My style of politics

Over the past days I was asked about my overall opinion on Maltese politics and its history, and the reasons for my opinion.  This was my reply:

I believe that over the past decades a lot of energy and effort has been directed towards sowing division between us rather than doing everything possible to unite as a nation.  When united this country can achieve, indeed has achieved, remarkable progress.  Since independence we have made many strides forward.

Unfortunately the adversarial mentality seems well ingrained in our culture where we seem to thrive upon controversy and antagonism – be it politics, the village feast or soccer.

I am confident that my generation is not interested in continuing to foster what divides us, but in working together to achieve the best possible results for our country as a whole – irrespective of which party is in power.

In his brief stint as Prime Minister, my uncle Alfred Sant tried very hard to instil this approach – a mentality where what matters is not one’s political allegiance, family background or contacts but whether one is capable and willing to work in the best interest of the country irrespective of the party in government.  Maybe that mentality was too avant-garde back then.  Today I feel that the time is ripe to put meritocracy, accountability, transparency and competence on top of the national agenda once again.

I am convinced that many people who enter politics do so because they genuinely believe that they can be of service and that they can positively contribute towards improving the quality of life of their community and of society in general.

This is especially true of people who enter politics on a local level via Local Councils.  In this respect, my personal opinion – and personal experience – is that it is a pity that political parties are present even at a local level.  I say so because having to date spent one term as a local councillor, I believe that there should be no partisan interests where the good of the locality is at stake.  I am sure that many genuine people who can give a positive contribution refrain from doing so because they do not wish to enter the political arena in its present ‘format’.

Marc

Change we can believe in

A few days ago the Labour Party put forwards some of its proposals for reform in the justice sector.

I feel that the proposals made so far are positive – in the sense that they are practical, will cost relatively nothing to implement and will serve to provide a better overall service to those people who resort to the law courts.  These proposals may also serve for the public to re-gain some trust within this institution.

In a supposedly-democratic country built on the rule of law and the separation of powers, it does not bode well when one of the three main institutions of the country is mired in controversy and faces very serious allegations which rock its very foundations.

The doctrine of separation of powers must be kept in mind when discussing the law courts and their extensive review.  Through this doctrine the three pillars of a democratic society – the Executive (i.e. the government), the Legislature (i.e. Parliament) and the Judiciary (i.e. Magistrates and Judges) – are distinct from one another.  However, at the same time they each serve as an instrument of checks and balances on the workings of each other.  Therefore, having one of these institutions which is malfunctioning or inherently weak per se, should be of serious concern to us all.

It is of the essence that these institutions have the respect and trust of the public at large at all times.

In my profession I often have clients who prefer losing money they are due rather than having to open a court case to recuperate their dues.  This attitude shows a deep disrespect and scepticism in the law courts and their workings.  Their main hesitancy essentially centres on the duration of the case, the leave they are required to take between the commencement and the termination of the case and the disproportionate length of time required to get a judgement.

Some of the proposals put forward by Labour are so basic that one necessarily asks why these have not been implemented before.  For example, the use of basic IT facilities such as the sending of emails or SMS’s to lawyers and clients when their case has been deferred will most certainly help to avoid a lot of waste of time – especially for those clients who purposely enter Valletta after taking a day or half-day off from work awaiting their turn only to be told that the case has been moved to another day.

It is fair to say that the law courts are by-far one of the most conservative institutions on these islands.  However, it is about time that they move into the 21^st century and provide the ‘consumer’ with an adequate ‘product’ and service.

Other areas within the justice sector which I feel require a review include the legal aid institution, the more efficient and expeditious hearing of cases within the Small Claims Tribunal along with better and continued training for the human resources within the courts.

The right to an adequate court/justice system appertains to us all.

Marc

One hell of a proposal

So far Labour’s proposal on the lowering of the water and electricity bills has dominated the electoral campaign.  True, it is a very important issue but it is not the only one which a future government must see to imminently.

Amongst the many proposals presented by Labour last week is that regarding the provision of free childcare services.  This measure gives women an added incentive to work, to be productive within the local economic context and not to desist from furthering their career.

-          Low female participation rate

One of the reasons for the downgrade which credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s gave Malta last week was precisely due to the low female participation rate in the labour market.  Through this proposal Labour is providing a feasible and tangible method how Malta can tackle this shortcoming in a sustainable manner.  I say sustainable because although in the first year this measure is expected to cost €3.1 million, by the fifth year this expense will turn into a surplus.

-          Dignity and self-fulfilment

This measure will give women added dignity by providing them with the opportunity to be productive and to contribute towards the economic development of the island.  One should not discard the positive effect of them being more economically independent and also increasing their purchasing power.

-          Optimal use of natural resources

As everyone knows, Malta does not have any natural resources which it can exploit.  The only resource we have is labour.  This proposal seeks to ascertain that the island makes use of this resource as much as possible.

-          Increased quality

In principle I am against the use of quotas – whether they are used to elect more women to the House of Representatives or to appoint more women on company boards.  I believe that there are – and I know that there are – women who are capable of holding high-ranking positions and/or positions of trust on their own merit, intelligence and capabilities and not just because they are women.

I feel that, in the long run, this measure will also ensure that there will be more women of quality available from which to choose.

-          Better return on investment in education

It is a fact that there are more females then males at the University of Malta, Junior College, MCAST, etc.  It is a pity that there are females who have undertaken such studies who then make little or no use whatsoever of these because they choose to place their family before their career.

Therefore, this measure will not only bring about the positive developments I have mentioned above, but it will also ensure that the investment being made on a yearly basis in education will be put to a better use within the Maltese economy – it will ensure that there will be a better return on the investment made.

This proposal is a positive one on numerous levels – not only for women but also for Malta’s economy.

Full points.

Marc

Ic-cuc Malti

Following yesterday’s news that a higher deficit was recorded in the September quarter of last year, today international credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s has downgraded Malta’s long-term rating.

Leaving aside the very ironic timing of the news – what, coming just hours after the PN launched their ‘Finanzi fis-sod’ billboards – Tonio Fenech has once again resorted to spin and hypocrisy.  According to Fenech this downgrading is the fault of the Opposition because it did not vote in favour of the budget he presented towards the end of 2012.

Fenech, as is his want, is blaming everyone and his brother for his own failures and crass incompetence.  Spin will get you nowhere Mr Fenech.  Never has any Opposition ever voted in favour of a budget presented by the Government of the day.  Didn’t one of your legion of consultants tell you as much?

Likewise, when Lawrence Gonzi stated that the budget would be a vote of confidence in the Government he was not re-inventing the wheel but stating something obvious.  This is because a budget is what is known as a money bill, and is per se a vote of confidence.

Now how could any Opposition member in his right senses vote for the budget and say he or she has confidence in the Government of which you formed part?  The Government, please note, which fell because of its inability to pass the budget presented as it could not muster the required parliamentary majority for the budget (and ergo the vote of confidence) to pass.

To further show how hypocritical Fenech is being, consider this scenario:

a)      The Labour Party is voted into government on 9 March; and

b)      Tonio Fenech is re-elected to Parliament – whether as PN leader (God help us all) or as an MP.

So from Fenech’s words, come October/November 2013 Fenech will vote in favour of the budget presented by the Labour Government of the day.  If he is willing to do so, he should say this clearly and unequivocally so that when the day of the vote arrives the people will be able to judge whether he stays true to his word or not.

Will Fenech take up this challenge?  For some reason I have my doubts.  Consistency was never his strong point any way.

Will Xarabank or Gonzi+ dedicate a whole programme to the negative outlook given by S&P or is Alan Bates a more important subject?

Marc

Inconsistency

Some years back, local councillors were allowed some form of ‘pocket money’ whilst they held office.  This ‘pocket money’ is, by law, linked to the attendance of councillors during Council meetings.  This measure was introduced by the then Parliamentary Secretary for Local Councils – an office falling directly under the Office of the Prime Minister.

Yesterday, one of the Labour Party proposals was that Members of Parliament (MPs) are paid their honoraria according to their attendance.  Lawrence Gonzi reacted to this by saying that MPs should not be treated like schoolchildren.

So would one be right to conclude that Lawrence Gonzi considers local councillors to be schoolchildren?

Could this be another case of Lawrence Gonzi not knowing what his own Office (through the Parliamentary Secretary) was doing? 

This story sounds all too familiar to the one when he insisted that the Local Council elections cannot be brought forward and that this was why the General Elections had to be held on 9 March.  Clearly, this was a blatant lie.

Gonzi has become synonymous with inconsistency. 

He is the Labour Party’s biggest asset.

Marc

A man with no shame

So this morning Gonzi was reported as asking where Labour is getting its electoral campaign funds. 

Why didn’t Gonzi say that the Galdes Report on Party Funding was presented in 1995.  Today we are in 2013 and NOTHING has happened in this regard...no progress...zilch.

To put this time into perspective, someone who was born in 1995 would today be eligible to vote.

What does this say about successive PN governments and their propulsion towards accountability and transparency?

This guy cannot stop shooting himself in the foot.  He actually seems to be enjoying it.

He has, undoubtedly, become Labour’s biggest asset.

Marc

Corruption

I am no economist – even if inadvertently described as one in a recent local newspaper (http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/Alfred-Sant-s-nephew-to-replace-uncle-on-party-ticket-20121201).  My economic credentials so far are an O-level in the subject which I obtained quite a few years back – more years than I would like to remember.

I do not consider myself competent to comment on the intricacies contained in any budget that is presented before the House of Representatives.  The Oxford Dictionary describes the budget as “an estimate of income and expenditure for a set period of time”.  Generally speaking, one of the main methods of generating income for the Government is through taxation.

However, no budget ever includes a tax which has far-reaching effects on the rest of the budget and also on the country in general per se.  It is a tax which is not really ‘seen’ (except when someone is taken to court) but can be felt – whether it is perception or not like the black dust in the Fgura area was once described.  This tax is that of corruption.

It is most probably impossible to completely eradicate this social plague from our midst.  I feel it to be something too ingrained into our mentality – although, truth be told, in some cases there is a very fine line between ‘being polite’ and ‘corruption’.  And I underline ‘some cases’ purposely.

There are a plethora of safeguards which can be introduced to ensure that corruption is reduced as much as possible.  Some safeguards might not be worth the paper they are written on, whilst others might be too restrictive and inconsiderate.  I would tend to be more in favour of laws, regulations and customs which are more biased towards the latter – so as to ensure that corruption is fought and not allowed to thrive.   

By favouring rules and regulations by no way means that I am in favour of a bureaucratic approach.  I detest bureaucracy with a passion and I fully understand both the common citizen as well as businesspeople when they complain about all the red tape they are made to face.  But limited bureaucracy is a necessarily evil.

Some years back the PL had put forward various proposals meant to tackle this problem.  I look forward to a new PL government – if chosen by the electorate – implementing these proposals and any other worthwhile ideas which will attempt to fight the very expensive tax which is corruption.

Marc

Uncalled for provocation

Some days ago Labour made it known that its first mass meeting will be held in Gozo on Sunday 13 February.  Yesterday it was revealed that instead of its intended meeting on the same day on the Fosos in Floriana, the PN had changed the venue to a meeting in – wonder of wonders – Nadur, Gozo.

Now putting aside the PN’s recent fixation of copying whatever Labour is doing and putting aside that we are now used to the PN’s right hand saying one thing with its left hand doing the complete opposite, the only logical conclusion one can reach on the PN’s choice is intentional provocation.

This provocation intended to pounce upon anyone who dares not kneel before any blue-eyed person (ideally a NET-TV cameraperson) who comes within a one mile radius – with the resultant mass hysteria and Pharisees-style clothes shredding that over the years has become a trademark of PN media and its acolytes.

However, all this only serves to further highlight a major difference between the two major parties – on the one hand, the Labour Party which is trying to unite a nation in order for it to move forward towards a better future for everyone; on the other hand, the PN which seems hell-bent on creating tension and division so that the few anointed people within the inner circle may continue to run roughshod over the rest of us plebeians for another legislature.

This is also what we will be voting for on 9 March.

The importance of moving on

Since I consider myself a very moderate and balanced person, I find it very off-putting when I hear or read politically-loaded and biased comments about the 60s, 70s or 80s (not to mention previous decades).

As I did not live those times, I can only try to understand the hurt which some people still feel and the rancour which still runs through their veins till this day.  I might also agree that the past should never be completely forgotten, lest the mistakes committed then are repeated.  However, I feel that an effort must be made to put aside this resentment and to seek common ground where we can move forward.

Sectors like education, health, tourism and financial services – just to mention a few – should never be turned into political issues.  Sure enough there might be some divergences (whether ideological or otherwise) on the priorities to be implemented.  However the end to be attained should always be the common good and the best interests of our country.

This is the positive message which I feel Labour is trying to pass on.  Let us forget our past differences and let us look for ways how we can work together in order to guarantee a better future for our country and for ourselves.  Let us work together to achieve a better future for us all.  Labour is guaranteeing that even though you might not agree with it, you will still be able to work with it.

Malta can no longer afford to run on half its capacity.  Truth be told, it has never afforded to.

Marc

Labour Party: clearly the more European-minded party in Malta

Earlier today Labour declared that if elected to government in a few weeks it will appoint a Cabinet member for European affairs. 

Once again Labour has shown that having a European mind-frame does not mean blindly waving the EU flag at mass meetings, singing ‘iva, ghalina...’ or taking up a cushy job in Brussels or Strasbourg.  Having a European mind-frame includes, amongst other things, hard facts and evidence.

Remember someone saying “Judge me on what I do, not on what I say?”

Looking back a few years, one realises how immature the build up to the EU membership referendum campaign was – where the Maltese public was given the impression that it was voting for a one-way ticket to the pearly gates or a “go to jail, do not pass go, do not collect £200” ticket to eternal damnation.

The truth lies, like most things in life, somewhere in between.  EU membership for Malta had, has and will retain its benefits as well as its negative aspects whether we like it or not and whoever says so.

Unfortunately, during the more recent divorce referendum campaign it was evident that lessons had not been learnt from the referendum campaign a few years earlier.

Marc

Christmas truce – over yet?

I think this whole “truce over Christmas” was a gimmick from start to finish.

The one time I was anywhere near Dr Gonzi over this period was during the launch of a scheme for local councils on 22 December – three days before Christmas.  I hardly believe it to be coincidental that the launch of this scheme – following the launch of another three schemes a few days before – all took place during the “Christmas truce”.

Admittedly, during this brief event there was no direct reference to party politics.  However, the fact that these schemes were systematically launched during the supposed “truce period” (with photographers and camera persons in hot pursuit) further reinforced my idea that this “truce” was a sham.

If the excuse for this “truce” was really the impending Christmas season, the elections should have been held towards the end of November or the beginning of December.  In this manner everything would have been over in time for everyone to truly enjoy this time of the year as best they wish.

But clearly, the ‘national interest’ has long been superseded by ‘what is in the interest of the party’ in government.

It is a very perilous situation when the latter is always taken to be congruous with the former.

Very perilous indeed.

Marc

I have wanted to start this blog for quite a while but I never got down to setting it up.

As today is the start of a new year, it feels like the right time to take this step…a new year, a new blog kind-of-thing.

I will keep this, my first post, simple and just wish everyone all the best for 2013.

Here is to discussing ideas, issues and policies that will bring about the best solutions for our country at this moment and in the future.


Cheers.


Marc