Saturday, 9th May 2009
OH NOT AGAIN
I got my hands on a rather pretty document issued by the Labour Party (I just can’t get my head around PL) in anticipation of the upcoming MEP Elections. The idea, of course, is to persuade the electorate to rally round these guys’ nominees, in the hope that they will get three out of five and be able to exercise bragging rights for the next four years or whatever it is.
Truth be told, at the moment this seems to be pretty much a foregone (forlorn, if you look at it from the PN point of view) conclusion – Labour win all the elections except the important one, and even if this wasn’t the case, at this stage of the national legislature and with the world going to hell in a cash-register, it would be surprising if the Government wasn’t given a black eye. Of course, if the future of the country depended on the poll, I rather suspect we’d all be thinking that we’d rather have the Nationalists in the driving seat, given that the alternative is a callow youth flanked by gentlemen whose grasp of the reins of government (as opposed to their grasp of the juicy sound-bite method of going about things) is tenuous at best.
But getting back to that document, to which I have given something of a cursory but penetrating look, just what is it that Labour are trying to do? Convince us that either a) they don’t have a grasp of the language or b) that they don’t have the common sense to do a bit of proof-reading before exposing their policies to the world.
You know and I know that the most controversial issue that blights the country at the moment is immigration. The sheer hate that is demonstrated by this country’s so-called Christians towards immigrants of a different colour and religion is well-documented and it is not this that I am concerned with at the moment, though it would be nice if all the MEP candidates were to get together (well, the ones that can, of course, the ones that pander directly to the racists can’t) and make an appeal for the country to step back from being bigoted and xenophobic.
So prominent is the issue of immigration that the Labour Party highlighted it in the first page of their manifesto, blaming the Government without, of course, proposing any solution. To this extent, Lowell is more constructive than they are, albeit in a more than slightly inhumane way. They do the same all over the place, in the manner of Oppositions everywhere: elect them and everything will be done exactly as everyone wants it, for free and perfectly, always.
Glancing through the policies that they are proposing, one sprang out at me: “the worker will have the right to work as much overtime as he likes without limitations”.
Nothing to do with immigration I know, but don’t you just love it when in one single line, a political party betrays its roots so elegantly? According to this lot, the Working Time Directive so loved by their compatriots on the Left in Europe will be chucked out along with the bath-water and, at the same time, employers will be given no choice in the matter: overtime will be worked when and as the workers want to work it and hang the costs.
I know the latter half of the previous sentence is not what they meant, but proof-reading, anyone?
Getting back to immigration, the document lambastes Gonzi for signing the Immigration Pact without negotiating for mandatory but not obligatory burden sharing.
Yes, you read that correctly, it’s not a misprint.
Not on my part, anyway.
According the Labour Party, the EU should have adopted a policy whereby burden-sharing, while not being mandatory, would be obligatory. Or was that the other way round, while being mandatory, it would not be obligatory? My brain is starting to hurt and my teeth itch.
Read my lips, you people who think you can run this country, for all the number of times the electorate has told you that you can’t, may not and will not: if something is mandatory, it is obligatory and, equally, if it is obligatory, it is mandatory. You either don’t have the most basic of grasps of the meaning of words (given that you’re politicians or wannabe politicians, this is not excluded) or you don’t have the administrative or organisational skills to put together a simple manifesto.
I’d go on and analyse the rest of the thing, but, frankly, when I got to the bit about Louis Grech having drawn up the EU’s Budget for 2007 apparently single-handedly, I was moved to press the delete button, because it’s clear that this document was prepared with only one aim in mind, an aim I’ll leave to you to divine.
But before pressing “delete”, another small piece of misleading information jumped out at me: Prof. Edward Scicluna was shown as having been chairman of that august body, the Malta Financial Services Authority, when in fact, he never was. He had been chairman of the Malta Financial Services Centre, of course, but not of the MFSA.
Picky, ain’t I?
RSS
Comments
Regarding the banks; they were given too much liberty because of the right ideology principles that the market is efficient and will correct itself should any mishaps occur. With de-regulation of the banking industry (which the right ideology believes is necessary in order to let the market operate freely) bank managers were prone to take on risks which they could not handle. And now we are in this mess. Therefore, it all comes down to policy and not to the bankers. Bankers follow the rules, and if there are no rules they simply act upon their models.
Also, with a lot of financial instruments and derivatives coming in the market, new regulation was needed; which could have avoided this fiasco. However, the conservatives opted for the invisible hand, and sure enough a lot of deposits ended up invisible as they were lost.
The PES is putting the people first in its manifesto. I hope that the PPE will be able to counter such a well-thought out manifesto, as otherwise it's going to be a one-horse race!
"Now governments from all over the world have to dip in and give out money in verious incentives".
"You will then see were the Left (including the Socialists, the Greens and the Communists) stands in stature in the eyes of the European voters".
Spelling errors are not mine.
What we do not need now is a welfare State ala Socialists' mentality.
What we do not need now is unrestrained spending only to be followed by 'belt tightening' and higher taxes.
It is so nice to group the Socialists, Greens and Communists together, Mr. Attard. I am sure you put a smile on some surprised faces.
Your misinformed ideas about who is to blame for the current financial crisis will soon get a jolt after the EP elections next June. You will then see were the Left (including the Socialists, the Greens and the Communists) stands in stature in the eyes of the European voters.
That will soon be followed by a monumental defeat to one of the few remaining liberal governments such as Brown's in the UK.
Maybe the vast majority of European voters just do not concur with your analysis of who is to blame for the world's woes (also taking into account your blank about the bankers).
Sure enough, you will see the EU turning further right than it is veering at present.
Gone are the days when people used to believe in the market, where no intervention wsa needed and where everything was left to Adam Smith's invisible hand. Now we need strong leftist principles to get the world out of this recession. Now governments from all over the world have to dip in and give out money in verious incentives so as to stimulate their economies as otherwise all will grind to a halt.
This is a testing time for everyone, especially for right ideological policies as such ideology needs to review its policies in light of what the world is experiencing today. The left is once again the solution to steer the world of problems. This goes to show just why countries do not have to turn right to move forward...
What gets to me though is that a smart individual like yourself should know that it is not healthy for democracy to have the same party winning the election ... gosh I lost count now, what would it be 5th time? A quarter of a century of PN government? We will be having more than a generation that has not experienced the opposition. From someone who lived most of his youth under the MLP I know exactly what I am saying ... it is very bad for all.
On the other hand ... with a whimper I have to admit you are right ... this triumvirate looks like something straight out of Monthy Phyton.
If you think ABC is such a bore then why do you bother to read him? Respect for opinion is a basic tenet of life.