|
The news that the General Workers’ Union lobbied the Prime Minister for approval of a tourist extension permit in an outside development zone, and the calls by a Labour MP to introduce segregated bus services, both call for comment, analysis and condemnation.
It beggars belief that persons living in the public eye should expect their planning applications to be fast-tracked. On another level, it is equally disturbing that a person who professes socialist beliefs should express such racist sentiments. Equally disappointing is the poor response from the organisations they represent. The total silence from the GWU and the diplomatic distancing from Mr Joe Sammut’s comments by the Labour Party, throw into sharp focus the poor judgment and insensitivity of both organisations.
Both are clearly resigning matters and would have been considered as such in any mature European democracy. Alas, this is Malta, where the value of political correctness has still not taken root.
The poor judgment of the two institutions is tantamount to sheer hypocrisy. The GWU President himself had publicly demonstrated with much fanfare against the granting of a redevelopment permit at Ramla il-Hamra, also an outside development zone. It would appear that what irked the trade unionist was not the threat to a magnificent landscape, but the opportunity to criticise a government with which he has little sympathy. The double standards at play are all too noticeable.
Elsewhere, Mr Joe Sammut’s racist comments are all the more disturbing, reminiscent of the racial conflicts in Deep South Alabama in the 1950s and 1960s. It would appear that Joe Sammut needs to indulge in a bit of Martin Luther King bedtime reading. His vision appears to be to clean up Marsa from ethnic minorities: a far cry from the tolerance dreams of King. He should have been instantly dismissed from the party.
When a certain Nationalist activist Alexis Callus had expressed sympathy with the far right, the Nationalist Party had correctly withdrawn his party membership. Incorrectly, however, similar treatment was not meted out to another PN activist, Kurt Gaullimier, an employee in the private secretariat of a minister. Racism calls for zero tolerance not simply by expressing one’s horror and disdain, but by taking the bull by the horns and dismissing racist elements from party ranks in and outside parliament.
These two incidents amount to politically shooting oneself in the foot. They are simply own goals, which do not enhance the credentials of the socialist movement.
Only last week this newspaper was sanctioned for expressing the view that Labour has no clear policies. We were admonished for pandering to the Government. We regret to reiterate that these two incidents are further evidence of the lack of crystal clear policies. Is the Labour Party committed to a zero tolerance policy on racism? if so why has it not expelled Joe Sammut from its ranks? Is the General Workers’ Union against developments in outside development zones? If so, why did it lobby in favour of such permits being granted on behalf of a company it partly owns?
These legitimate questions casts the spotlight on an all-too evident national tendency to criticise only according to one’s own personal and professional interests, and not on the basis of the merits of the case.
If something is unacceptable, should be considered as such regardless of the perpetrator. All too often, political parties and organisations simply pick and choose which projects to criticise and which comments to highlight. The maxim of “what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander” simply does not come into play. Not unsurprisingly, as our front-page story reveals this morning, political parties feel free to criticise projects yet tolerate their own party representatives to act as secretaries of the development company involved in the same criticised project. Both political parties are fully aware of the facts and the particular involvements, yet both conveniently remain mute. This newspaper is simply making known what is already known to both political parties united in their common desire to keep certain things under wraps and away from the public domain.
Their conspiracy of silence triggers us to carry on exposing politically incorrect behaviour, irrespective of whence it comes. |
