Micahel Falzon | Sunday, 10 May 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

The redimensioning of Joseph Muscat

Less than a year ago, Joseph Muscat was riding the waves. He made it to the MLP leadership and became Labour’s great young hope. Talk of an earthquake that had to shake the Labour Party into a lithe new shape and promises of a new political season were the rage. Many fancied his chances of his pulling the Labour Party out of the rut that it had found itself in and lead it out of the opposition doldrums.
Recent events, however, tend to redimension Joseph Muscat and his ability and willingness to change the ugly face of Labour. Two topics stand out as having led to this undoing: his opportunistic stand on illegal immigration, and his confused stand on the recent amendment to the electoral law.
Muscat insisted he wanted a parliamentary debate about Malta’s illegal immigration problem. When he was given this opportunity, he came out with a 20-point action plan that was nothing new in many parts and naïve in what was new. In the words of the editorial of The Times of March 21: ‘The action plan is both good and original. But the regret must be that what was original is not very good. And what was good is not original.’ It was obvious that Muscat tried to take a political advantage from the prevalent mood that the government was not doing enough to tackle this problem – a stance that did not, however, present any viable alternatives or changes to the government’s official policy. In this, Joseph Muscat diverged from the position that had been adopted by his predecessor, Alfred Sant who had basically pursued a bipartisan policy on the issue, resisting the temptation to turn it into a political ball – the same temptation that a less mature Muscat fell for without any hesitation.
Recent developments on this front show the sheer opportunism with which Muscat has been ‘using’ the issue. When the ‘Pinar’ incident took place, the Labour Party latched on to it to give a push to its latest spin to the effect that Lawrence Gonzi was no longer in control of the situation.
Here was a Turkish ship that had picked up migrants off Lampedusa and Malta stood firm in not accepting to take these migrants. In truth there was nothing more that Malta could do, but Labour issued a statement saying that the Prime Minister had stood frozen (ċass) when faced with the illegal immigration situation as he had lost control of defending the national interest. Hours after this statement was issued, Italy decided to take over these migrants and Malta ended up with a diplomatic ‘triumph’ of sorts. Immediately, the Labour Party boasted of its having backed Malta’s stand! This was stated in no uncertain terms in an editorial of the Labour Party’s KullĦadd (April 26) and echoed in an article written in l-orizzont by Muscat’s deputy, Toni Abela.
In the next round of this never-ending immigration saga, it was Italy’s turn to ‘trick’ Malta by first saying that it had no means to rescue another group of immigrants and then refusing to allow the Maltese Armed Forces boat that rescued them to take them to Lampedusa. Incredibly the Labour Party switched again to the ‘lost control accusation’ mode! Joseph Muscat himself led the rampage and was reported by The Times last Monday as having said that “We have a spineless government which does not know what to do when faced with a crisis.” This was followed by a host of articles written by Labour spokesmen or columnists in different newspapers, with the worst case being that of Gavin Gulia showing unrestrained glee at the success of the Italian trick in his article in l-orizzont last Tuesday. Then when Italy subsequently failed to pull the same ‘trick’ again, Labour was dolefully silent!
If Muscat thinks that the people cannot see through his continually shifting positions in order to maximise his political ‘advantage’ on the issue, he must be really as naïve as many say he is.
While his ‘tactics’ on the immigration issue are transparently opportunistic, Muscat’s confused reaction to Government’s decision to give voters who are abroad on election day the possibility of their voting a week before, unearthed hitherto unknown weaknesses in Muscat armoury: his reliance on the paranoid streaks shown by those that believe that Labour lost the last election because Lawrence Gonzi ‘cheated’ rather than because of their misjudgements; and his complete lack of understanding of parliamentary procedure.
The whole shenanigan was sparked by the fact that the date of this year’s European Parliament elections coincides with the Small European Nations Games being held in Cyprus. This meant that the members of Malta’s contingent in Cyprus would not be in a position to cast their vote. This sort of thing, of course, becomes a national cause célèbre only in Malta! Incredibly, the Labour Party suggested that on election day a ballot box should be sent to Cyprus so that the Maltese contingent would have the opportunity to vote. The government, arguing that this facility should be made to anyone who is abroad on election day – whether running in Cyprus or pub-crawling in London – decided to amend the electoral law so that anyone who declares on oath that he is going to be away from Malta on the day would be able to vote a week earlier.
The paranoids at the Labour headquarters – who are continually being let down by their political nose – decided to smell an inexistent rat and egged Muscat to oppose the measure in the most hysterical way. Labour’s show in Parliament on this issue was a disgrace; apart from the hysterical speeches, the House ended up discussing amendments made by the Opposition when these had not been actually tabled. Muscat even admitted he was not well versed in our parliamentary procedures.
The only one on Labour’s side who knew what it was all about and could judge the matter objectively was probably my namesake, former deputy leader, Michael Falzon. He had been responsible for the party’s electoral office for many long years but recently found out that he was divested from this responsibility behind his back. Falzon steered clear of the House and turned up five minutes before the vote was taken! Once again Muscat’s leadership failed the country in the most evident way.
The cherry on the cake is Muscat’s insistence that the Prime Minister should somehow involve himself in the investigation being carried out by the Police in an alleged massive case of corruption that was going on in the VAT department.
Muscat’s stance means that he believes that the Executive should interfere in one way or another in the duty of the Police to investigate crimes – a very dangerous political tenet that makes Stalin’s methods look amateurish! Except, of course, that Muscat’s insistence is motivated by his immaturity and obvious lack of understanding that in a democracy there is such a notion as the separation of powers.
In my opinion, this is the most worrying thing that has come out of Muscat’s gibbering mouth, confirming that he has not lived up to the initial expectations of those who sincerely felt it was time for Labour to turn a new leaf.

micfal@maltanet.net

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.

All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.

EDITORIAL


Italy and Malta fail

INTERVIEW