From a distance

This is perhaps the first electoral campaign that I am not somehow involved in, directly or indirectly, since 1971 - over 50 years ago. I first contested the election in 1976 and have quite some knowledge how the campaigns since then progressed, from a PN vantage point.

Looking at the campaign from a distance helps one to be more objective and avoid falling into the sort of biased reasoning that prevails in any of the political camps battling it out.

The Labour strategists, for example, think that Tonio Fenech is on the defensive on the energy issue, especially after the revelations of alleged kickbacks in the purchase of oil by Enemalta because he has lowered his tone, and is coming across as less aggressive. The real reason for this is not what the Labour camp seems to think: he has been told to calm down as his aggressiveness was coming across as an arrogant 'know it all' attitude that was backfiring and doing more harm than good with those who are still judging the issue, even though it made him popular with established staunch Nationalist voters.

The sudden 'disappearance' of Konrad Mizzi from our television screens was interpreted by the Nationalist camp as an indirect acknowledgement of his having failed to convince people on his energy plans.

The real reason, however, seems to be that this was a preplanned tactic to propel Konrad Mizzi to the top of the public discussion that would then help him immensely in the door-to-door campaign in the electoral district where he is standing as a candidate. Mizzi is not cowering, but simply meeting potential voters. 

Even so, the debate on the energy issue seems to have somewhat dissipated in the third week of the electoral campaign and, contrary to what seemed to be happening for some time, undecided electors are being confronted with a more fundamental issue. This is Joseph Muscat's much vaunted 'new Labour' stance. Simply put, can Joseph Muscat persuade these voters that his is not a temporary misleading stance to win votes only to act as Labour has been known to act whenever it was in power?

In an interview on The Sunday Times a week ago, Muscat said that Malta needed Dom Mintoff in 1971, it needed Eddie Fenech Adami in 1987 and implied that it now needs him. He reiterated this in a speech some two days later. His trend of thought is that the input of political leaders of importance (thus discarding Alfred Sant, KMB and Lawrence Gonzi) is what made this country what it is. And he intends to continue building on what these leaders have built.

His is a pretentious and immodest claim: the torch of progress passed on from Dom Mintoff (who freed Malta from being a military base) to Eddie Fenech Adami (who made Malta an EU Member State) and it will now pass on to Joseph Muscat. Of course, this ignores the stance Joseph Muscat took under Alfred Sant's leadership when he fought tooth and nail against EU leadership. Perhaps Muscat's sojourn in Brussels as an MEP changed him as he now 'staunchly' believes that Malta's place in within the EU!

Yet, I cannot but admire the way Muscat has thrown old Mintoffian ideas in the dust heap of history. His talk on the importance of tertiary education is in sharp contrast with Mintoff's utilitarian education policies that saw the old MCAST being wiped out and our University decimated. This is more than fifty shades of Tony Blair - whom Muscat tries to emulate - being the true successor of Margaret Thatcher's political legacy.

Many disgruntled Labour insiders are even saying that Muscat is a Nationalist, after all! The PN says that he is a fake Nationalist, not the genuine article and people would be risking if they fall for this trick - much like a tourist buying a cheap fake brand watch from a street vendor only to find that despite the similarity in the external appearance, the fake watch does not really work.

A very interesting situation in the electoral campaign is therefore ensuing. Except for calling him a 'fake', the Nationalist Party has no reply to Muscat's stance and has, in fact, been taken aback with Muscat's invasion of its turf.

Over the years, the PN has perfected its tactics in its confrontations with Labour but using these tactics now, presumes Labour has not changed. If Labour has really changed the way Muscat is saying it did, the PM is at a loss because they are fighting Muscat's Labour with the tactics they so successfully used against Mintoff's and KMB's MLP. For me, this is the wheel turning a full circle: Mintoff - who was used to fighting Borg Olivier's PN - was at a loss fighting Fenech Adami's new PN.

The big conundrum is whether Muscat is honest in his stance and - even more important - whether once in power he would be able to control and overwhelm the vestiges of old Labour that are still alive and kicking.

Just a casual remark?

A few days ago, Lou Bondi unearthed a two-year old clip with an apparently casual

remark about me during one of his numerous Bondi+ programmes.

He was talking about Labour's reaction to news of wrongdoing comparing their stance to the latest revelations about alleged kickbacks in the purchase of oil with their stance in two other unrelated and quite different cases, one of which was the Sandro Chetcuti incident.

It was in the context of Sandro Chetcuti that I was mentioned - a good example of the Maltese idiomatic expression about Pontius Pilate being mentioned in the Nicean Creed.

When I accepted to become President of the Malta Developers Association with Sandro Chetcuti as Vice-President, I took a calculated risk because I was aware of facts and circumstances that the general public did not know.

Subsequent events have proved that I was right and that there was more than a hint of abuse of power in Chetcuti being accused of attempted murder - an accusation that has now been withdrawn by the Attorney General.

I am a Nationalist who fought against the abuse of power of the Mintoffian regime when it would have paid me handsomely to become one of the regime's cronies. Lou, of course, does not remember this as he was in Canada at the time.

As a true Nationalist, my first loyalty is to the principles of the Nationalist Party and this means that I combat abuse of power wherever it comes from. If Lou is looking for a turncoat in this episode, I am sure he can easily find one.

If his programme is truly an exercise in genuine journalism, Lou should use it to investigate the Sandro Chetcuti accusation rather than to pass inane, casual remarks. I am ready to help him organise it. I am sure it will reveal even more than is already publicly known.