Daphne Caruana Galizia, Maltese Society, and Partisan Politics

 Journalism is one of the most important pillars of our democracy, there is no denying it, as journalism is what guarantees that those who are supposed to live up to our democracy - those who are in power as are politician and influential individuals of  our society - are held accountable for their actions. Politicians should accept and also respect that journalists are going to be critical of them when there is the need to do so, and that it is their (the politicians') responsibility to prove to the journalists that they are wrong about what they are saying about them. And, if politicians are unable to defend themselves against what is being said about them, about their honesty and integrity, then they ought to resign from their respective positions. There should be no doubt allowed about the integrity of  politicians by those whose country it is their duty govern, nor should there be doubt on the integrity of those who are on the opposition benches in a liberal democracy, as doubt is what will subsequently bring a lack of trust of the political classes, which will not happen without repercussions to that same liberal democracy. Moreover, it also boils down to an issue of competence: imagine how competent politicians are at living up to the interests of their country and society, if they are unable to live up to their own interest in portraying their true selves as honest persons  (i.e. if what is being said about them is not true). And, it goes without saying that people who lack honesty and integrity should not even be trusted on more trivial matters, never mind politics. Daphne Caruana Galizia had written in her blog allegations that are more than unflattering towards some politicians, corroborated by documents, that albeit inconclusive if some want to make them so, make the position of certain politicians untenable. The untenable nature of their positions still stands today even that Caruana Galizia is dead, and even if these politicians decide to withdraw their libel cases against her, possibly to cover up their own alleged wrongdoings. From allegations of brothels to money laundering to failed promises of credible audits, accountability runs very low in our country,  too low for us to consider ourselves as a normal EU country. For this reason, one trusts that  Daphne Caruana Galizia's family will continue to seek answers, by being exigent that all the libel cases by politicians on her are brought in front of the court as planned. They have already done so with a minister, and for we should all be grateful to them for that, as they continue the fight that Daphne Caruana Galizia had started.  


 Malta is a hostile country to independent and investigative journalism, and also to journalism that requires some kind of thinking or discernment, as people are more inclined to being impressed by what they hold at face value. For this reason, some kinds of radio programmes go down pretty well with the general public, especially if these are of a partisan nature, and require no discernment at all, as opinions are fed to them ready cooked in the form of what one may define as propaganda. Unfortunately, certain kinds of blogs or newspapers (including foreign newspapers) that require more thought and discernment are only read by the very few, and there are some who would read them, because of the allegations they make against the foe of the party that they support. These blogs and newspapers are read by some when they are endorsed by the politicians who they support, and are attacked if they are attacked by those same politicians, or others who they have come to support. It is easier for people to listen to a one sided attack on the party, politician, or journalist they disagree with and come to hate, than to adopt an attitude of true analysis of a situation. And, moreover, we are a country that is happy with sermons and dogmatic speeches on the radio stations, and frown upon free thought or speech, especially when this goes against our parochial and partisan attitudes. People adore politicians, as if they were statues in our parish churches - demigods of an infallible sort, who ought not be questioned, as it would sinful to do so. The same attitudes of scantily dress young women on the shoulders of men of a macho disposition in parish feasts, is seen in mass meetings of our political parties, as these consider politics as if what matters are the piques that lie deep in our culture. With this kind of attitude, and with an inability of some form of discernment, what we get is an attitude that says that the only important aspect to politics is to win, over and above what is best for our country and for the future generations, as it is good to celebrate in the way they do in their parish feasts, and the more satisfactory to spite one's own adversary. Our choice of a leader is based on whether our party will win or loose under his/her leadership, not on the principles that should guide our choices for a common good.

Some people find Caruana Galizia's pictures taken of random individuals at mass meetings or elsewhere, and her comments on the way that they were dressed and/or even behaved as unacceptable. Those who are critical, especially those on the left of our political spectrum, believe that this kind of journalism is prejudiced and brings class hatred into the equation. I am sure that that wasn't the intention of Caruana Galizia. Albeit there might be some truth in their criticism that it isn't right to invade one's own privacy, I can also see a failure on their part to understand what stood behind those pictures i.e. a critique of and against the parochial attitude ingrained in our culture - the macho culture of some men, and the submissiveness of certain kinds of women. She never limited her critique to class, as one may see from her commentary and photos of ministers, members of the opposition party, as well as businessmen/women. Caruana Galizia was critical of the same aspects in society that her own critics were also being critical of. The difference was in the way she did it.

We may see how some politicians do thrive on the attitudes that Caruana Galizia used to hate. The problem is that that kind of attitude is widespread and dominant in our culture, and that it is difficult for any journalist to promote a kind of position in society that goes against this ingrained culture. During the past decades, Caruana Galizia's blog was perceived as if it were a beckon of truth by people who supported the P.N, and was seen as the opposite by those who supported the P.L. Some of those in the P.L who were against what Caruana Galizia spewed hatred against her, calling her a witch, threatened her, and used all kinds of violent adjectives to describe her. Then came the leadership election of the P.N., and some in the party stopped supporting what Caruana Galizia had to say before the general election, and blamed her for the P.N.'s drubbing in the 3rd June general election. Rightly or wrongly, she was  critical of Adrian Delia who then became party and opposition leader after winning the leadership election. At that point we began to witness the same kind of violent attacks on the social media by the supporters of Delia. The attacks were no different to the venom that spewed out of those on the other side of fence, it was the same kind of venom by different people belonging to the same culture of parochial ignorance.
 


         

Who is harming the P.N.?

Sometimes I expect too much from people. Then I am befuddled by what they say, and I think to myself - and sometimes think so aloud on the social media - that there are people who are just unable to grasp things as they stand. We can all see  - i.e. if we are not too  myopic to do so - that there are a significant number of people who are just not convinced by Adrian Delia's leadership. This is a fact that cannot be denied, and whoever does deny this fact, or tries to give an impression that this is not the case by stating that there has been 600 new members in the P.N. are living in a parallel universe that few people know of. We need to face the facts, even if they hurt, or are so unpalatable for us that we manifest our denial and anger with an indignation that sounds more like a tantrum than anything close to somber or constructive reasoning.

In no way am I suggesting that because of this haemorrhage Delia must go. It goes without saying that it is only fair to give the man a chance to prove himself. My point is that there are people who support Delia who are harming him unknowingly - and the party also - and who are so blindly livid, or possessed by a paranoia of an acute kind that they are unable to understand that what they are doing or saying is what is leading to what they themselves are dreading. I will state fairly and squarely that telling people to join the P.L., because they do not support Delia is stupid to say the least. Don't these people realize that if doubters leave the P.N. altogether, there is little chance of any kind of inroads in the next electoral challenge in less than to two years time? Don't they realize that intelligent people do not follow leaders at all cost, and that honourable people are those who are true to themselves? It seems that they are unable or unwilling to reason that way, and for that reason, I am able to state with a degree of certainty that their attitude is what will be the downfall of the P.N., not those who are critical, and who are entitled to be so. You do not tell an intelligent person to shut up, without repercussions.

My advice to Adrian Delia is that he should attempt to calm people down, by telling his own supporters - obviously by persuading them about the harm they are inflicting to his leadership and the party - to stop kinds of comments such as: "you are negative for discussing the idea of a free vote in parliament" or worse still: "you are annoying a lot Nationalists, because you are giving an opinion". People are entitled to an opinion, and a debate on issues of different kinds should transcend the walls of the Dar Centrali. If you want to bring politics to the people, the worst thing you can do is to treat the leader of a party as some kind of titular statue in a village festa, or attempt to shut people up, or worse still, expect everyone's brain activity to be so backwards that the only contribution that they could give to a political debate is: "Delia!!! Delia!!" That's not what the P.N. need. The P.N. should be in the kazini, the grocer etc., but must also be a party that accepts constructive criticism by people who support it. The P.N. should not be a monastery, wherein things are done behind closed doors. The P.N. should be a party that embraces criticism, and is so close to the people that doubters are contacted, and given a voice in within the party. I will advise Delia that it is easy to be liked by some people, because notwithstanding the fact that you are the leader, you seem to be one of us or them - depending on how you see it - by making coffees in kazini, and playing table tennis, or billiards with students. However, you might also need to address the more difficult task of speaking to those who are less easily persuaded about your qualities.


        

   

Robert Arrigo for Deputy Leader

Robert Arrigo has been working for the good of the P.N. for a long time, even during times when things weren't that good for the party and for himself. If politics is to described as a service to the people, then Robert is one who has definitely excelled in that. His way of looking at politics has always been that of being close to the people. And, knowing what the needs of people are, is of utmost importance in politics, as there is nothing in life that is more important than one's own well being in society. As a party for the people, of the people, I believe that Robert really epitomizing what our party stands for.

His view of politics is that we need to understand people, empathize with their needs. Visiting people in their homes is a must in politics, as it gives a politician an idea of what people go through in their daily lives. A politician who is capable of doing this, is even more capable of bringing people together in a political party. This is very much need at this point in time for the P.N., after a leadership election which was intense to say the least. And, I am sure that Robert fits the bill in bring people together. 

To bring people back together, what is needed is someone who is capable of communicating with others, as Robert is surely capable of doing, as one could see from his popularity in the 9th and 10th district. And, I believe that having him as Deputy Leader on party affairs is what the P.N. need at this point in time to bring togetherness back to the party. 

Moreover, Roberts organizational experience, as we can all see in his past business experience and his position as Sliema mayor, will come handy for the P.N. to restructure itself further. A lot of good work has been done during these past 4 years, especially in the party's finances, and it is  important that we have people who could continue to enforce the good work that has already been done.   

    

On honesty and democracy: the P.N. leadership election result

I consider honesty and integrity as important in politics, as it should be in everything we do. However, there is another aspect to politics which we should all cherish, and work for, which is democracy. One of the reasons that I did not want Adrian Delia as leader of the P.N. was because of the allegations that were being said about him. Allegations are allegation, as there is no proof to say whether they are true or false. However, allegations are also a liability to any politician, and Delia is no different in this regard. And, it is for this reason that I have always held that he should clear his name, as not to embarrass the party. My opinion has not charged in this regard since then. I still believe in the necessity of transparency.

On the other hand, I believe that democracy is as important as ethics in politics. Democracy guarantees that the will of the people is respected. Democracy also ensures that minorities are not sidelined by the majority. And, this is even more the case when considering that nearly half of the voters in the election for leader last Saturday voted for Chris Said not for Adrian Delia. This obviously means that Delia, as the new leader of the P.N., needs to ensure that he brings back to the fold those who did not vote for him, and who went as far as to tear up their membership of the party. This is the first test for Delia as the P.N. leader. There are two of things he needs to do to bring back these people to the fold, and if he doesn't  do so, he would definitely fail to bring the party back to its feet again. The P.N. needs to unite behind the leader, if it is to become strong again, and the leader should do what he could to bring everyone on board.

The first thing that Delia needs to do is to persuade each and every member of the party that he knows of who has shown disappointment by tearing his/her membership, by speaking to them individually. He needs to win their trust. He can only do this by proving to them, beyond all doubt, that all that has been said about him is untrue, without seeming too offended or defensive when doing so. The second thing to do is to explain more clearly that he is not an anti-establishment politician of the kind as Donald Trump, and that he is prepared to work with everyone, even those who have been very much against him during the campaign. If Delia manages to do this, then I believe that he stands a good chance to unite the party. I am sure that most of those people who have torn their membership will eventually warm up to him to the benefit of the P.N., and even the country that needs a strong opposition.

On the other hand, it is important that we all accept the choice of the majority. This is done by considering it as a clean slate for Delia, and allowing him to prove that he can really bring the P.N. forward. It is way too early to judge what kind of leader Delia is going to be, and it is important that we all give him a fair chance to prove himself. I am prepared to do so. Are you?
   

Simon Busuttil, the P.N. leadership election, and honest politics

Honesty in politics, and in all walks of life, is the most important thing to have. This is why I respect Simon Busuttil for what he stands for, and what he stood for as P.N. leader. As Leader of the Opposition, Busuttil fought for and spoke tirelessly about good governance in politics, and made this central to the P.N.'s electoral campaign, and during his four years at the helm of the party. Some people say that he focused too much on good governance, but said too little of other things people want to hear about, such as the economy, or daily problems. My take on this is that Busuttil understood that good governance is what ought to be the foundation of a government that could bring sustainable progress to our country, and daily needs are conditioned by sustainability. It is fallacious to believe that the positive economic wave that our country is riding upon at this point in time is sustainable without the good governance to go with it. Thus, the idea of some that they do not care if people in the present government take what isn't there's, as long as the rest of society is better off, is shortsighted and will come to bite them in the future. Corruption will ultimately catch up on us and them with devastating consequences to the economy, and to our way of life, including our daily needs. This is why fighting corruption was central to Busuttil's leadership of the P.N.

Some people say that the P.N. was being run by the blogger Daphne Caruana Galizia, and that her accusations were unsubstantiated. On this, there may be the relevant point that relying on what the independent press comes up with is not the right way forward for any political party; that the P.N. need to be self sufficient However, in most if not all democratic countries, what journalists discover and publish is taken seriously, and there have been politicians who were forced to resign, because of what journalists said about them. On the other hand, I will argue that the P.N. might need to invest more on it's own investigative journalism, while taking into account what independent journalists say about the situation in our country and abroad. What was said about the Muscat government before the last general election by Caruana Galizia raised questions that couldn't be ignored by Busuttil leadership, and he did right to raise the alarm. The prime minister, Joseph Muscat, was unable to come up with a credible explanation on the Panama papers, and the P.N. did the right thing to ask for his resignation, together with that of Minister Konrad Minister, and his (Muscat's) Chief of Staff, Keith Schembri. For a politicians who believes in good governance as is Busuttil, such accusations made the position of all three untenable.

People were called to the streets by the P.N., and a lot of activists and supporters flocked in their droves. They believed what Caruana Galizia said, or rather I used to believe that they did believe what Caruana Galizia said, and were in it because, as did Busuttil. they believed in clean and honest politics. My experience of many P.N. activists was that they were constantly looking forward to the next story that could damage the P.L., and it's leadership in the Caruana Galizia blog. I was one of those who was there, and who supported the P.N, in its fight against corruption, and in support of good governance. I took part in the protest, because I believed and still do that full disclosure and transparency should be central to politics. I did not do it to damage the government, or to propel the P.N. into government at all costs. Could this be said of some people who were present at the protest? My answer to this is "No!!". Some were just interested in scoring points against the P.L., not to bring a better future for our country.

To some extent, I could understand that some people consider politics as if it were a football match, and that they consider winning at all costs as the most important thing. However, having politicians in the P.N. reasoning in that way beggars belief. They should rise up above the populism of the crowd. I remember Clyde Puli, Jean Pierre Debono, and others who now support Adrian Delia's candidature for leader, agreeing with Caruana Galizia, and publicly stating that the prime minister should shoulder his responsibility for not firing Minister Mizzi and Chief of Staff, Schembri, and resign. They expected full disclosure from those in power. I thought that they genuinely believed that full disclosure is the most important thing to do in politics, and I was fooled at the time about their intentions being noble. Nowadays, I doubt whether their true motive was that of fighting for full disclosure. I am more inclined to believe that they adopted a position, because it was in their best interest to do so i.e. for their political career. If they really do believe in transparency and full disclosure, I cannot fathom how they do not have a problem with the fact that the candidate that they are supporting is being accused of the same things, by the same blogger, as were Mizzi and Schembri. Delia refuses to clarify his position about his business interests, and raises doubts because of it, which will harm the P.N.'s long term future i.e. if he becomes leader. Delia was so unconvincing and hazy about his business dealings, when he was summoned to the ethics board, formed by the Administrative Council, that he was asked to withdraw his candidature by that same Administrative Council.

 Busuttil, who has always been consistent and true to his word, said that if he were in Delia's position he would have withdrawn his candidature. In my opinion, Busuttil did the right thing to respect the party structures, and expect that others do the same. On the other hand, Delia was defiant. And those M.P.s I have mention above who support him, welcomed his decision to go against the interests of the party, by defying the verdict given by the Administrative Council. One must not forget that the decision was taken because of what came out from the ethics board, which was the right thing for the Administrative Council to do. Delia's people always use the word establishment to justify their claim against things being done properly. They suggest that the establishment is working against Delia's candidature, which is nothing but a load of baloney. However, in reality, who could be more part of the party establishment than a former parliamentary secretary, and a Deputy Secretary General who have been there since the time of Lawrence Gonzi? If anything the man who is truly not part of the establishment is the outgoing leadership of Simon Busuttil.

If the P.N. is in any way going to continue the fight against corruption, we need someone whose integrity is not in doubt, and who doesn't need to be constantly defending himself when he is supposed to be bringing the party forward. The only candidate who fits that description is Chris Said.

       

       

The PN's current situation: my opinion.

It is important that we bring things into perspective, and stop the hysterics, if we are to be taken seriously. It is clear that things were done with haste, and the election for leader of the P.N. has not been organized that well, because of an uncalled for urgency. This has caused some problems that have been milked by some, as to give a false impression that there is a plot headed by Daphne Caruana Galizia in the Dar Centrali. This kind of opportunistic electioneering must be condemned unequivocally, as it is causing damage to the party we love, and has led to a barrage of attacks by our adversaries. I was watching a program of ONE TV when the whole thing unfolded the day before yesterday, which was presented by Karl Stagno Navarra. The whole aim of the program was to ridicule the PN. They phoned one of our councilors, Dr. Joseph Ellis, and didn't allow him to speak, after which we had Stagno Navarra aggressively rebuking and ridiculing him. I do not think that this was fair towards a man who we all consider as an exemplary and honest gentleman. This is unacceptable, and to be honest, we are bringing all this onto us ourselves, which is a pity. There was Dr. Simon Mercieca calling the decision of the Administrative Council, Stalinist, Dr. Robert Musumeci stating that this was the same kind of situation that made him and Stagno Navarra leave the PN to join the PL, while Dr. Miriam Dalli (the PL MEP) and Dr. Daniel Micallef (the president of the PL) were having a field day stating that they were so sorry for the PN activists, who have been betrayed by their own undemocratic party headed by Dr. Simon Busuttil. Dr. Musumeci also suggested that the PL, which he still defines as a movement, should fill in the void left by a crumbling PN. The attack was mainly on Dr. Simon Busuttil, which says a lot about the true motive behind the whole program. The intention was to discredit Dr. Simon Busuttil and Ms. Daphne Caruana Galizia for their own gain.

It is clear that the PL are trying to divert the attention off the true issue that is still plaguing them up to this very day i.e. corruption. They know too well that by making Ms. Caruana Galizia look bad they are able to make her claims look unconvincing, and this could well absolve them from her accusations on Mr. Konrad Mizzi, Mr. Keith Schembri, and the Prime Minister. We have fallen for that trap, with some of us going as far as to question her claims before the general election, those which we had fought for, and which we should still be believing in i.e. honest politics. We are fighting against each other, and in the mean time we are heading towards the imminent risk that the government is left to run the show without an opposition to fight corruption. May I remind the reader of this blog that the same Muscat government is there to continue its rampage on our countries assets, and that it was Ms. Caruana Galizia who unmasked a lot of what had happened. We owe this to her.

In saying this, it would be wrong to state or consider Ms. Caruana Galizia as infallible, or as an oracle of unquestionable truth. And, for this reason I believe that the PN needs to be cautious before accepting anything she says. We need to verify facts before committing ourselves to a position. We need to become self-sufficient by having the right information from which to take our decisions. Yet, it is equally wrong to treat her as an enemy of the PN or the country (this is what the PL want), as she has contributed so much to the fight against institutional corruption. She has made claims against one of the candidates for PN leader, and it is only right that these claims are investigated, and that we give him the right to defend himself against these allegations which are serious. This is what the ethics board, entrusted with conducting this investigation are going to do. For this reason, it would be wrong for anyone to see this as a sort of campaign against the candidate by this faceless clique. This is precisely how things are done seriously, and it was the right decision by the Administrative Council to make. Now, Dr. Adrian Delia will have the opportunity to prove that he is up to the job and innocent. It is up to him to rise up to the occasion and proof that he does not have anything to hide.          

Winning is not the only thing that matters

In summer, temperatures are most certainly high. Amid the village festas, attended to by droves of eager people, the marketing strategies of politicians are at full swing. Photos are taken, and politicians smile with members of a festive crowd,  together with their bottles or cans of beer. Politicians know that it is important to be seen, that they make people feel that they are one of them. And, maybe then, or possibly only then they will be voted for by some who are only interested in being part of an "us" against "them" dichotomy, a mentality that has been marring our political culture for decades. This is what brings politicians to act is this way, and I do not blame them for doing so, especially when considering the parochial culture that we are living in. Even well meaning politicians, who are many, need to entice this parochial mentality, if they are to make any headway in their political careers. Political parties are no different to football clubs for this tribal element in Maltese society. Politics is discussed over beers in kazini by rowdy and intoxicated macho men, whose idea of what is good for them and their country is somewhat limited to how certain political decisions have effected them in their daily lives, without them even considering the whole picture, such as, for example, the common good which is so important to sound politics. To add to this, their more generic political approach will be about how bad immigration is for our country, with all the racist bigotry that goes with drunken behaviour, but as they say "vino veritas", intoxication does tell some of the truths about things in this country. Maltese politic's future is being discussed in this scenario, a fertile ground for the worst kind of populist politics. And, this is because a distinction is not being made between a bit of summer entertainment like the local festa or good of football match, which I've got nothing against and even enjoy, and politics that should go beyond the kazin bickering and the drunken men. Winning at all costs is what really matters for a crowd that loves to celebrate their superiority to that of the kazin on the other side of the road. But, this should not apply to politics. Winning is not the only thing that matters in politics, as politics is what effects  people's lives beyond the pique coming out of populism. Moreover, the most incompatible aspect that one may find in the festa to that of politics is that for the former it is not enough only to win, but also to enjoy your adversary's disappointment. With this mentality, it is useless winning if there is no other side with their heads hanging downwards in exacerbation or shame. On the other hand, politics it is about bringing people together for the good of society and the country, not punishing your adversary. Yet it is the mentality of pique that people want, and it is this that politicians have to face and cater for when campaigning amid the stench of beer and whiskey in the "marc ta' filghodu". Politicians need to cater for a tribal mentality, without becoming the kind of populist who does more harm than good to national politics. However, there is a very thin line between being close to the people and being an outright populist.

As amid this festiveness, the fireworks, and the excesses that go with them, lurking in the crowds are those who deem power attractive, and who are willing to do what is needed to gain it when the opportunity arises. Many times, this is because that is what boosts their already inflated ego. These are many times outsiders to political parties, and the political game, but might be presidents of the local kazin. They come out of the woodwork of a tribal mentality, and say things that the tribesman or  tribeswoman want to here, or find attractive. Promises that victory is certain if they are made the tribal chief is rife, conveyed to the festive crowd in a rhetoric that is as colorful and as load as the fireworks and brass bands so typical of a festive climate. That is what these kind of people are good at and the crowds want it. The crowd promotes the president of their football club to become Leader of the Opposition, even without the necessary political experience to go with it. However, experience in politics is what really and truly matters, not running a football club, which is a different sort of enterprise altogether. Populism promotes these kinds of pseudo-politicians who go with the flow, project themselves as one of them or us, as accessible blokes with a can of beer and a load demeanor, with no substance to go with it.  This is empowering for some i.e. that is what makes the non-discerning crowd feel empowered. The crowd believes that having "one-of-us" will  mean that their voices are heard, that problems are solved, and that they will all live happily ever after, and also possibly have a bite at the cherry when the opportunity arises. Yet this is far from what really happens in this kind of situation. People will be disappointed. I am sure about it.

Unfortunately, this kind of populism does not work, and leaves people with far less than what they expect or hope for. A politician is no Father Christmas, who dishes out gifts for all those who have been good disciples. There is more to politics than a football or band club. Moreover, it is not only about winning in politics, as politics is also about guaranteeing that people live their lives freely, without the need of a demigod who looks as modest as one may get, albeit his grandeur is there for all of us to see. There is a big difference between local tradition which is fine, and a politics that has become more sophisticated and demanding than ever before, especially since we've joined the EU. We need a clear-headed leadership in the PN that goes beyond songs that sing the praises of the "l-avukat ta' klassi" who will rid the party of the "klikkek" in Dar Centrali, klikkek that by the way are anything but true. We need a leader who was there when we were fighting corruption during the past 4 years, against a government deemed as the most corrupt our country has ever had. The PN does not need a leader who has decided that he wants to become the Leader of the Opposition just two months ago, without the necessary experience. Here, we are considering the future of our party as well as the democracy of our county, not whether one kazin in better than the other. We need experience. We need Chris Said to be our leader.