Sunday, 13th July 2008
Why I’m going for it
I do not normally promote myself in a hard sell manner since I have always believed that self-praise is no recommendation. However, since some of my fellow bloggers such as Charles Buttigieg and Ray Fava publicly wished me well in my bid to be elected as Labour’s next general secretary I feel I owe it to them and others to set out my stall before the total media ban agreed to in the last meeting of the National Executive becomes effective on Monday, July 14, 2008. So here goes.
Ever since I got back to work after the General Election I started receiving phone calls from numerous activists from all across the party spectrum encouraging me to stand for the post of General Secretary of the Malta Labour Party. These calls increased after I took part in Pierre Portelli’s politics talk show on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 on NET TV. People told me that they liked my style and saw it as the sort of approach Labour needs from the person, who is essentially its CEO, when the GS appears on the media.
So, after giving this bid much thought and consideration – after all I have a successful professional career which I will have to put on hold if I get elected – I have decided to let my name go forward and throw my hat into the ring.
Following the leadership election the Joseph Muscat - Anglu Farrugia – Toni Abela tandem has already shown that it is definitely up to the task and that it is working intelligently to regroup the party and then to get on with the important task of offering a credible and positive alternative to the jaded Nationalist Government which is reneging on the 350 odd promises that it made prior to the March General Election with every day that passes.
It is because of these new opportunities that this new political season within Labour is offering that I have decided to stick to my decision to offer my services to Labour. After all, this very hard-working, fresh and enthusiastic new leadership team deserves the best possible administration it can acquire to achieve its goal of a winning generation.
I have very clear ideas about how to improve the party organizationally from its roots. I also definitely want to get back the lost sheep. If the delegates give me their trust, this will be a priority I will work on with the collaboration of our local committees. My vision for Labour is for it to be a really professional, modern, outward looking party which is capable of appealing to its traditional support base but which can also connect with the young, new, ICT-driven Maltese generation. Connecting to the new and first time voters will, thus, also be one of my priorities.I believe - to borrow a phrase from Shirley Williams, that politics is for people – but to achieve this it also has to be a politics of substance not just pretence at presentation.
I will also work to improve the party’s finances in a way which will ensure that it has more than one source of income and yet will in no way be dependent on big business on state financing only.
For me genuine and clean, no strings attached donations by sincere admirers and supporters are welcome, as is income from any business venture which feasibility studies and well worked out business plans indicate we should go for. Revenue thus generated will be used to engage the best political campaign professionals available together with Maltese understudies who will be trained and retained by the party. I will also invest in training opportunities for all the party’s activists as I firmly believe that our party is only as good as the quality of its grass roots volunteer activists.
While doing all this I also pledge to remain readily accessible to and in contact with the party’s activists and the general public while remaining with my feet firmly planted on the ground and definitely not letting the aura of the position go to my head.
Finally, whatever the outcome of the election on August 4, I will respect the decision of the delegates and pledge to continue to serve Labour to the best of my ability in any other way that I may be asked to help, as I have always done during the 27 years in which I have been a Labour activist.
RSS
Comments
I had previously commented about an abhorrent incident that occurred in the run-up to this election. Someone who was clearly from the pro-Jason camp circulated a disgusting e-mail among party delegates unfairly depicting Mr Grixti as a PN "lackey" for accepting to be interviewed on NETTV by Pierre Portelli. I am morally convinced that Mr Grixti was and remains loyal to his party. This disgusting incident should qualify for inclusion as a prime example to explain the idiom "The end justifies the means".
It was expected that bloggers ( both pro and anti ) on this VERY site would, at least, deign to stand up for Mr Grixti in admiration for his disregard for this public indignity that he suffered and in solidarity with him. The fact that nobody bothered to comment may lead one to conclude that some are more intent to comment on trivialities rather than on matters of substance.
The quotation marks in CJB comment are my mistake. What was actually said by him was much worse. According to him there is a "PN Gospel" that according to me says that "The end justifies the means. We win elections, we can control control our domestic differences behind closed doors, we therefore do not need to be so fussy so fussy about democracy because as it is its working for us"
According to his twisted logic that is an honest paraphrasis of what I actually said "The proof of the pudding is in the eating"
(1) pompous,
(2) bombastic,
(3) innuendo,
(4) tongue in cheek, and,
(5) swallowing a bait, hook, line, and sinker!
:-)
Quote.CJButtigeg flies in the face of truth and easily verifiable facts by pretending that he only intervened to give his "views about the meaning of two idiomatic phrases".unquote
No reference to contents from heavy tomes to back arguments will be made. This practice may be objectionable to those not used to consult reference books (probably regarding them as similar to firewood) for their enlightenment and relying on their innate intuition to back arguments.
The term " the proof of the pudding is in the eating " doesn't concern unorthodox ingredients used as recipes compared with the resulting pudding taste. It means that solid proof is required before passing judgement on any matter; appearances and empty promises don't hold water in this regard.
The term "The end justifies the means" is in effect a false doctrine on ethical and moral grounds. Evildoings cannot be regarded otherwise even when employed towards a justifiable cause. The unscrupulous whose conscience can be stretched to accomodate coveting every desire may find the saying suited to their ends.
The two idioms are completely incompatible. The second promotes what is ethically objectionable while the first emphasises the necessity of producing proof to support claims.
The names of some authorities are being bandied about in a strained and unconvincing attempt to gloss over the very important difference between the two idioms. Quotations from these authorities are being used much in the same way as a drunk person uses a lampost, for support rather than illumination.
Regardless of what one puts into a pudding, it is the result that counts. Is the pudding good and tasty? This eating is the proof of the pudding.
Does it matter how the thing was cobbled together? That it was cooked over a bonfire of old Playboy magazines and /or surplus holy books? Not at all; it is the result that counts. The unorthodox means that were used are fully justified by the exquisite result.
So, you see, the two clichés are not necessarily incompatible. (Although, as clichés, I personally abhor their use, jointly or severally.)
Of course, any reference to clowns, regardless of whether professional or amateur, that is inferred, stated or implied is purely intentional and totally unregretted!
CJButtigeg flies in the face of truth and easily verifiable facts by pretending that he only intervened to give his "views about the meaning of two idiomatic phrases". That is evidently wrong. He took the liberty of monkeying around with what I actually wrote ("The proof of the pudding is in the eating") and substituting it by the unethical and immoral "The end justifies the means" because in his infinite wisdom the two are almost interchangeable. Evidently he hoped that no one would spot his trickery! He then proceeded to criticize ethical standards which he attributed to me but which I categorically disclaim. Adding insult to injury he then accused me of gobbledygook, of being a pitiful person, of losing an argument and trying to impress by praising myself.
How on earth do you expect to penetrate through such a maze of illogicality.
@ The pitiful people who resort to gobbledygook either to impress or as a weakness to get around a lost argument and during the process try to demonise and\or humiliate their opposing number.- "Self - praise is no recommendation" and “Those who do not read ( or misinterpret) are no better off than those who cannot.”
QED.
I had simply intervened to give my views about the meanings of two idiomatic phrases.
I can't be bothered to read what Mr O'Rourke of Ohio University says about any different interpretations. O'Rourke may be an expert in American English - a language different from Queen's English - on which our educational system is based and in which we're supposed to be knowledgeable about.
According to Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase & Fable (Cassell) the term "The end justifies the means" signifies that evil means may be employed to produce good results. It is a false doctrine condemned by various Popes for maintaining that one can be unscrupulous to achieve aims considered to be good by one's ethical standards.
According to the same source, the term "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" means
that actual performance constitutes the true test. Not appearance, promises or empty words, for the proof for testing food deliciousness is taste.
I strongly maintain that the significances of the two idioms are worlds apart.
(1) Re JPO case - the former General Secreatary Saliba stated that even if JPO has been involved in the case, nothing will be revealed so as to gain votes
(2) Re Surcharge - Hon Austin Gatt has criticised the Opposition for doing the Hedging Agreement which proved that eventually it was a good decision of doing so and also at the election time Hon Prime minister never promised us that surcharge eventually will rise to 95%
(3) Re Privitisation of the Dockyard - certainly the workers prior election were never told that they will be given the "Early Retirement Scheme" but on the contrary they were told that thair job is secure
(4) Re EUR conversion - Government held up the prices till end of March but nowadays every retail outlet shot prices up
(5) Re Transport reform - Reform has been mentioned first time in 1992 - no progress done
Andrew, these are only few and you know that there are much and much more failures.
You are absolutely correct when you consider my comments as "not conducive to bloggers' entertainment". I myself never aspired to be a clown or any other type of public entertainer.
Sweeping statements are the bi-product of extreme bias and attract a lack of credibility to the author. How can anybody declare that the PN has been a total failure beats me. The PN has had its fair share of shortfalls and failed miserably on a number of issues however they had a gross success in winning elections. The reasons for their successes as well as the failings can’t be given in 200 words.
The above equally applies to Labour yet like Stephen I think that Labour is a better party but naturally Andrew has a different opinion.
Just stating the obvious I guess.
You see, and I'll try to keep this simple, the concept of totality is predicated by the consideration that there is nothing that is more of a failure.
Self-evidently, since the MLP is a vastly more profound failure than the PN (I'm taking it at face value that the PN is a failure, purely for the sake of this discussion) it is the MLP that is the total failure, while the PN, se mai, is only a relative failure.
Naturally, anyone with half a brain knows that the PN is not a failure, but that's an argument for another day.
Some people resort to gobbledygook either to impress or as a weakness to get around a lost argument and during the process try to demonise and\or humiliate their opposing number. It is my opinion that, sadly, Dr. Saliba MD fits in that category like a kin glove.
I’ll consider further ado on this item as superfluous and certainly not conducive to bloggers entertainment. I therefore call it a day.Dr.Saliba MD may however feel free to keep on going with his gibberish to entertain his sort.
In closing I would make a general appeal for more sensitivity when making remarks that may offend the feelings of less fortunate people. In the mean time the Chairman of KNPD is investigating these particular remarks and his comments are being awaited.
As far as I am concerned, and you are free to disagree, I insist that if one takes the interpretation as ‘anything may go in the pudding mix as long as it comes out of the oven tasting good’, the end has been justified.
Now analyse this if you will.” Will you never learn not to distort other people's messages because this demolishes your own entire contribution?
I never said, nor do I believe, that the "end justifies the means". What I said was that "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". Translating for the benefit of the mentally challenged”....... Grammatical errors put aside, Dr. Saliba MD.very conveniently put me in a type category and then labelled the category en masse. How would PJ Mifsud feel if he were maliciously included by a medical practitioner in that category?
P
@PJ Mifsud
Firstly if you go back to my initial comment you will find that I wasn’t quoting Dr. Saliba when I wrote that the end justifies the means. That was my expressed opinion about his attitude however contrary to your interpretation ‘Longman’ proves how crudely synonymous the two clichés are.
It sounds as if ‘Longmans’ interpretation which attests my conclusion, only gives one interpretation of the idiom out of many others. Since it appears that like me, you are keen on research, you may find it interesting to go into more details by reading what Michael O’Rourke from the Dept. of Philosophy at the University of Ohio has to say about this particular proverb and I quote “For a common and widely used proverb, it is surprising that “the proof of the pudding is in the tasting” does not lend it to uniform interpretation. It isn’t difficult to find a number of divergent analyses, whose differences are instructive.”
Qabbizitli d-dmugh!!!! Certainly, my great leader knows my integrity and whatever you write on me he won't believe you. Grow up mate - a die hard PN supporter wrting to the MLP leader........ this really makes me laugh... as if I'm going to be punished for doing voluntary work!!!!
Yes, I reaffirm what I've said - PN is total failure. Just look at what your failure party promised in the last 20 years and what actually have delivered!
One can have a lot of voters who cannot even think in an organisation .MFA and MLP come to mind as good local examples.
@ Dr Francis Saliba : don't waste your time with people who twist other people's words. Just ignore them.
In my opinion you fell in a trap when you used "mentally challenged" even though it is a PC word.
I think that you were unprofessional and not myself since you have opened a scathed attack on me when you don't even know me!! So again please be practical and at least try to interest yourself in local politics prior to say such things.
Many thanks for quoting Longman's Dictionary to confirm that Mr CJButtigieg was not justified in substituting my phrase "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" by the morally objectionable one of "The end justifies the means".
"Mentally challenged" is a new euphemistic buzz word applied to any degree of intelligence that falls below the maximum level. I myself did not apply it to Mr Buttigieg but he chose to do so himself. I was clearly referring to any readers of this blog who were not smart enough to spot Mr Buttigieg's sleight of hand.
According to the Longman Dictionary of English Idioms (Longman, 1980) the idiomatic phrase "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" means
The real worth of any idea, machine etc. is discovered only when it is put into practice or use.
The literal meaning for the colloquial phrase "The end justifies the means" is given as follows:
If a result is good, it does not matter if the methods used to achieve the result are unfair, unjust, violent etc.
In my opinion, Mr. Buttigieg, the two idioms are not synonymous.
The term "mentally challenged" is not included in the said reference book. Referral to dictionaries proved futile since the phrase isn't included as a single entry. I won't attempt to give its meaning, especially since Mr Buttigieg mentioned that it's a medical technical term.
I've come across the term several times but it was never used to indicate "a category of humans having a particular IQ level". Hence I never bothered to look it up as I assumed it meant "to be challenged on a mental level".
I hope that this may help to settle your academic argument.
Feel very pity for you, saying that my great leader Joseph has no room for me but just to put you into the picture I'm a former MLP mayor and MLP councillor since 1999. So before you opt to say silly things, it is much better for you to investigate about REAL facts. And yes, PN is a total failure - promises something and do the other way round!
You do not answer a plain simple question by asking more convoluted ones. By so doing you are tacitly admitting that on present showing the MLP opts for an absolute majority or a relative majority system of voting to suit the needs of particular candidates for particular party posts - that is the sum total of its zeal for democracy.
Answering your irrelevant questions:
What matters most is that the PN manages its internal elections, general elections and referenda without major earthquakes, smoothly and most successfully as proven by its long tenure of office. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I admire your optimistic hope that in the foreseeable future the MLP will be able to put its electoral shenanigans in some sort of order so that it could eentually become a useful loyal opposition with a credible chance to become a posible alternative government.
That is my personal version of a real zeal for democracy.
Since you promised to provide ample examples, without being too academic, can you please explain to me, in plain language, which of the two systems used to conduct MLP internal elections is the more democratic and whether the system that is less so has its spirit/application bordering on the dictatorial:
(a) The 50% + 1 system used to elect the party leader OR
(b) The ' First past the post ' system used to elect the party General Secretary
Thank you
@PJ Mifsud. Since we’re being academic, as a rule democracy demands from an affinity group to put up with its statute. But this does not mean that all democratic rules are equally democratic. Moreover although the letter of a law may be democratic its spirit and\or application might be very dictatorial. I can give you ample examples.
Part 2
MLP delegates may come to regret their unwise decision regarding the re-election of Jason Micallef in future. The latter's stubborn decision to contest, notwithstanding his abysmal past performance, and his eventual success can be compared to Dr Sant's decision to withdraw his resignation and stand for re-election in the wake of the 2003 Referendum/General Elections MLP debacle. The resulting outcome is clear to all and sundry.
I prefer to go along with Evarist Bartolo's wise appraisal of the situation/farce as reported in "The Times" a couple of days ago. He commented (not his actual words) that the more things appear to change within the MLP organisational framework, the more he is convinced that a STATUS QUO situation is being effectively maintained.
@ Francis Saliba. Hope you do not mind a question for an answer to your question. Is the election system at PN different than Labour’s? If it is can you spell out the difference?
And, since your emotions dwell so much on historical occurrences equating them with current events, do you not see a lot of variables in the way EFA and Gonzi were promoted as opposed to Labour’s current leader?
Labour is progressive and will not oppose the will of the majority which chose the relative majority system. Times are changing and the general conference, with the required simple majority rule may decide to amend the statute to enhance the current system. This may happen sooner than you think because nobody owns the MLP except the people.
A final and pertinent question- Do you think that the PN will ever manage to garner enough support at its General Council to dismiss JPO from the parliamentary group?
Part 1
The Times 5th August issue reported inter alia:
" An anonymous e-mail circulated just hours before the election carried a photo of Mr Micallef with party leader Joseph Muscat with a caption reading that the party needs a General Secretary who is loyal to the leader, rather than one who is a PN "lackey", it continued, under a photo showing Mr Grixti with PN TV presenter Pierre Portelli during an NET TV interview ".
It's degrading to what base levels one can stoop and what unethical methods employed in an effort to attract support. Apart from cutting a good figure during the Portelli interview, Alfred Grixti maintained his MLP loyalty throughout.
Unfortunately, I had foreseen things might eventually go this way (see previous blog). A two-horse race was required for Grixti to emerge victorious. But, in a democracy, it's the organisational regulations that rule. That doesn't necessarily imply that one organisation is more democratic than another, Mr Buttigieg. In addition, any contender, notwithstanding his/her low backing, cannot be obliged to pull out of the race. I remain convinced, however, that Alfred Grixti would've made an excellent General Secretary having a strong appeal to floating voters.
The great conundrum:
Why is the 50% + 1 voting system the preferred one for electing the party leader but, in the case of the party general secretary, "to show its zeal for democracy" the MLP adopts the totally different one of the "first past the post" system?
It would appear that the "zeal for democracy" is a variable commodity varying with the identity of the personalities involved!
It would be stating the obvious that I’m not feeling pretty chuffed at the moment seeing Jason re-elected however contrary to your conclusion this result came about due to Labour’s zeal to democracy. Because the MLP is the strongest democratic institution we have in Malta today and with all your bullshit you will not be able to convince the staunchest PN supporter otherwise.
Once again you have demonstrated that you are not very familiar with the norms and irony of democracy one of which being the principle of relative majority like the type our present government enjoys.
Better not to talk about democracy because your party is a total failure!! Grow up mate!
The result shows clearly that your party is not interested in democracy and fair play. Had the simple majority (50% + 1) rule been in place, the result could very well have been different.
The question now remains whether you (and others) can continue to work with Mr. Micallef who may for a while change his attitude but as they say - Min jitwieled tond ma jmutx kwadru!
Joseph Muscat may very well rue the moment he decided (or pushed) to run and become leader of a party which is prone to shoot itself in the foot at every given opportunity.
Good luck with your future endeavours and feel proud that you have contributed to the democratic process of this country, although not to your party's - wasn't not your fault ! Too bad.
@Dr.Saliba: As a Maltese citizen,I thank you for putting the interests of the Maltese people, before your personal interests. It must of been hard for you.
@Alfred Grixti: Listen to your brother's comment, don't forget where you came from, should you get elected. Help Joseph continue with the healing. Also a little of the subject, elected or not.Fr.Vella needs help in restoring St.Dominic's painting. If you haven't done so, give him a call, and offer some help. GOOD LUCK ALFRED.
A PN supporter hoping for a stronger opposition.
@ Joe Martinelli. I owe you an apology. My last posting re Wally Vella-Zarb was addressed in your regard erroneously as it was meant for Dr. Francis Saliba and I realised my mistake after it was sent and posted. Got a bit heated under the collar I guess due to our August heat.
Wallace Vella-Zarb.The phrase ‘square peg in a round hole’ means not fit in, out of place. Elementary Mr. Watson. A square hole is more difficult to dig than a round one. The mixing up of the phrase was intentional to emphasize the dire difficulties I see in Wallace’s efforts in trying to convince an inconvincible.
Wally is an extremely smart cookie which explains why he supports Labour and I’m sure that he does not need imported brains to tell him the obvious nor does he need to be patronised .
Your gesture should not be forgotten..
WallaceVellaZarb continued to say "THAT (meaning the NP) is your party, THAT is when I decided to start voting". That implies that in practical terms he does not really believe that "it works both ways" equally.
@WallaceVella Zarb.
Have patience with Charles J Buttigieg. He did not mean that your brain, even when fully functional, is anything like a "round" peg nor that your skull is something akin to a "square hole". He means well but he has an unfortunate habit of mixing his metaphors.
Allow me to nit-pick a little - you did realize that Wally Vella Zarb's post started with 'it works both ways' right?
When will we realize that both parties have done some pretty nasty things to each other in the past? Politics in Malta is not some sort of good vs evil battle. Hating a political party for a grudge which is a quarter of a century old (or older) is a little bit sad. Both sides have to move on.
From my own personal experience it was the MLP that "did not accept that a man could be professional and apolitical at work". As a Police Medical Officer, the MLP did not permit me to continue to be professional and apolitical in exercising my medical duties. It expected me to jump on its band wagon and connive with a blatantly politicised police force that behaved as an actual acomplice of the violent MLP mobs and regularly omitted to bring known culprits to justice.
I was not given a transfer. In the eyes of the MLP that would have been too good for me. So an attempt was made to frame me and secure my dismissal. When that failed because of manifestly perjured evidence I was still forced to retire compulsorily and illegally "on grounds of public interest". I suffered that injustice for twelve solid years before my compulsory retirement was declared to have been a "miscarriage of justice" and I was eventually reinstated.
As usual, you conveniently mention the periods 1971-1987 and 1996-1998. I also remember the 1960’s when it was well nigh impossible to find a decent employment if one was not a banner-waving Nationalist and a ‘devout’ churchgoer. I also recall very vividly the wrecking of the Auberge d’Aragon during the post election ‘celebrations. Even closer to home is the endless series of transfers to outposts where my “services are more urgently required”, places as diverse as Gozo and Hal Far. The underlying reason for these transfers was the fact that I had delivered under a Labour Government. . A Nationalist administration did not accept the concept that a man could be professional and apolitical in his work.
Incidentally, I was not even registered as a voter at that time, let alone a member of a political party!
THAT is your party; THAT is when I decided to start voting.
As for “broadening my horizons”, please do not attempt to patronise me. My work took me to fourteen countries ranging from Puerto Rico to Finland and involved technical matters as well as high level negotiations; I was not selling magazine subscriptions!
Do you just read my comments on this blog and on others too? Do you not read the MLP's apologists finding fault with every government project? Your standard version is that whatever the NP government does a Labour government can do better!! Yes, of course, your party has proven just that between 1971 and 1987 and again between 1996 and 1998.
No wonder I chose to stay in Canada, however imperfect, cold or scorching hot and how heavily taxed, but like any other Maltese I am resourceful and had the luck of experiencing another way of life, far more disciplined and orderly than the Maltese way. This country is made up of umpteen nationalities, the majority of whom abide by the laws of the land whether enacted by Liberal, Conservative or NDP governments. Election excitement is over in 72 hours (if that) and the morning after the election the sun still rises and we all have to work for the next dollar.
Do people complain here? Of course they do and there are many who prefer to stay home and collect welfare - same, as I suspect they do in Malta.
Please grow up and broaden your horizons!
"I wonder what the MLP has on its plans after August 5 to keep us on the edge of our seats. I am quite certain that it will invent something else to entertain us with."
Likewise, we are sure that, whatever the MLP comes up with, Your Eminence will certainly find some flippant fault with it.
It is to our collective detriment that you decided to remain in Canada; had you remained here you would possibly aim at becoming CEO of Malta inc., and all our problems would be solved! :
YOU DESERVE WITHOUT A DOUBT, THE POST OF THE GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE GREAT MALTA LABOUR PARTY..
THIS TIME IT SURELY SHOULD BE YOURS...
AWGURI MY FRIEND.. OUR BELOVED PARTY IS IN DIRE NEED FOR YOUR PROFESSIONAL AND SINCERE SERVICES...
GOOD LUCK...
Either the MLP reads this blog and took a hint from Charles J Buttigieg or CJB had some inside information!
Since this blog belongs to Alfred Grixti, I would like to congratulate him for his improved chances at winning the contest (democratically or not).
I am sure that Alfred had nothing to do with persuading Messrrs. Cauchi and Chetcuti to withdraw from the race!
I wonder what the MLP has on its plans after August 5 to keep us on the edge of our seats. I am quite certain that it will invent something else to entertain us with.
One of the things we hate acknowledging in us is a critical spirit. We want to put the best spin on ourselves, of course, so we give this quality nice names like “reflection,” and “being properly analytical.” Like the rest of the world I want people to access me as,diplomatic,nice and positive all the way however I have too much love for the Malta Labour Party and very little personal ambition to stay tranquil and untrue to myself to sit pretty and look nice when I suspect the menace of another electoral defeat.
I’ve known Alfred Grixti since our 1987 campaign, his spiritual and physical energy then has been enhanced with maturity,mellow,leadership material,charisma and a rock solid academic background. He ought to be our General Secretary. I would vote for him and save the day.
Although some of our conference delegates might not have all the required ability to recognise a good Manager when they see one, the situation as presented to them today is so clear that they can see in Jason Micallef a really nice and vivacious person however the sad fact is that he has proved over and over again that he simply does not have the strengths required for this high office, and his weaknesses do not need vivifying
The PN are using all their arson on Jason to promote a sense of ‘esprit de corps’ which translates to a common spirit of comradeship, enthusiasm, and devotion to a cause among our delegates and hence voting for him. Because his lack of abilities work to their obvious advantage.
A good number of Labour well wishers, myself included, are currently very active to minimise the danger of the 2003 infamous strategy and its attendant fiasco which only brought us tears while the Nationalists are still smiling. That diabolical thought would send shivers down the true Labourites spines. Do we really and truly can’t foresee the consequences of actions that may take us to that situation?
Delegates gave the PN a non-stop headache by choosing a rising star in Joseph...they may knock out another good blow to the Perfect Party..the one that NEVER commits a mistake and always emerge winners come what may..........
MLP Adminisrative posts election regulations dictate that the contestant garnering the relative majority of votes gets elected. With six contestants vying for the post of General Secretary, it is quite possible for Jason Micallef to get elected as no majority vote is required and the anti-Micallef brigade may disperse their votes among the other five contenders.
Even were the contestants to be whittled down to Grixti, Vella Bonnici and Micallef, as suggested by Mr Buttigieg, it would still be possible for the latter to claim victory were the opposing votes to be equally split between the first two contenders. In my opinion, if other less-quoted contestants aren't convinced to step down, Alfred Grixti might as well risk the possibility of failing to get elected.
The opinion poll published by The Times listing Grixti as the leading contender with 40.3% of the votes merely reflects the opinion of the Times readership. This is composed of an almost balanced chunks of Labour, Nationalist and floating voters with hardly any MLP delegate being represented. What actually counts at the end of the day is the final say as expressed by MLP delegates.
Who was it that once said:
Dictatorship will always argue that there are no reliable alternatives to it?
Branson's quip ' a benign dectatorshoip is always the best option as long as I am the dictator' or something to that effect, always brings a knowing smile to my face :)
Regarding the solving of the Leadership issue and the 'fresh air coming in the glass house', let me tell you Charles, that letting back in the likes of Dom and KMB, is admitting stale air, not fresh at all.
The 'sweet smell of electoral success' is not earned by sitting on fences. It requires bold decisions. One cannot be afraid of making mistakes because only those who do nothing can possibly claim of not making mistakes.
You stated that I am trying to convince you. I simply do not understand your assumption. Convince you of what?
I only comment on what you write here and what grand ideas come to your mind from time to time. That does not mean that sometimes, though infrequently, I don't agree with you.
For example, I quite understand and sympathize with you that you would like to see Labour in glory. Any supporter of a football team, political party etc. would share that feeling, but it takes a whole team, a whole organization to pull in the right direction in order to accomplish its goals.
The MLP still has to learn to change its methods with the times.
Still unable to answer a simple straight question, eh?
Still slippery as an eel?
Still carping about MEPA? In Labour's days there was no MEPA, but there were Ministers who gave away/leased public land/issued permits as they pleased, received gifts etc. etc.
Still think the JPO screwed an election victory for you? The JPO affair is small potatoes compared to suspect dealings of the 70s and 80s. by some of your Ministers and MPs. Anybody resign then?
Thank goodness you solved the leadership problem! We shall see whether it makes any difference in 2013 and even if Joseph will still be leader then!
Sure you have valid contestants for GS and Alfred Grixti seems the most qualified and most popular with the general public and Labour card carrying members, but will Jason's machine prove to be too strong? We shall see.
In the meantime, clarify what kind of mediation, compromises, offers you had in mind offering Jason so he can step aside?
Would you not be interfering with the democratic process where every contestant has a chance at the prize? Or are you admitting that Jason's 'machine' is digging up the level playing field?
I KNOW HIM VERY WELL AND THATS WHY I AM TALKING!!
Since you are having a hard time trying to convince us to no avail why don’t you try to convince your other friends to sort out their mess created by MEPA,JPO and the rest? Hallina Guz,
Read my WHOLE comment - not half of it.
If the other half is still not what you implied, why hide your hand? Tell us what your theory is and let us decide how brilliant your suggestion is.
I wrote that the other possibility, however improbable, would be to negotiate with Jason Micallef to please go away quietly. Comment on this part Charles and on my remark that either way (negotiating with three or with one), it goes contrary to the 'democratic' process you at the MLP boast so much about.
You wrote: 'Now is the time for a respectable personality to come forward ,mediate and offer an amicable compromise'.
Mediate with whom? Offer what? You seem to know what's best. Are you positioning yourself to be that 'mediator'?
Would be nice, once in a while, if you express yourself clearly and not through riddles and parables. Even so, we can still read you like a book. You are a respectable gentleman, so why make half a suggestion? Go for it Charles, it may be the greatest event for the MLP since 1996.
Difficult situations require actions that would normally be considered extreme!
Alfred Grixti is the ideal man for the post of GS. His track record and aura with both Labour activists and floating voters is enough to confirm such a statement. Stay the course, Alfred: you'll make it!
“Let me get this straight.
Your suggestion is perhaps that some 'mediator' steps in, negotiates with the 'other three' to drop out and to make it a Jason Vs Alfred contest? “
You got it all wrong but then that’s how you end up when you ass(u)me.
Let me get this straight.
Your suggestion is perhaps that some 'mediator' steps in, negotiates with the 'other three' to drop out and to make it a Jason Vs Alfred contest?
That is the most ridiculous (implied) suggestion and illustrates in what a hopeless mire the MLP finds itself in.
First we had the epic drama to elect a new leader, now it comes to 'persuasion' for three contestants to step aside (at a price , I suppose).
The second possible implied version is persuading Jason Micallef to go quietly - hardly possible due to his unabashed arrogance.
If most think the way Leo Brincat thinks (rightly so), then negotiations, if any, should be with Jason only. Of course, Charles, that would go against the 'zero tolerance' and the 'democratic principles' of the MLP.
But then, stranger things have happened along the way to this, now famous, 'new beginning'.
In the meantime, delegates are furiously painting themselves into yet another corner.
Barring the potential risk of Jason Micallef pulling it through, the most likely contestants to win the race are Alfred Grixti and Joe Vella Bonnici in that order. The other contestants although valid do not have much support. Had I still been managing a company and looking for a capable person to take on a senior position I will have no problem to appoint any of the two favourites as they both have the required capabilities. Our dilemma is however a little more complex.
Difficult situations require us to take actions that would be considered extreme if taken in other situations, actions which are more extreme than we normally take are considered “drastic measures”
A solution albeit drastic exists and must be considered seriously. It would be too patronising for me to spell it out and would also create an unnecessary revolution. What we are after is the evolution of a progressive political party without the need of heads to roll. Nor are we after humiliating any party member.
Now is the time for a respectable personality to come forward ,mediate and offer an amicable compromise. Not an easy task but we do not have an easy situation.
I hope I can put my stomach medicine back in my medicine cabinet.
May your wishes come true!
They ran as follows: If I am not elected I risk ending up without work. I am more or less the same age as the party leader. I apologise for past mistakes. I will mend my ways. I still have much to contribute to the party. And so on, and on, and on.
When I recently expressed my opinion (and that of many delegates who have supported Dr Muscat throughout the leadership campaign) to a key official that his position had become untenable in the wake of the electoral defeat analysis report, I was unpolitely told that when the time comes and I am proven wrong, I should not even bother to congratulate him.
This is the kind of arrogance that I hope delegates will push aside.
The party can ill-afford to make such risky and counter-productive choices in the coming days.
Tomorrow week the Labour Party will be electing its new officials.
While I pledge to respect the verdict of the party delegates, I appeal for deep reflection on their part before casting their vote.
There should be no room for divisive and controversial figures.
There are people who eminent contenders for the leadership race have made it publicly clear all along that they feel, and would continue to feel, uncomfortable working with.
Our judgment must be solely based on criteria of efficiency, competence and reliability, as well as proven track records - in full respect of the 'healing' process that the new Labour leader has launched from day one of his election to unify the various elements within the party, including those who felt dejected, rejected, snubbed and ignored in recent years.
We cannot afford to see the political 'earthquake' that Joseph Muscat unleashed upon his election as party leader ending up halted, or even worse aborted.
Some of the arguments brought forward by certain incumbents to try to hang on to their role offend one's intelligence.
I am in agreement that blaming the 'rich' for poverty or NP for MLP's travails would be sweeping statements that derail analysis.
Poverty causes low educational standards. A clean warm bed, safe roof, decent food and wear are prerequisites for a well-educated society. The process overlaps as uneduacted parents become able to provide basic needs but not a learning environment.
An interesting aspect observed during recent elections was the number of youngsters coming from labour families who voted NP. This may suggest that the MLP is still perceived as the bread and butter party that lacks colour that splashes the mystifying dream of youth. Joseph's selection may have been a reaction to this factor.
Above all, however, our society needs to become open. Unless we accept our realities, we can not move forward. We can not pretend any more to be a modern European state when we lag behind in matters of economy (the least average number of participants in economy due to very low female participation), poor TV fare, education and environment etc. We need to call a spade a spade if we are to work for a better society
It was a funeral to which I was called away and I am concerned at so many of my contemporaries slipping away but that is the nature of old age.
Concerning the subject of this blog I have to be restrained in what I write because of my own nationality, my lack of knowledge of the personalities and that I am remote from Malta geographically these days.
I am presently engaged in studying the effect of class
in today’s society-viewing it as always from my own left-wing sympathies but trying to be impartial in my judgment as in that I do not think that the rich are the cause of the poverty of the poor or that the problems facing the MLP are engineered by PN.
I spent ten years as a teacher in the east end of London and am conscious of the poor educational standards of the children of Cottonera, for instance, from where so few go on to university. Maybe MLP should address that problem.
I hope that Mr. Prictoe appreciates the fact that although we rarely agree I have a great deal of respect for him and his opinion which is always demonstrated loudly and clearly. Mr. Prictoe has now erased my doubt about his true political conviction and I have no difficulty to make a public apology for distressing him with my previous erroneous conclusion. It probably is the case that Joe and I may have more things in common than I knew. I shall therefore give Joe the required respect and allow him to give me his intelligent reaction. What’s a day or so to wait for a response after all.
As to the point you raised about our leader’s interference to have the petition rescinded, I will deal with it after you give us some specifics to give your assertion some credibility.
Your assessment of Jason Micallef, of course, is right and this maybe the only thing you and I will ever agree about.
But then, how come Joseph, your fresh, new, charismatic leader decided (solo) to do away with the request that the GS be elected by a 50% + 1 vote by a petition signed by more than the required minimum of party delegates? Is that not giving the 'power of incumbency' an unfair advantage?
Why is it that many phone calls were made resulting in the 'withdrawal' of 21 signatures thus invalidating the proposal?
A repetition of the George Abela affair?
Is this the 'true' democracy your party boasts about?
Is this the 'New political season' 'call me Joseph' has coined and trying to impress the public with?
Give me a break! This is the kind of tripe which goes on within the red glass house at
Mile End.
In simple English - things have not changed one bit and I don't care what you say.
The time has come for the top brass in the Party to do what is required of them to ascertain that the best qualified person wins this race and that will be a noble act as it will prevent another martyrdom of souls.
The contestants must and I repeat must get their heads together and act on the only solution to enhance the leadership of our young knight in shining armour. Get rid of the dead wood.
@ Peter Prictoe. “Let me reiterate that I am of the left and wish to see the left prevail in Malta. My problem is that I am most unhappy with the set-up of MLP that seems to be a collection of individuals in competition with each other whilst the unspeakable Nationalists, though having their problems, seem to work with more purpose-though actually doing very little!” Very well put old chap, How can any free thinker argue with such a statement?
I do not mind repeating myself ad nauseam that the incumbent General Secretary, to be clearer Jason Micallef proved to be a liability to the party and because of his lack of management and political abilities Labour loyalists came out bruised and hurt. The sad fact is that empowered by the typical Mediterranean pique he still has a hold on a good number of delegates.Peter I only do not agree with you when you attribute this weakness solely to the Labour camp. Gonzipn\JPO vindicates my argument.
Thanks but I I am hurriedly called away for a day or so
While battle lines seem to have been drawn (again) regarding the merits of the MLP and the NP, a blogger who has had great difficulty in persuading the others that he is indeed a socialist at heart and a laburist, having been born in Cospicua many years ago, and those who albeit sometimes with tongue in cheek methodically point out the MLP's shortcomings ... I would ask myself:
How about me?
How about getting back on track debating who's the best bet for General Secretary of the party? What do you perceive as my strong points or conversely, my weak ones? How else can I exploit my strong points and how can I shore up my weak ones?
How receptive to my aspirations is my party ? If not, why not?
Answers to these questions, I suspect, were the reasons for Alfred Grixti writing this blog to begin with!
In three weeks, the answers would be known, but by then, they would not be of much help to Alfred.
Congratulations! This time you have really excelled in dogmatic unsubstantiated assertions all buried in a morass of mixed metaphors!
There is no trace of any progressive "upward mobility" in an MLP leadership that like the proverbial English duke only "led his forces up the hill and led them down again".
I do hope that Joseph Muscat will be allowed to renovate the MLP meaningfully but he will need much more than the "sophisticated endearing" qualities so much admired by you. We are talking about a possible future Prime Minister, not a cinema idol.
I understand your frustrations. Rest assured that we know that you are one with our ideals of social justice.
Two things you may want to keep in mind:
1. '...whilst a couple of right wingers were expressing sympathy with my problems'.
That is a Nationalist 'off-the-shelf' strategy. They seek 'dissenting' voices and hang them on poles to prove that the Labour tribe is barbarian. A way to get some 'appointment' is
a. make yourself known that you are a Laborite
b. select a dissent
c. see them running with some appointment as long as you act 'Laborite with a grudge'.
2, We are also ' unhappy with the set-up of MLP that seems to be a collection of individuals in competition with each other...'
The labour Party lacks a central mechanism that ensures effective managerial rigor. Individuals rush after jobs a couple of notches above their level of competence. A managerial culture will be nibbled to the bone by a few thousand piranhas.
This is a cultural that can not be rectified by a committee.
Our hope is Joseph and deputy Anglu who understand the issues and seek to swerve their way through the shoal of piranhas.
little significance except at election times but Malta does not run in that fashion-and more’s the pity.
I have Maltese friends of both persuasions but I have to keep them in compartments. Some of them express surprise that I am Labour, Monarchical and Catholic
Blair was charismatic and tended to the centre to rob Conservatives of the middle field but Prescott was a sop to old Labour. Prescott was born a Catholic whilst Blair became one after relinquishing offic. Brown is a dour Presbyterian I believe for he was a son of the manse.
I would like to think that the Church could be a factor for unity in Malta but the divide is too deep I suspect.
What else could be unifying in Malta? Patriotism?
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel opined Dr Johnson I believe and I concur.
Well for me it is Socialism but obviously that’s not everyone’s cup of tea.
Dear Dr Saliba,
Malta is a conservative society that failed to upgrade social and economic structures under a 20 year conservative NP rule. Maltese Individuals could not, however, stay encapsulated in a time warp. The consequence is inflammation and perforation. Malta's social fabric is today suffering from peritonitis (co-habitation outside formal structures, 20% of children not living with both parents, impressive number of kids with father unknown, low education standards, gambling culture, creation of working-poor class etc)
A bulk of Labour support is as conservative as the next one and cohabitating as much as conservative Nationalists cohabitate. Labour also has its upwardly mobile, mostly progressives, yet these have to stay on the sidelines.
The point is Leadership. Malta’s current state of affairs has been brought about through years of conservative Nationalist rule. The general consensus is that Gonzi and Tonio Borg are pure conservative breed.
Any liberal tendencies within the NP comes from Gatt and Dalli, yet these tendencies seem to be inspired by a sense of self-preservation rather than a commitment to have a modern Malta.
Labour's leadership has always been progressive (even if style may have not always been sophisticatedly endearing as Joseph seems to break this mould).
Let us be consistent at least within the same comment. What you criticise as "conservative" and "asphyxiating" in the Nationalist Party you extol immediately afterwards as your hope for an MLP amalgam between "upward mobility" and the "traditional". What is sauce for the NP goose should be sauce for the MLP gander.
Of course, the emergence of "a better climate for discussion" is the hope of everyone of goodwill but deeds will speak louder than words.
You have no doubt of my and all the family's support in your bid to become Secretary General. Public opinion is definitely in your favour. Moreover, you will be in our thoughts and prayers especially over the festa week in honour of our patron saint St.Dominic, who has and will always be looking over you. I am certain that if it is God's will, St.Dominic will intercede and you will get the top job. If, eventually, you do become SG, may I humbly remind you not to forget from where we departed. How proud nannu Duminku would be to see you in such a prestigious yet demanding position.
One final reminder. If you do not make it rest assured that Daniel, Thomas, Mireille and Esther will be around to hug you and call you as they always do "HAWN ZI". Obviously. kisses will follow!
Good luck brother.
Ivan
My Comment: I did nothing of the sort. My argumentation has nothing to do with Labour Party's leadership disputes of the past but everything to do with the 'conservative' culture of the Nationalist Party, that, by the way, persits to this day.
The story of Boffa and Mintoff is another story completely and is irrelevant to the issue under discussion or to the achievements of Mintoff for the benefit of Malta and the working class.
Peter reminds us of Prof Frendo's opinion that Strickland and Mintoff were the only charismatic politicians of their time and they did get things changing at different stages of Malta's history. Joseph promises charismatic leadership and potential to be a catalyst of change. His tandem with Anglu seems to have evolved on the Blair/Prescott tandem that represented both the upwardly mobile and the traditionalists. Time will tell and a better climate for discussion will hopefully reduce emotional spin rhetoric for change to happen that will be to Malta's benefit
I live in Barnsley, a stronghold of British Labour though I take no active part in politics and I am more interested in what takes place in Malta.
Let me reiterate that I am of the left and wish to see the left prevail in Malta. My problem is that I am most unhappy with the set-up of MLP that seems to be a collection of individuals in competition with each other whilst the unspeakable Nationalists, though having their problems, seem to work with more purpose-though actually doing very little!
The forthcoming election for General Secretary is no doubt democratic though with a plethora of candidates
it seems to favour the incumbent which, though I try to avoid personalities, is unfortunate.
So glad that your clarification makes your version tally with mine - apart of course from Sir Gerald Strickland's alleged chameleon's characteristic of changing colour according to his lcation.
If you know "the filthy" rumour that was used to slander Paul Boffa you would think twice before robbing him of his achievements and attributing them to those who unseated him maliciously.
Labour needs a change. This need is felt by many (I think).
The fact that this singular need is not felt by the many candidates who have put forward their name, increasing significantly the chances of 'no change', makes one wonder how much we want the much needed change.
I am sure that Mr Grixti will be an improvement, but one would have preferred that the other 5 could come together, look at their capabilities fairly and squarely, and endorsed one candidate to ensure needed change. As things stand, the prospect of no change is too painful to contemplate. And how come there are no contenders for the marketing role? Drastic change to the rule book seems to be a surviving lifeline.
You seem to have difficulty reading my contribution within the context of the on-going discussion. I will therefore fill in the blanks for your benefit:
Doctor Francis Saliba is correct in saying that our local brand of labourites have very little in common with the British Labour Party.
History shows that a Conservative in Westminster can equate to a radical reformer in Malta. Malta's brand of conservatism as nurtured by an asphyxiating Nationalist Party in the 1930s, made out of a gentleman such as Lord Strickland, who was a Conservative true-blue MP in Westminster, a true red radical reformist in Malta, joining forces with the Labour Party of Boffa to initiate some drastic social and economic reform in the face of a Nationalist Party holding desperately to a motley status quo.
I fully agree with your recollection of events.
I do not claim that Lord Strikland was a Labourite.
The point I'm making is that Lord Strikland's policies in Malta were radical to Malta at the time and brought down on him the anger of the conservative class despite his strong religious background.
Wish you all the best
His radical stance in Malta contrasted with his Conservative pedigree in Westminster.
A political stance is influenced by circumstances applicable to a given society. The attitude of a Lobourite in an economy delivering a GDP pc of US$30,000 and incredible wealth by way of investment in other economies will be different from that of a Labourite in an economy delivering US$19,000 per capita and no outside investment of note. The stages of development are obviously different and hence priorities will influence different attitudes. Ex. We have one of the lowest female participation in any EU economy.
So when a third party tries to put spokes in a relationship between two socialists living in different economic and social realities is in my opinion cheap opportunism.
Obliged for the history lesson - though I rather lived it.
Sometime in the late nineteen thirties I won a small prize at a Mothers’ Union or something like that in Valletta which was presented by an elderly gentleman over whom everyone was making a fuss. You guessed it for it was indeed Lord Strickland -though I did not know his significance at the time.
It was about that time that I lived for a while in Vittoriosa where Paul Boffa was born and I remember seeing him after the War when he was Prime Minister but his post as leader of the Labour Party was usurped
by means of a filthy rumour spread by Dom Mintoff whom the MLP now tries to airbrush out of the scene.
I promised to keep out of the present argument as MLP struggles to find leaders but leaders are not made by committees but by the emergence of charismatic persons.
Now the object of this exercise is to quote a Maltese historian (Prof Frendo-a Nat) who states that Strickland and Mintoff were the only charismatic politicians of their time. I see no charismatic politicians in Malta or the UK of today.
Whatever you do, please do not, repeat do not, try to make sense out of d attard's comment if you want to retain your sanity. I disassociate myself from that drivel about Malta's conservative political parties, attributed to me and, help me God, I do not share with him.
The Nationalist Party was not "made out of a gentleman such as Lord Strickland". He would squirm in his grave if anyone described him as "a true red radical reformist". He did form a "compact government" with the then leader of the Labour Party ( Sir Paul Boffa) who would be just as uncomfortable as Lord Gerald Strickland to be associated with today's MLP as moulded by Dominic Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici.
"If you can keep your head, when all around you, are losing theirs and blaiming it on you ..."
It is the MLP who asphyxiated twenty years ago and still suffer from an extreme case of asphyxia.
So rare is the oxygen in the air you breathe, that you implicated Lord Strickland as being blue on one account and red in the another. On second thoughts, you may have accidentally reversed the colours. It is when Strickland joined the Labour Party (?) that he turned blue, a symptom often associated with lack of oxygen!
Doctor Francis Saliba is correct. Malta's brand of conservatism as nurtured by an asphyxiating Nationalist Party made out of a gentleman such as Lord Strickland, who was a Conservative true-blue MP in Westminster, a true red radical reformist in Malta joining forces with the Labour Party to initiate some drastic social and economic reform in the face of a Nationalist Party holding desperately to a motley status quo.
I am taking your advice and packing it in on this subject
I fear for my sanity and blood pressure.
If you have not yet realised it already please note that our local brand of labourites have very little in common with the British Labour Party. So little in fact that they would not even admit you to their fold. Don't let it disturb your equanimity.
You say - Yes we did lose three in a row but learnt our lesson. Can MLP learn its lesson?
Good Question. Will have the answer in five years time.
You say - You note that the UK Labour is in disarray...but we are still in power and who knows what will happen at the next? Good Question. We will soon know. Good Luck to Labour under Brown
You ask - If my opinion is the same as the Nationalists does that make it incorrect?
answer - It does to me, if in my opinion the opinion is in my opinion incorrect
You say - I have no time for them...
I say - Give me five
You say - they succeed and you don’t. You are making excuses for your failure.
If you consider excuses the significant overspending in the quarter leading to elections, having 11,000 new children's allowance payments in the election stretch paying full-year bulk payment entitlement, paying extraordinary amounts of tax refunds in the period leading to elections, telling transport workers no change in modus operandi on the eve of elections, hunters, jobs, (ran out sorry) I respect your opinion...
@ Charles J Buttigieg
Charles you direct your posting to me personally and I reply. Note that I write “direct” and not “directed”.
That is simply my style of writing and you should not draw anything un-towards from it.
I assure you that I was not being sarcastic and if you ask others they will tell you the same.
So I am old and under medication that impels me to write a little oddly at times - so you must excuse me.
You made the mistake of attacking me when I had not even posted on this blog and you questioned my political allegiance. I can assure you that I am a Socialist and wish to see MLP gain power.
That I take a poor view of MLP as presently constituted
is another matter.
@ M Vella
Firstly Mr Vella I am not referring to the Fascist sympathisers in Malta who disappeared into the woodwork when Italy bombed Malta in June 1940 and busts of Il Duce were hurriedly thrown into the sea at Sliema. Like my father I have always been Socialist.
I appreciate that your family was pro-British though I am no apologist for the British Empire and wish that we had treated Malta better during our period of power there.
The failure of Integration was the great disappointment of my life but I do recognise that MLP under Mintoff brought a measure of dignity to the workers even if that were to go astray later.
I still maintain hopes for MLP and I deliberately refrain from criticising PN.
That will do for the moment.
Pete, you are wasting time. I want to make three points too:
1. One can never get a straight answer from some people.
2. Some people don't know what they are talking about.
3 Others look at their party as being the best at everything - afraid to emulate anything that works better elsewhere.
Therefore the status quo is their best haven. Hence the quandary they find themselves in. They are always on the defensive and regard any genuine suggestions as 'infiltration' or 'interference'. They fail to realize that the interference and the infiltration they talk about is fostered within the confines of their very own party.
The party structure is cumbersome, too many tiers, too many managers and this fosters factions which is counterproductive. The proof is in the pudding (or frejjeg).
@D Attard
You made three specific points
1. A Labour admin is selected the same way as the NP selects its own
2. The system ensures checks and balances
3. Please note that UK Labour is in total disarray
1 I recollect that back in 1992 in Cospicua’s Rialto
Sant was chosen over Spiteri but that ever since there have been allegations of vote-stuffing. The name of Paul Muscat comes to mind.
The NP does not seem to make such a hoo-ha of the business and gets on with the task of running the country whilst MLP twitters.
2 Maybe, but did it apply to 1? Somewhere between the Rialto and the Macina maybe?
3 A standard Maltese response to any criticism is that things are just as bad in the country of the writer so one has to accept it. Is it relevant?
Is there any chance that a more positive exposition of the situation of MLP might be forthcoming?
`
Xenophobic am I? How do you see me unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign? The only foreign element I mention in my comment is the faxxist era, that pre 1940 era when a number of Maltese kids were sponsored to be guests of the Black Shirts in Rome. Are you referring to this?
Members of my family served proudly as members of the Royal Navy. My point is rational not emotional. We have known misery. Our link with Great Britain was the first step out of this misery. Strikland's efforts were an important second step. We supported integration with the UK. The Labour Party was the final motor that gave us a decent living. Mine is a testimony. That you want to hurt with snide remarks such as the MLP history you read is not well written is further hurt in itself. We do not have strong lobby groups to enable us to provide slick presentations in some areas. But we do have a real soul and capabilities to deliver on the hopes of Malta as a member of the Union.
@ Mr.Peter Prictoe. “Possibly my greatest failing is to be sarcastic sarcasm is peculiarly hurtful and obstructive on email and I would urge all Gentle Readers not to fall into that trap”. A quotation from what Mr. Peter Prictoe wrote in a different portal.
When Mr.Prictoe quoted me his comment read thus: “A quotation from what Charles J Buttigieg writes.” English is only our second language and I am fully aware of my grammatical shortcomings however even an Anglophone writer like me can interpret the choice of the word ‘writes’ instead of ‘wrote’. That’s sarcastic and sarcasm is peculiarly hurtful and destructive. It’s also stating the opposite of an intended meaning especially in order to sneeringly, slyly, jest or mock a person, situation or thing. It is strongly associated with irony, with some definitions classifying it as a type of verbal irony intended to insult or wound. And Mr.Prictoe admits that he is sarcastic.
@D Attard
Yes we did lose three in a row but learnt our lesson from that.
Can MLP learn its lesson?
You note that the UK Labour is in disarray and I have to agree but we are still in power and who knows what will happen at the next?
If my opinion is the same as the Nationalists does that make it incorrect? I have no time for them but they succeed and you don’t. You are making excuses for your failure.
An account of the origin and history of MLP can be found on the internet -and it is not very well written-but at least it indicates that MLP had its origin in the Dockyard where British expatriate workers urged their Maltese fellow workers to organise.
If you want an emotional account of family problems then a lot of us can bring up some dangers and hardships including my father at sea throughout both wars when he was bombed and torpedoed and my own childhood in the Great Depression and wartime service in Italy and Malta.
Buttigieg can answer for himself and he insulted me before I ever posted on this blog .
My country is in the Commonwealth and EU same as Malta and are you frightened by comment from abroad?
So less of the insults and more information on MLP if you please.
...'As an English Socialist interested in Malta I would like to see MLP in office but consider it unlikely because of recent past failure at elections'...
can not understand basis to your argument. UK Labour made it to Government after 3 consecutive electoral defeats. So what is your point?
You have a new leader who was not the unanimous choice of Labourites -
do not understand basis to your argument. Name any one leader who enjoyed full support of followers?
He has had foisted on him two deputies who may be considered as representing the ineffectual recent past.
Your gratuitous opinion and that of Nationalists.
You are now facing elections for General Secretary with no less than five candidates of whom the one elected may not be compatible with the new leader. Why cannot the leader select his cabinet in the same manner as is done (I suppose) by the Nationalists and the UK Labour party -both of whom are in power facing a disorganised Opposition.
1. A Labour admin is selected the same way as the NP selects its own
2. The system ensures checks and balances
3. Please note that UK Labour is in total disarray
You may patronise us to your heart's content. What Mr Buttigieg had to say is as clear as daylight. You may take exception at our opinion that you are a pseudo socialist and try to impress us with your Cospicua experience as you deride our party. My Grandfather lived in a Valletta Quarter in conditions much worse than those of the Cottonera you remember. He served the Crown as a diver at the Malta Drydocks even before you started your RAF experience. He used to bleed through his ears with every dive and suffered Faxist harrasment as did many others. It was thanks to a Socialist movement that we have moved on in life and we are proud that we are today led by a social democratic party that represents faithfully our condition and aspirations.
Because you are one of us, your derision of our party hurts like hell as we have to live our daily lives under a regime that has rendered the workers-condition to hand to mouth existance. We are proud of whom we are.
Maybe someone would answer my query below as I am dependent on the ‘net for information and at my advanced age
I tend to get confused with duplicated Maltese names and what appears to be a bureaucratic set-up at Mile End.
As an English Socialist interested in Malta I would like to see MLP in office but consider it unlikely because of recent past failure at elections and I see no perceptible change in the constitution of the party. You have a new leader who was not the unanimous choice of Labourites and he has had foisted on him two deputies who may be considered as representing the ineffectual recent past.
You are now facing elections for General Secretary with no less than five candidates of whom the one elected may not be compatible with the new leader. Why cannot the leader select his cabinet in the same manner as is done (I suppose) by the Nationalists and the UK Labour party -both of whom are in power facing a disorganised Opposition.
Where is the promised new start under an untrammelled leader?
Labour should get all its posts filled by competent and team-building professionals instead of amateur primadonnas who have literally sent the party into freefall during these last years. Moreover, party activists who think that only a change in the leader is enough to win elections do not know what they are talking about. How can a newly elected leader carry around him the same SG who has, time and again, made a complete fool of himself and still believe that he can swing around new votes to Labour?
One last comment. All those delegates who will be voting for the other contestants - Keith Grech, Joe Chetcuti, Gino Cauchi etc, will be actually voting for Jason! That's how he got there in the first place five years ago! It seems that Labour never learns! Hopefully I'm wrong and the delegates prove yet again to know what they are doing.
I have been trying to contact you, but with no luck. Kindly get back to me
Matthew
Extracts from what Charles J Buttigieg writes:
CJB: I do not think that the MLP as an organisation is working in harmony to re-elect Jason Micallef.
PP: Working in harmony with what? The sentence reads awkwardly and MLP cannot be other than an organisation.
In what way is it working?
CJB: Jason may have some individual support from some party officials but he also has a lot of opposition within the same framework.
PP: Damning with faint praise. Putting in the knife Eh? Are you drawing attention to disunity within the Party? Having denigrated Mr Micallef he is suddenly Jason
CJB: Popes are chosen this way.
PP: What way?
CJB: With monarchs and dictators it’s a different cattle of fish.
PP: Most monarchies are heredity but some are or have been elected
Some dictators have been elected
Cattle is a group name for bovine
Fish, in the popular saying, come in kettles and are usually pretty but in a mess.
Now I have taken just one paragraph of yours and I submit that it is meaningless babble.
Its 'kettle of fish' and not cattle of fish. May I refer you to www.worldwidewords.org to learn about the origins of such an expression.
1. Should a candidate (any candidate) for GS list his/her priorities? Are not the GS's priorities those of leadeship? What delegates may possibly be keen to know are qualities and abilities to implement underpinned by achievments and endorsments.
2. I fully agree that the Party desperately needs a change in GS. I have no doubt that the majority of delegates are aware of this following the pathetic performance in the last GE that left us 'broken'. So may I ask how on earth do we come to have no less than 5 candidates, a number that plays comfortably in the hands of incumbent?
Sweeping statements contain words such as "everybody", "everything", "nobody" or "nothing" (essentially words of totality, which leave nothing, or very little, out), and will therefore be very easy to disprove, if one can find just one example where it is incorrect.
“Having the party machine pushing the present SG “is typical. If you want to make a credible point be specific and to the point. If you follow my contributions you would have came across comments on the power of incumbency and they were specific. But there again my criticism is constructive as I am a social democrat and wish all the good things to happen to Labour. Some opponents are destructive and make sweeping statements.
I do not think that the MLP as an organisation is working in harmony to re-elect Jason Micallef. Jason may have some individual support from some party officials but he also has a lot of opposition within the same framework. Do you honestly see anything undemocratic about this. Popes are chosen this way. With monarchs and dictators it’s a different cattle of fish.
As far as the other fellow is concerned, you know the incumbent, that’s something else. I can’t be forceful enough in trying to convince that he must be given a different job as he can be otherwise better gifted.(diplomacy)
I don’t normally like to judge people’s credentials however its unavoidable in this democratic process.
Dear Mr. Saliba,
Alfred Grixti's writings on this blog are public domain, as are yours and mine. No entity needs consent to refer to material which is public domain. Therefore, uncalled for interpolations regarding 'with or without your consent' are totally out of place here.
Readers should go for the substance of Alfred Grixti's article because that is indeed the whole point of the exercise. The delegates have a very clear choice here with a respected candidate with a proven track record who is running for the post of General Secretary of the MLP. No waffle or fake smiles here. Just a hands on approach to bring back harmony, team spirit and target setting in the post of General Secretary.
Excellent part one. You know your stuff. Bet you (again) if you were thirty years younger you would have run for the position yourself and probably did a very good job unlike Jas. I would have stopped there.
Lousy part 2. Every time such an occasion arises you give your hand away. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi. I only know of him but not much about him, so in my opinion, he keeps a low profile and that's just fine.
But for you to describe the 'perfect' Secretary General without naming names, why then did you spoil an otherwise good comment by 'preferring' Stefan?
If you are indeed neutral (publicly) with regard to the selection of Secretary General, why show your hand with the position of President of the Party?
One thing you can do better is to expose the 'machinery' which is still running at full steam ahead pushing Jason's bid to retain his job.
Are they too afraid that a new GS will unearth a few skeletons which Jason has closeted in the last few years?
With or without your consent the comments on your blog are being selectively published so as to present a bias against some contributor who had been unfairly criticised. I am not sure that you will be allowed to see this but in any case I am trying to appraise of the abuse. I allow that my telephone number and e-mail address be divulged to you, just in case.
1. The MLP new 'new labour' led by Messiah Joseph have a media ban - presumably to let the internal machinations do their job - in true olde MLP style!! What an advantage for the incumbent!!
2. The MLP has been funded by big business for a number of years and this has to stop. One has to question the value for money!
3. The PN have broken in excess of 100 electoral promises already in their 4 months in Govt (about one a day). By the end of the year the PN will have no more promises to break!
4. The new MLP leadership is intelligent and offers a credible alternative Govt. How one reaches that conclusion is beyond me!
A new leader the party may have but make no mistake - it is being run very firmly by the olde hand that knows no different!
It is high time that Labour goes for a man with substance and a proven track record to occupy the most important post of General Secretary of the MLP. We cannot afford any more mistakes, arrogance, and cocky disdain to all those who are intelligent within the party.
Good luck Alfred
People like you, Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi and other worthy contestants can get us there. The last of the incompetents who got us in this mess should be given another job and kept a relative distance from harm’s way.
First phase of the operation must be a number of fund raising marathons exclusively aimed to write off the burden of the financial situation our party is in at the moment. Expensive mass events and capital expenditure must be put on hold until the bottom line of our ledger is written in black.