Friday, 20th March 2009
LIGHTEN UP
It’s the crack of dawn on the Friday between a public holiday and the weekend and I’ve just had a look at the weather forecast to see if it would be probable that I get back from the main island if I traipse down to do a couple of things. Seems like it will, though if not, ‘Er Indoors will really be, because I’ll have the car.
Over the last week or so, I’ve had a small taste about how there is a distinct dearth of appreciation for the lightness of touch that makes life less tedious.
I made a wise-crack in the comments section of the Facebook page run by the young MP, Owen Bonnici. He had changed his status and referred to how he thought that Freedom Day should be given the importance it deserves, it being the thirtieth anniversary (is it, doesn’t time fly when you’re having fun?) an’all. Just to be slightly facetious and poke a little fun at life, I asked why it was so darn important, the event having been – pretty much – just the date on which the Brits’ lease ran out.
It was as if I had questioned the very essence of the workers’ movement and the integrity of its foundations and supporting columns. I hasten to point out that it was not Dr Bonnici himself who drew himself up to his full height and declaimed all manner of pompousness in my general direction.
Yes, I do know, then, that Freedom Day has its importance in a national sense. It gives us a holiday, when it doesn’t fall on a weekend (now that the nasty Nats have taken away the holidays that land on Saturday or Sunday) and this year it’s even better, because by the judicious taking of a day off, you can get yourself a four day stretch, much as we could do thanks to good ole St Joseph. Considering that Easter is following hot on the heels of these two nice long weekends, it’s a wonder anything gets done around this time of the year.
It’s almost as bad (or as good) as Xmas or August, though without the cold and heat, respectively.
But still, getting back to “Freedom Day”, within the panoply of National Days, does it hold the significance of the others? Actually, I’m getting a bit tired of having so many National Days or whatever we call them. Most normal countries have one National Day (England doesn’t even have one, unless you count Her Maj’s birthday) and don’t go around confusing everyone.
We just have to be special, of course. Such is the penchant we have for turning everything into a partisan spasm of pique, that as soon as the Nationalists got elected, way back when, they just had to react to Mintoff’s previous paroxysm of party political peculiarity (he had cancelled a number of public holidays, in his inimitable style – thank Heavens it’s inimitable, we really don’t want him back, in any way, shape or form) but instead of doing a Dom and consigning the other lot’s favourite days to the dustbin, they pulled off the usual Nationalist compromise of trying to please everyone.
As I just wrote, they did, really, because we now have a nice range of days on which to take time off, which is great, except that productivity tends to be a touch off.
Getting back to the large amount of rhetoric dumped on my hapless pate, though, you’d think that “Freedom Day” marked the culmination of armed struggle against an oppressor, with hundreds of our countrymen and women giving their lives in a bid to extricate our motherland from beneath the boots of the coloniser, bent on clinging to our rock tenaciously.
Actually, it doesn’t.
It marks the day that the British Armed Forces packed up their stuff, switched off the lights and closed the door behind them, leaving their bases in much better condition than they were when they found(ed) them a couple of hundred years before. As to the condition of said bases now, as far as I can see they’re in decent nick, though their condition had deteriorated somewhat. Must have been something to do with the parsimony and general low standards of public care bestowed on us by the Mintoff regime – and yes, for those who will no doubt comment, I do have less than unbounded admiration for him, for reasons that, if you are my age or even a bit younger, are self-evident.
This orderly departure of the Brits would not have been on the cards if the Nationalist Government a number of years earlier hadn’t turned Malta into an independent state. Mintoff and his slavish followers had always called this a sham (Mintoff, on the other hand, had originally campaigned for integration with Britain, though he did pull a U-ie on that later, when it suited him) and he just had to find himself another day to make his own, Republic Day just not having sufficient cachet for the purpose.
Still, it’s a day in our national make-up and we should recall it: just not with the solemnity and gravitas with which it is being imbued by those for whom history is just another means of showing the party’s colours.
RSS
Comments
Precisely. To avoid the consequences of a possible people revolution or unrest (as per Verheugen's words, but very improbable in a country made up of people with the passive DNA of the Maltese) it is up to the government to exploit all avenues of minimizing this risk.
Then what is so wrong, in the circumstances, of using our veto as a last resort? Should we be held at ransom for fear of being branded a 'pariah' state as some revered consultants and left-wing media columnists would lead us to be so afraid of?
And, following in the same realm of argumentation as ABC, should Verheugen be branded a 'racist xenophobic' like me??
Gunther Verheugen was stating the obvious when saying that the burden-sharing principle approved by EU member states in November was not working and that as a European citizen, he feels ashamed seeing that bigger and richer member states are not willing to implement the burden-sharing agreement which he chose to call it principle, and really help Malta.
According to Mr. Verheugen, if this had to happen in an average German town with 350,000 people, a revolution would start immediately and when he was asked about his opinion about the Labour Party’s suggestion that Malta should use its veto on a number of issues to drive home the point on its problems on illegal migration, Mr Verheugen replied that "no responsible government would consider this unless it is the last resort.
Wouldn’t the risk of a Revolution require deploying all resorts to avoid it? Which resort hasn’t been explored to solve our current problem except the use of the Veto? Isn’t Mr. Verheugen then justifying it since it’s our last resort?
Gunther Verheugen's comment goes a long way to show how spineless and meek most of the Maltese are (unless their pockets are fiddled with that is). If anything, this must be a rallying cry for mass demonstrations and protests at the passivity of the government in the face of these HUGE danger! Now where are the apologists to brandish Verheugen as a xenophobic and a doom-monger like any racist?? Where are they??
@C Formosa; i believe you are correct and its latest location in St Anne Street has exposed it to traffic fumesand probably hastened its deterioration. Many statues have been moved over the years as I believe the "Neptune" in the palace courtyard was once down on the fish market. That latter area was most picturesqe before the war. Speaking of statues the Freedom monument (have I got the right one?] was plonked in front of St Lawrence in Birgu.I am not questioning the significance of the group but am not sure of its aesthetic appearance and location.
True, the statue was originally within Fort Manoel, but when the same GM Antonio Manuel De Vilhena built Floriana as a 'subborgo' to Valletta, his monument was taken from the abandoned fort and placed at 'the Mall', facing Valletta, to commemorate the great benefactor.
Little did they know that years later history-insensitive people would remove it from it's historic significance for their partisan convenience!
@CJB:
I think you are trying me out Charles but I am not that interested nowadays.
David Erving or Irving is another red herring.
Compared to my experiences on some other Maltese groups I have been well treated on this blog and wish to remain at peace with all gentle readers.
Internal Maltese politics are of little concern to me but I am more interested in Maltese foreign relations.
I raise an eyebrow at some comments about the UK in relation to Malta but presently we have other problems to hand.
Right now I want to teach myself Linux but I am following the discussions herein.
I am old and crotchety and can't visit Malta any more-which is sad making.
Just to be pedantic, the De Vilhena statue's original site was at Manoel Island.
Maybe someone can confirm this as I'm not sure.
I found out recently that Sir Harry Charles Luke's diaries of Malta and Palestine are held by St. Anthony's College, Oxford and I’m still trying to find out whether they could be found in book form. Any idea? As for an impartial account of our history during the British era maybe we should commission David Erving to do some serious research for us. Lol.
You may feel 'free to declare that my opinion about the type of 1964 Independence was a demonstration of George Borg-Olivier’s political weakness' - because you can, these days, but that does not mean you are right. Deriding the man who gained Independence for Malta, but respecting the Independence monument ?
GBO achieved Independence through determined and focused political stamina, hardly the characteristics of a 'weak' politician. He outdid Mintoff, stalled his Integration with Britain madness and achieved Independence. There are no different types of Independence - there is only one. There are no UN members who enjoy 'different' types of Independence and Malta became a UN member in 1964 - not 1974 - not 1979 - whether you like it or not.
Mintoff 'unloaded' the Brits only because they would not pay the ransom he was asking for and not through any political acumen. Celebrating Freedom Day is just celebrating the end of a lease contract with Britain - hardly an occasion to celebrate since history tells us that after 1979 there was a lot of belt tightening - bulk buying - inability to buy a colour TV, shortages galore - high unemployment etc.
Re Your comment to Antoine Vella.
Had Antoine Vella made a fool of himself, I would have simply felt sorry for him and call it a day. A National Monument represents the high esteem and the National respect and has to be treated as such and giving it its spiritual value like we give to National Colours.
I would feel very free to declare that my opinion about the type of 1964 Independence was a demonstration of George Borg-Olivier’s political weakness, but would I be correct to disrespect the ‘Independence Monument’? I would naturally also allow Antoine Vella and his friends to opine whatever they think of the value of ‘Freedom Day’, ditto, would they be correct to disrespect the ‘Freedom Monument’? Am I being old fashioned, too sentimental, too nationalistic or too sensitive about Mintoff’s past achievements? I don’t think so because I give equal respect to all our National Monuments and exclude none of them.
Re my last, in part two “....... PN had no problem with it until it worked against them in 1987” Should read “1981”.
NB. The system did however give the PN an advantage in 1996, with 7,633 less votes they managed to elect 3 seats more than MLP and after the bonus award of 4 seats the MLP were left with only one seat majority when in mathematical calculations they should have had a majority of two seats. Had the system not been Gerrymandered, even after Mintoff voted against, the MLP would still have had the majority to govern.
Why all this hatred for anything accomplished by a Labour govt? Did you ever complain that a centuries-old monument to Grand Master Vilhena was removed from its original site against all history ethics and methods, just to make way to the 1964 independence statue?
Monuments make sense when they are "in situ", i.e. in the exact place their meaning relates to. A case in point is the Freedom Monument on Birgu's quay which for decades reminded all of the British Forces stay on the Island.
You must belong to that clan who want to re-write history...so sorry for you all, facts are there to stay, however sour it may be to some blinkered pretenders!
Such comments paint you in a very pitiful and sad light...
If you have nothing decent to say, sometimes a better option is to say nothing at all, lest you make a fool of no one but yourself....
The STV ( Single Transferable Vote )was not invented by the MLP and the PN had no problem with it until it worked against them in 1987. The PN also invented an infamous system in 1971 in which a number of MLP strong districts were made to elect six MPs to weaken the Labour support.
A few hours before the final result of the 1971 General Elections, when it was known that the MLP obtained 85,448 votes and won the absolute majority with 50.8 % of the cast votes, the PN managed 80,753 representing 48.1% and the PCP 1756 votes i.e. 1.1 %, the PN and the MLP were neck-to-neck seat-wise with both of them electing 27 seats out of 55 and fighting for the last seat. When Labour won the last seat with four votes more than the PN Guido De Marco kept demanding one recount after the other hoping to find a fault which would allow his party to govern in spite of Labour’s vote majority.
Any denials?
An enduring problem in electoral systems is that of "disproportionality," i.e., the mismatch between a party's percentage of the popular vote and its percentage of legislative seats. Such disproportionality is quite common and extreme cases are easy to find in the real word. To give you just one example, the Liberal Party in Britain polled 13.8% of the national vote in 1979 but was rewarded with only 1.7% of the seats in Parliament. The Conservatives, with 43.9% of the vote in the same election, received 53.4% of the seats and were able to form the Government.
Such percentage differences have not been as extreme in Malta because STV systems generally produce more proportional results. Nonetheless, disproportionality of some degree has always been a factor in Maltese elections.
I tend to understand why you suggest that the monument should be moved to Filfla. After all we are living under a Gonzipn 'moral' (sic) regime. Your suggestion reminds me so much of the destruction of the Buddhas by the Taliban! Long live Dialogue and Democracy.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself . You are speaking about a National Monument. Just put your money where your mouth is, get the help of the people you represent and just try it.
Imissek tisthi. Filfla would be the ideal place for you.
The EU has developed a single market through a standardised system of laws which apply in all member states, guaranteeing the freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital. It maintains a common trade policy, agricultural and fisheries policies, and a regional development policy. Sixteen member states have adopted a common currency, the euro. It has developed a role in foreign policy, representing us in the World Trade Organisation, at G8 summits, and at the United Nations. Twenty-one EU countries are already members of NATO. The EU has developed a role in justice and home affairs, including the abolition of passport controls between many member states under the Schengen Agreement.
Isn’t this background the embryo of the European Federation which Winston Churchill probably dreamed of in 1946, a European Parliament with responsibility over Federal Affairs including defence, foreign policy, and taxation. - Our Parliament would, one day only be responsible for domestic matters but we will be sharing the Federal autonomy with the other European Federation States. Would I’ll still be around when that happens? But happens it will.
In 1946, the late British Prime Minister Winston Churchill pronounced a celebrated speech at Zurich University (Switzerland). It was considered by many people as the first step towards European integration in the post war period.
The EU traces its origins to the European Coal and Steel Community formed among six countries in 1951 and the Treaty of Rome in 1957. Since then the union has grown in size through the accession of new countries, and new policy areas have been added to the remit of the EU's institutions. The Treaty of Maastricht on 1 November1993 saw the beginning of the European Union we have after the pre-existing European Economic Community of yesteryear.
Just you and the "many people" you say you represent try it.
It is amazing how the same events are often interpreted so differently by different people to make them almost unbelievable.
I have no inclination nor the time to rebut all that you spewed regarding the Integration/Independence issues of the past but one phrase you wrote kicked me in the right place, so I quote, (Integration) "Our Parliament would retain responsibility over all affairs except defense, foreign policy, and taxation" - EXCEPT - Defence - Foreign Policy and Taxation - I ask, what else would our Parliament have been responsible for? Street sweeping?
Why then did Mintoff, a few years later rave so much about 'non-alignment - neutrality'. Was this the same man who was willing to leave defence, foreign policy and taxation in the hands of another nation?
"In substitute to Mars Bars he gave us a Republic" - If indeed Mintoff traded Mars bars to turn Malta into a Republic, it shows the degree of concern about Malta's future, Mintoff had. One thing is for certain - throughout his life for Mintoff - Mintoff came number one, followed by number 2 - Mintoff and finally Mintoff. His mission was self aggrandizement at any cost.
Filfla, for example.
, @ Charles Buttigieg whose comment upon Alfred Camilleri's view of Maltese history gives "Dear old Peter Prictoe" both food for thought and some amusement..
Interested in Malta's history all my long life I am still searching for an impartial account of Malta during the British colonial period,read about all that has been printed and remain unimpressed-though Henry Frendo's accounts seems fair enough from an ex-Nationalist mayor of one of the Three Villages, as I recall though my own memory seems a bit shaky now I am in my eighties. Harry Luke, who was Lt. Governor during my Maltese childhood
provides a British view of Malta in the thirties of the last century
Although history fascinates me I think it would be best to draw a line over the past and concentrate on Malta's present and future.
Give us please ;
1. The re-counts asked by the PN and reasons behind these re-counts.
2. The attempts 'to bribe' the 2 Gozitan MLP Members of Parliament to cross the floor.
3. How the MLP increased rather then decreased it parliamentary seats ..own medicine!
4. The 'abolition' of begging and beggars from our streets.( Pn voted NO)
5. The introduction of Social Services to the needy.( PN votyed NO)
8. Introduction of minimum wage ( PN voted NO)
9. Introductions of 'Housing Estates" ( PN voted NO)
10. Introductions of NEW Industrial Estates ( PN voted NO) and the rest for some other time.
In the meantime may I ask Martinelli and his team, to furnish us how EFA managed to take the helm of the PN and who played 'Brutus'? Enlighten us all please!
@ Alfred_Camilleri & Peter_Prictoe.
I get the impression that dear old Mr. Prictoe would be more conversant with the Maltese history than you are.
After sending my exhaustive respond to you I now realised that I had overlooked one serious error in your post, “1) the Church's opposition (because of the famous 6 points - you had better ask Buttigieg and Grech Mintoff to illuminate you about the 6 points,...........” The six Constitutional Amendments couldn’t have been an issue as those came about in 1964 during the Independence Constitution saga, the Integration negotiations never got round to a discussion about a new Constitution. After Integration the ‘Magna Carta’, ‘The Habeas Corpus Act of 1679’ and ‘The Bill of Rights of 1689’ would have probably became our Constitution and later would include the European human rights provisions that were incorporated into UK law in 1998.
And for further illuminations, Archbishop Gonzi tried to have us believe that his bone of contention was that Mintoff failed to get us a solid guarantee from Britain that they would not interfere with our religious matter. Sir Michael Gonzi was, in reality, preoccupied that he would become second in hierarchy after the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The British kept under their control important utilities like Cable and Wireless, Gas and Petroleum energies, Airport, Airline, defense, Broadcasting, SAR etc. and sizeable parts of Malta. The very place which now houses the OPM was still used as a military facility by the British Government.Nato still had its Headquarters Allied Forces Med. (HAFMed) at Floriana. Our currency merely changed its name from Malta pound to Malta lira but remained linked with the pound sterling.
In 1971 we elected the greatest dictator Malta has ever seen, Dom Mintoff killed pregnant women in the streets, he closed down all the churches, he introduced military discipline on all workers and he went as far as depriving us from Mars Bars and double soft toilet paper. During the same process he moved towards loosening ties with the United Kingdom and pursuing a non-aligned foreign policy, establishing close ties with Libya China and N.Korea. In substitute to Mars Bars he gave us a Republic on December 13, 1974, with the last Governor-General, Sir Anthony Memo, as its first President. In 1979 the last British forces left Malta on HMS London with the Royal Marines band playing “WE ARE SAILING”
Thank you Dom.
Integration with Britain Malta would have gained more autonomy than it did with GBO’s Independence.
At a Round Table Conference which was held in London in December 1955, attended by Mintoff, Borg Olivier and other Maltese politicians, along with the British Colonial Secretary, Boyd, the British government agreed to give us our own representation in the House of Commons while retaining our own Parliament in Malta. Our Parliament would retain responsibility over all affairs except defense, foreign policy, and taxation. We were also to have social and economic parity with the UK, to be guaranteed by the British Government. Defense, foreign policy and taxation would have been a shared autonomy with England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland within the Lords and the Commons.
Malta was the only British colony where integration with the UK was seriously considered, and subsequent British governments have ruled out integration for remaining overseas territories, such as Gibraltar.
On 21 September 1964, Malta became a hybrid of an independent state. We remained in the Commonwealth and recognised the Queen as head of our state. Sir Maurice Dorman got promoted from Governor to Governor General and stayed to enjoy our newly acquired freedom.
While I concede that in spite of a wide search I made regarding the number of Maltese migrant children to Australia, turned into a virtual nightmare, I did find one Australian Government site which quoted the number I gave. Other sites produced a large number of publications regarding the subject, probably exceeding the number of children who were sent to Australia. Incidentally, the numbers from other countries, more prominently from England, ran into thousands. In another document, I also notice that in 1979 the Australian Senate did pass a resolution apologizing for the wrong doings these children suffered by their sponsors.
But, I suppose the argument still rages on with regards to the emigration patterns from Malta to Australia, Canada, USA, UK and other destinations. Official figures I obtained were, NET ( To less returned From) for the period of 1946 to 1996 : Australia: 68,940, Canada: 14,997, UK: 18,830, USA: 9,021, Other: 740.
Unfortunately, these numbers are not broken down by year and I would be grateful if you can pass on any more accurate information and its source if you happen to have it.
The PN did not accept the result on the grounds that only 44.25% of the registered list voted yes. The Colonial office concluded that the result was inconclusive.
91% of the eligible voters went to the poll for the EU Referendum, the ‘Yes’ garnered 53.6% and 46.4 % voted ‘No’. Alfred Sant, using GBO’s wrong argument, insisted that since only 48% of the eligible voters voted yes, 52 % of the total population were against the proposal.
With a landslide of 74.83 % ‘Yes’ Votes Labour won the Integration Referendum and the PN, with 53.6 % ‘Yes’ votes also won the EU referendum. George Borg-Olivier and Alfred Sant were both wrong in their judgement.
Had Britain honoured its commitment to respect the result of the Integration Referendum, Malta would have became part of ‘ UK & Ireland & Malta with a possible representation in the House of Lords, three MP’s in the Commons and five MEPs added as a fourth region with Britain’s three regions’ of 87 MEPs.
Surely you do not think that that would have been so bad.
@ Alfred Camilleri. Part One.
I never said that the majority was against independence; my statement was that the majority was against “that type of independence”. The referendum was not about Independence it was about the constitution. The question was, “Do you approve of the constitution proposed by the Government of Malta, endorsed by the Legislative Assembly, and published in the Malta Gazette?"
Traditionally circa 98% of the Maltese cast their vote, only 79.66% voted during that referendum with 50.69 % voting yes. Of all the registered voters only 40.38 % voted yes.
Labour was not totally against the proposed constitution but insisted on six amendments which were refused by the PN due to opposition by the Church. The six amendments were later included in the Republic Constitution and the PN in opposition voted in favour except GBO and his last five supporters in the PN opposition.
In spite of pressure by the church to boycott the Integration Referendum 59.13% cast their vote with 74.83% voting yes, 22.21% No and 2.83% were invalid.
It was "INTEGRATION OR SELF-DETERMINATION"
"In all our actions we take our inspiration from the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ, as propounded by the Roman Catholic Church
a) In our relations with the British Government we are guided by the belief that all men are born free and equal; that all men are God's children. For the smooth and friendly co-operation between employers and employees, between rich and poor, we shall continue to apply the Christian tenets of the Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno, and we shall continue to combat Communism in all its forms.
(b) The Malta Labour Party is a national movement. Its members come from all classes.. It is not Marxist either in ideology or in action. Nationalization, where necessary, will therefore be limited to such public services as. are strictly essential for the well being of The community, and only in those cases where monopolies hold away...."
This should CLARIFY matters and paint the REAL picture as to what the MLP wanted to achieve. Before things happened.
And FACTUALLY.
http://www.maltadata.com/mlp-53.htm
On the 3rd June 1962 a 'load of Maltese kids' ( to be precise 214 kids) left our shores for ' a better future in Perth Australia". Other 'loads' followed fear after year till 1969! For your own information in 1978 a good number of these kids were brought back home. the 'hostel or centre' in Perth was closed down in 1979! Some of those who returned then, can very well tell you their horrifying experiences in those 'centres'!
So please do not add insult to injuries towards those who suffered so much.
Also please do not twist or fabricate figures as it is a PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE that during Socialist Administrations ( 1971 to 1986) hundreds and hundreds of those who left for better fortunes In Australia returned back to Malta , found employment in Malta and started new life here.
Your repeated twists and fabrications of events is getting out of all limits, pathetic and condemnable.
One can easily conclude from the RESULT of the "interdiction" imposed on the left leaning MALTESE BRETHREN,many thousands of Maltese suffered unnecessarily (even up to today) merely because of EARTHLY POWER....especially in view that Gonzi had to APOLOGISE IN WRITING (it hangs near the entrance of Mintoff's bathroom?!) for his unspeakable behaviour to the Maltese.
Anyone denying this SHAMEFUL period (never mentioned by PN apologists of course:their history begings from seventies onwards!) is doing HIMSELF a disservice by becoming incredible in his argument...
c) But the 'LOUDEST' point that you make in your outburst against us...
is that you do NOT confirm (or otherwise) whether Labour's cry at the time was:
"Intergration"
or
"Integreation OR SEPARATION"
the "OR SEPARATION" bit, of course, puts a completely different aspect to the arguments put forward 'trivially' by apologists like this blogger(sic!)and others suffering the same colour blindness.
To insinuate that 31st March 1979 is a silly small "date"(bypasssing all that it REALLY stands for...) well, in my oppinion, shows crass mental deduction (as per Baldrick of Bladadder fame) or a more machiavellian scheme to 'whitewash' the left wall making the mucky right wall look prettier than it actually is.
What's new?
>The reasons integration was not imposed on us were...
>(1) the Church's opposition (because of the famous 6 points...
>(2) the astuteness of British politicians who that integrating Malta to Britain would not have been in their country's interest.
Thank you for verifying 3 things for us in your far more enlightened way. In reverse order:
a) I think I covered (2) above with the paragraphs (please read again properly this time!):
"With all due respect, the Britishcolonials were not exactly 'entusiastic' to such a proposal..."
and
"Once the Crown's position was made CLEAR that in our country.."
b) You point about the church's 6 points is correct.
For Pete's sake plenty of infornation can be gathered about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikiel_Gonzi (see controversies)
and a verly long but HIGHLY interesting
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2007/mw/mw_april25_2007/t12.html
(of course there are others! Just google "Gonzi Mintoff church")
HOWEVER... you OMIT to state:
- what those 6 (Mintoff) points were that he insisted had to be accepted by the Curia (Gonzi)
- whether they Gonzi was right (and they were recanted by Mintoff) or vice versa
- in the light of the winds of change of Vatican Council II which one of them was ...correct?
Under the long and dynamic leadership of Dom Mintoff, the MLP government turned Malta into a strong ally of the Non-Aligned Movement. It strengthened cultural and trade links with our North African neighbours, notably oil-rich Libya, and also with China and North Korea.
On assuming office in 1971, Mintoff renegotiated British/NATO agreements to dismantle its military base within 7 years on condition that the base cannot be used against Arab states. Mintoff also negotiated a treaty of friendship and close economic cooperation with China in April 1972, making Malta a member of the Non-Aligned Movement.
Dom Mintoff was a product of elitist Oxford and a friend of British Labour Party radicals. But it was Lord Louis Mountbatten who advanced Mintoff’s political career. Mintoff’s father ran the pantry at Castille Palace in Valletta, where Mountbatten, then Flag Officer heading NATO’s Mediterranean fleet had his office and took a liking to the young Mintoff and recommended him to a Rhodes scholarship to Oxford to prepare him as a future leader friendly to Britain. Later, through Mintoff, Mountbatten promoted a scheme for Malta to seek full integration with Britain.
You are so right - Mintoff made Malta what it is today - a permanently divided country!
@ D Attard
Ask Mintoff whether he would have renewed the Economic and Defence agreement of 1964 had the British offered what he asked for.
@ Joseph Buttigieg Attard
The adjectives you used are better suited to yourself. Which 'twisted or fabricated' events are you talking about? Your mix of Latin and English perplex me. Did you mean 'homo sapiens', 'homo loquens' or 'human comprehension'? Stick to one language please.
About one hundred - not hundreds of children were sponsored to Australia between 1947 and 1953 (unless Australian records are inaccurate) and the thousands of young persons emigrated to Australia and Canada between 1947 and the early eighties, after which emigration tapered off and repatriation reversed the trend starting around 2000 to-date. So before you throw false information, I invite you to examine who was in power during those years and you will find that emigration peaked in the Socialist era since emigration was their only viable solution.
Do some research and unless you find other than my accounting, please do not enthrall us with your fantasies
:”Eddie is to us what Moses was to the Jews. Moses freed the Jews from the foreigner; Eddie freed us from slavery imposed by other Maltese.”
This was a statement made yesterday in The Sunday Times by a PN fanatic from Mosta. How can anybody believe that? Yet they keep on harping wishing that the haven which the PN created for some of them would last forever.
The Freedom our younger generation, Red Blue and Green, need to strive for, is a freedom from this kind of old fashion politics characterised by character assassination, hate, lies, deceptions and divide. That would be a Freedom day which I doubt that I would be here to celebrate to. And I do mean a National Celebration.
If you put things into PROPER context, it is equivalent to Malta saying to the EU "sort out immigration problem out, and treat us THE SAME as yourselves or else we're out of here!!" and expecting ANY positive response.....(and bear in mind that the 'Empire' was politically/militarily far more POWERFUL than the EU is today!!!)
With all due respect, the Britishcolonials were not exactly 'entusiastic' to such a proposal by a mere 'ant' of a colony and (in context, quite rightly)did not feel it had to go this far (can you immagine the repurcussions in the OTHER colonies if it were to accept?!!).....
Once the Crown's position was made CLEAR that in our country a Brit doing the SAME work would remain being paid 3 times as much as his Maltese counterpart(etc etc), Labour was left no alternative than to seek separation(referred to by il-bocca as a U-turn!!).
Thus,"Integration OR SEPARATION" was the actual phrase that Labour was using at the time.
Logically, Labour was fighting for (ALL) Maltese's rights(thereforesome whitewash over this!) What Labour was fighting for in those days and which culminated in 31/03/79 makes perfect sense...unless one wishes to remain colourblind of course!
;)
>Please put me right
Rather than putting you right, I think a more honest interpretation of history is in order...
you see when il-bocca blogs (sic!) that "Mintoff, on the other hand, had originally campaigned for integration with Britain, though he did pull a U-ie on that later, when it suited him"... well, let's just say he's 'blogging(sic!)' again and you'll quickly understand.
Reality - and there is PLENTY of evidence for this if you care to do some very light research is that the MLP actually campaigned for " Intgeration OR SEPARATION" .
(The second part is very conveniently let out by those who wish to rewrite history and bloggers(sic!) of the same ilk although it is as important as the first part!)
Briefly, this translated in today's terms to "treat us the same as yourselves, equal pay for our/your workers, benefits etc" (something which is taken for granted today by any foriegner LIVING in the UK itself nowadays!) or else "we're not interested".
Integration had a huge support but not nearly as much as the Republic. Labour supporters wanted Integration but the Nats were against. Everybody wanted Independence except Archbishop Gonzi and Mabel Strickland. The majority were against the ‘type’ of Independence which was offered on a silver platter to Borg-Olivier.
The public support for a Republic was unanimous.
I was too young to vote for Integration but would have definitely voted Yes if I had a vote. Nobody voted for Independence, the Referendum was for or against the Constitution as drafted by the Colonial Office. We did not have a Referendum for the Republican Constitution as there was consensus between Government and Opposition.
And today, dear Peter, I still wish that Malta had Integrated with GB and I only blame your former Colonial Office for what it allowed to happen
@Charles B.
I am sure that you are correct in writing that a "unanimous Maltese public" voted for a republic but I have been told that more people (who actually voted) voted for integration than
opted for a republic. Not at the same time of course
Please put me right
Freedom day has great significance in our history. Irrespective who and how it came about the fact remains that it celebrates the end of centuries of military occupation. But does it deserve to be one of five National days.
Independence is the birth of freedom and Independent should be our only National Day, but was the 21 September really the day we achieved our true freedom?
Republic Day, 13 December saw an almost unanimous parliament and a unanimous Maltese public endorsing a very important New Constitution which left little or no political divide.
Republic Day on 13 December should be our only National Day, the other four days should be considered as important public holidays.
You are totally out of touch with realities.
I repeat in the early and late 60s HUNDREDS of MALTESE KIDS ( from numerous families )were 'taken' to WESTERN Australia ( Perth for your information ) and the treatment they had there is 'condemnable"!
For your information too some are back in Malta and their experience there is horrific1 so please do not add insult to injury to these " exported kids". These kids didn't emigrate of their own free will as you are trying to imply.
Your twisting and fabrications of events is getting too infamous to comprehend your motives.
What a shame that you persist in your daily errors, twist and fabrications.
Very true :)
Quote : The only reason we celebrate "freedom day" is to humour the Lejburisti, in the spirit of national reconciliation that the PN has always practised Unquote.
A sentence that speaks libraries...I honestly think that with this kind of attitude there is no further scope for debate. If a so called 'Lejburist' such as I is to be respected in the society I live, then I feel that I can only seek alternative avenues.
In the meantime, Mr Vella may want to continue to humour the 'lejburisti' to his heart's content.
Good night.
@ D Attard
If Mintoff made Malta what it is today - a permanently divided country, who leads the other half? Isn’t it always the case that two or more are the beneficiaries of a division? Doesn’t it require the energy and the good will of two to unite different poles?
I know that it wasn’t you who blamed Mintoff for our sad polarised state but if I ask the other fellow he would only answer my question with another rhetoric question.
Wrong. The man that divided Malta was none other than Eddie, and people like you.
Wrong again on emigration. Emigration peaked in the 50`s, were if you did not have a job you were out begging. Who abolished begging?
Who gave you free education, free health service, money in old people`s pockets. Who gave us the Social Services that each and every Maltese is enjoying today?
Who voted against all the said services? I will say it once more, Dom Mintoff made Malta what it is today against all odds, odds spewed by none other than your bleeding lot.
Mr. Martinelli, you do not invent history, history is there to be read, seen and felt by each and everyone of us. You can deny it yes. But you`ll be wrong.
"And that's the truth. Given his price Mintoff would have gladly renewed the agreement for a further fifteen years."
Your opinion cant count as history. I am not questioning the man (mintoff). I am just saying that freedom day is historically important. This is also a question of perspective. If we can have a public holiday to celebrate a man whose wife was humped by the holy spirit then I see no reason why we should not have one for freedom day.
"Some comments posted here bring to my mind "attention deficit syndrome""
Other comments bring to mind 'delusions of grandeur'.
You said "Mintoff made Malta what it is today - a permanently divided country!"
Rich coming from you! You're the first to antagonise anything which has to do with the PL!
I don't know why people from the Nationalist camp are questioning this event. I think anyone who says that it should not be celebrated is not looking at history in an impartial manner. These events, even Independence Day of course, should continue to be commemorated by all the Maltese. I can understand that one party might stress an event more than the other (after all they were obtained by different govts pertaining to these parties) but to demonise Freedom Day? Why?
You are so right - Mintoff made Malta what it is today - a permanently divided country!
@ D Attard
Ask Mintoff whether he would have renewed the Economic and Defence agreement of 1964 had the British offered what he asked for.
@ Joseph Buttigieg Attard
The adjectives you used are better suited to yourself. Which 'twisted or fabricated' events are you talking about? Your mix of Latin and English perplex me. Did you mean 'homo sapiens', 'homo loquens' or 'human comprehension'? Stick to one language please.
About one hundred - not hundreds of children were sponsored to Australia between 1947 and 1953 (unless Australian records are inaccurate) and the thousands of young persons emigrated to Australia, US and Canada between 1947 and the early eighties, after which emigration tapered off and repatriation reversed the trend starting around 2000 to-date. So before you throw false information, I invite you to examine who was in power during those years and you will find that emigration peaked in the Socialist era since emigration was their only viable solution.
Do some research and unless you find other than my accounting, please do not enthrall us with your fantasies.
This sentence gathers up the whole meaning of Freedom Day. We are celebrating a myth creating by the socialist regime that Mintoff kicked out the British from these Islands. If you beleive this myth than you should also beleive that Santa claus brings presents on Christmass !
Altough the British Empire back in 1979 was on the decline, their pride was still the as high as when they first came to these Islands. When they left they were not kicked out but they had come to the conclusion that it was not worth keeping Malta as a base, paying up the hefty sums demanded by the Maltese goverment, when two aircraft carriers can do the same job.
So they decided to give up the base and fixed the 31st of March as the day to end their stay.
' So let's not incense all too much blindfoldedly. :
Nice sentence. What does it mean?
However, it is incorrect to celebrate it on the 31 March: on that day we still had a military base, up to midnight. Il-ħelsien. so-called, came about on April 1 which is when this non-event should be celebrated.
.
That's why it's an important event and why it deserves to be commemorated.
Dear Mr Vella,
It is a known fact that emotion always gets the better of logic.
With your emotional input in response to my comments you are bound to 'win' the argument, no matter how irrelevant, irreverant or cruel your comment may be.
So you win hands down. Congrats.
Calling someone ' your memory is on the wane ' demonstrates your incapabilites of accepting 'facts and realities'! Your pure fabrications demonstrates your fragile attempts in twisting events by "your self fabricated events", How miserable your behaviour is beyond 'homo comprehension'.
You please yourself in glorifying the 'devil incarnate' to belittle the TRUTH! You play as an eyewitness of events that never really happened while you behave like a sprinter when the truth is revealed or spoken about.
You play you know all and that you have a vivid picture of past events. May I ask you what you KNOW ABOUT THE HUNDREDS OF MALTESE KIDS THAT WERE TRANSPORTED TO WESTERN AUSTRALIA by the ADMINISTRATIONS YOU TRY SO MUCH TO GLORIFY??? Of course I am not referring to the exedus of thousands of youths to Australia in the early and late sixties!
Please demonstrate that your memory is not 'on the wane' as you accused someone else!
"No wonder that Mintoff remains the only internationally recognised Maltese icon."
It's an honour he shares with brucellosis.
It is not for a Brit to suggest Malta’s National Day but it might be better if you chose a non-political day.
Freedom Day is all very well for those who go in for that sort of thing but we manage without any national days and don’t even put the name of the country on our stamps.
Mention is made of the Queen of England-a creature who has not existed since 1707 and the birthday celebrations are not held on Brenda’s actual birthday but that of Queen Victoria and it used to be called Empire Day in my imperial childhood when we got a day off from school but no-one bothered much in general.
The British Queen was, I seem to recall, Queen of Malta from 1964 to 1974
just as she is Queen of Canada when actually in that country.She is the Head of the Commonwealth-for whatever that organisation is worth nowadays.
I served in Malta as did both my father and my grandfather though in different armed forces and different wars. I mention this to partly explain my interest in your country.
Interesting blog and comments.
Peter P. Barnsley - where it is unusually sunny today.
I don't know whether you are old enough to know, but defence was part of an agreement between independent Malta and Britain agreed upon jointly. This agreement also included economic guarantees and grants. Before the agreement expired Mintoff tried to pry a few extra sterling out of the Brits but he asked a bit too much for their liking and politely told him to take a hike. Mintoff then simply did not renew the agreement as ABC correctly pointed out, and they packed their stuff and left. And that's the truth. Given his price Mintoff would have gladly renewed the agreement for a further fifteen years. Instead he preferred to go hat in hand and do some begging around Libya, China, Korea and Russia. He sure enamoured himself with the West!
If you are old enough and do not remember the details, then your memory is on the wane.
Until Freedom Day, the Maltese were always governed by powers-of-the-day and Malta could never develop as normal cultures do i.e. with the power to deliberate in making deliberate choices.
Freedom Day towers over any other moment in Malta's history because it was the day when malta became master of her own destiny:
Phoenicians et all
Carthaginians
Romans
Arabs
Normans
Feudal dominance
Knights of St John
French
British (upon being invited by the Maltese - a first Maltese decision)
and finally we became masters of our own destiny on the 31 st of March, 30 years ago.
A massive reason why this date qualifies to be Malta's only national day.
No wonder that Mintoff remains the only internationally recognised Maltese icon.
But to be fair, Freedom Day DOES hold some meaning. I ask everyone to imagine being an owner of a property and lease it to a 3rd party. When the contract expires, the other party doesn't vacate the property but stays put, keeping hold of the main doors, veranda and the toilet. He tells you that u can use the rest ....
what would you celebrate the day the contract ended or when the property is vacated completely and you can use it as you please?
For me, Independence and Freedom Day are the start and end date of the same lengthy process of Malta getting its identity. It was the start and end of a process .. so its futile trying to gauge which was is better.
"Please also care to mention that after the maltese independence the airport, seaport, telecommunication and energy were still under british rule. This situation lasted 10 years. "
You forgot to mention that:
- we carried on using the British coinage (Pounds Shillings & Pence)
- the taxes gathered went to "the Crown"
- Were not the police also in the hands/control of the Brits?
- there were areas in Malta that were Maltese-no-go areas (Kalafrana, Marsa Sports
Grounds, even in parts of Comino, I believe!
etc etc
Oh yes. Of course, after "independence", the head of the Maltese state was....
- the Queen of England.
So much for independence!
(This suited GBO just fine as the great honourle gentleman was as pro British Royalty as il-Bocca is anti anything-left-of-blue....
He was VERY patriotic... just leave his beloved Queen out of it, that's all.)
Pray tell why you bother a) reading this blog and b) commenting on such 'drivel'?
If you are questioning the relevance of freedom day please also ask why we should celebrate independence.
I empathise with you, dott. The same thing happened to me, in the same Internet medium, on page of a very high official of the NP who conveniently stayed away from Malta when the going was hard, only to come back to fill a very high party post when all was said and done, in 1987. No sooner had I challenged him over something, that all hell broke loose. Only this time, it was the man himself who started attacking and insulting me.
So, there you are. Bad things happen over the other side, as well.
Still (putting it politely), you just can't leave that itchy nappy rash alone can you?
Very self demeaning drivel, in my opinion.
It will be most amusing to see your reaction if, God forbid, all the supermarkets and retail shops in Gozo ignored the (in)significance of 'Freedom Day' and opened up - business as usual - on the 31st of March!
It is a fact that we have TOO MANY National holidays. Nevertheless to turn your odious guns towards the PL in general and Dom Mintoff in particular is pathetic and cheaper then a free glass of tap water.
Today's topic ,"lighten up' , should be addressed to the author of this article/writing/or whatever one choose to call this scribbling. Day in day out we get a repetition of anti-PL personal sermons on this blog. Sermons that the sun shines ONLY when/if the PN is in power and all the doom and gloom when/if the PL is in power.
I expected ABC to turn his guns against those who closed all retail shops and supermarkets in Gozo yesterday and left those many hundreds who crossed over to enjoy a long weekend in Gozo. But it seems priorities are permanently shelved for the poorest reasons.