The old joke which claims that the job of the United Nations Secretary-general is neither that of a secretary nor that of a general, might as well be applied to the job of the secretary-general of any Maltese political party – more so that the Labour Party has, in its case, now officially embarked on the course towards rendering this post obsolete.
The news that the Labour Party has opted to take this course of action has taken many by surprise. Towards the end of last September, we were told that Jason Micallef had stepped down from his post as general secretary of the Labour Party and will instead head One Productions, the party’s media arm. At the time the Labour Party had explained that the move followed talks with party leader Joseph Muscat on changes within the party’s administrative, political and commercial sections. Mr Micallef, it was pointed out, was not going to be a candidate when elections for the post of general secretary are held in January.
Talk of Jason Micallef’s temporary replacement – Stefan Zrinzo-Azzopardi – assuming a more permanent role dissipated some time after when it became known that Zrinzo-Azzopardi had no ambition to assume the role on a permanent basis. Then another name was being touted – that of Edward Zammit-Lewis – but this suggestion also faded away, only to be replaced by the idea of abolishing the very post itself!
It does appear, therefore, that the decision to do away completely with the post is a recent one, taken out of convenience in the strange circumstances that the Labour Party leadership has currently found itself: better no secretary-general than one that does not pull the rope as he is told! Very much like a football team opting to play with ten players as the one available for the eleventh position cannot be entrusted to carry out the coach’s directives faithfully and loyally.
Disapproving of a nomination to fill a vacant position is quite different from the elimination of the post itself. The job of secretary-general does not entail – to repeat the old joke – either the job of secretary or the job of general. But it does entail the responsibility of co-ordinating the various actions taken by the party and the various tasks to be carried out by the party’s administration. The person occupying this position is responsible for the day to day running of the party and to ensure that its organisational structure is permanently in tip-top condition and will not encounter any hitches when under stress, such as during an election campaign. Indeed, the secretary-general personifies the party organisational structure more than the party leader.
Moreover, when the party is in government and the leader is, presumably, the Prime Minister while other senior party exponents are ministers, it is the party’s general secretary that acts as the visible image of the party’s ‘persona’, as distinct from the government formed by that same party. In this scenario, a party without a secretary-general can only reflect a situation where the separation between the government and the party in government does not even exist on paper.
This situation seems to exist already in the case of local government where the separation between the administration of the local Labour Party club and the Labour-led local council is hardly discernible. So is the decision to eliminate the post of party secretary-general a premonition of the shape of things to come?
The Labour Party is in a situation in which doing away with the post of secretary-general would not, at first glance, seem like a rashly taken decision forced by circumstances more than by some long-term strategic vision. Since being elected party leader, Joseph Muscat has introduced the unelected post of Chief Executive Officer (CEO), a post with duties that included a number of overlaps with those of the secretary-general. Muscat could have nominated a personal assistant to help him ensure that his wishes and his directions are respected but he opted in favour of nominating a person enjoying his personal trust as CEO, giving him even more authority than would have otherwise been the case.
It was obvious that this nomination would set the CEO on a course that would be diametrically opposite that of the secretary-general. No wonder that Jason Micallef was asked to step down and Zrinzo-Azzopardi – the party’s President – was asked to temporarily take over the post until the January election that will now not materialise. Perhaps Zrinzo-Azzopardi did not put much effort in his temporary duties… and this led Muscat to conclude that the party could do without a secretary-general!
But the Labour Party has another position that inherently obliges duties that must overlap with those of the secretary-general. This is the position of the party’s ‘Deputy Leader for Party Affairs’, a post created in the Mintoff days as a result of what – at the time – many considered to be ulterior motives.
When Labour’s Deputy Leader and Deputy Prime Minister, Anton Buttigieg, was nominated as the second President of the Republic, way back in December 1976, the MLP (as it was then known) did not immediately proceed to elect his successor as party Deputy Leader. Instead it changed its statute to provide for two Deputy Leaders – one for Parliamentary Affairs and one for Party Affairs, with the second position not being available to anyone who is an MP. At the time, this change was interpreted to be a typical Mintoff move aimed at ensuring that the post of Deputy Leader does not give the incumbent any advantage or claim in any eventual leadership succession race.
Whatever the real reasons for this extraordinary move, the Labour Party ended up with someone who was Deputy Leader responsible for the party’s organisation, a position that necessarily overlaps that of the secretary-general, unless perfect co-ordination between the two personalities is achieved. Whether one can attain ‘perfect co-ordination’ with the colourful personality of Toni Abela – the person whom the delegates elected as Deputy Leader for Party affairs – is a moot point.
For some time there was speculation about the Labour Party abolishing the post of Deputy Leader for Party Affairs. Instead, it is now the post of secretary-general that is being abolished! There should be no doubt as to who won the day in that particular duel.
So, will this move lead to Toni Abela doubling up as the Labour Party’s secretary-general, when this post will no longer exist? I do not know that answer.
What I do know for sure is that playing around with a political party’s statutory posts in order to make them fit in with the available – and approved – personalities at a particular point in time, is a sure recipe for an organisational mess.
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.
Search:
MALTATODAY
BUSINESSTODAY
Download MaltaToday Sunday issue front page in pdf file format
