice? In recent years, Parliament has been occupied by more than two parties. Marlene and Godfrey Farrugia briefly represented ‘Partit Demokratiku’… Giovanna Debono sat in the House as an independent MP…

… so did Konrad Mizzi…

Yes, him too. My point, though, is that Malta has already experienced ‘multi-party representation’… and it hasn’t really changed anything at all. What makes you confident that you yourself – as a single, independent candidate – can make such a big difference?

I see your point, but it’s not a like-with-like comparison. Because unfortunately, Marlene and Godfrey Farrugia – and let’s face it: they were the only ones to have been ‘vociferous’, as third-party MPs – were not seen favourably by the Nationalists. They had contested with the PN; they were placed at the forefront by the PN; they were elected on the Nationalist Party ticket… and the day after, they turned around said: ‘We are not Nationalists. We are PD.’

And fair enough, if that’s how they felt. But from that point onwards, they were simply put aside. They couldn’t be effective: because to be effective, in a multi-party system, you have to collaborate…

Do you feel you can collaborate as part of a Nationalist-led Opposition, though?

Yes. I’ve said it many times before: I would be willing to collaborate with any other Opposition party – and even with the government. If the government needed cross-party support, on something that I feel deserves support… I would be happy to help; so long as the Cabinet is made up of clean, honest people.

But they have to be clean, and honest. They have to have no track record of misdemeanour. So if government were to appoint Ministers who were not clean… then, sorry, no, I will not support you.

And that is, in itself, a way of keeping government on its toes. It is a way of ensuring that government doesn’t appoint crooks, as ministers; of seeing to it, that MPs who are found guilty of wrongdoing, end up resigning.

It is, in a nutshell, a way of at least trying to clean up a political system that is ethically, and morally, ‘sick’. And that, at the end of the day, is what I am trying to do…