PN and civil society: a relationship of convenience

Very often government and a chorus of media supporters have portrayed critical voices as insignificant troublemakers.

Carmen Sammut 2 March 2012, 12:00am

4 min read

A special appointment: Simon Busuttil will liaise with civil society and the Prime Minister. Photo: Ray Attard/Mediatoday

TWEET SHARE

Fresh from his re-anointment as party leader, Prime Minister Gonzi declared he is willing to address repeated accusations that his legislature has become insensitive to the public. Two 'initiatives' were announced. Initiatives should bring something 'new', when in fact his two steps merely entail old arrangements.

First, it was stated that the PN secretary-general should ensure that ministers, parliamentarians and candidates reach out to their constituents. What's new in this? Isn't it his job to see that his party communicates with electors? This announcement could have been a positive 'initiative' only if the Prime Minister instructed his Cabinet to acknowledge that - given the slim electoral majority of 2008 (and his current questionable support in Parliament) - they should be addressing the concerns of the whole nation and not just the lost sheep that may or may not vote for his party in a fast-approaching election.

The second 'initiative' is even more amusing. Dr Simon Busuttil was appointed special delegate to lead a "structured dialogue" with civil society and the social partners.

Flirting with civil society is not news to us. As the PN seems set to drop the GonziPN brand, we are now witnessing renewed attempts at attracting civil society exponents. Yet, history has shown us that this flirting has always ended in a relationship of convenience. Civil society has been repeatedly bruised by such blatant political expediency.

Only two years ago I was only one of several observers who noted in this blog, that after the heavy petting that went on during the EU referendum campaign, we were experiencing "the ramming of civil society". When government failed to tame activists by co-opting activists into some state structures, critical individuals were demonized. Government quickly forgot that civil society may positively contribute to enrich our democratic life. Critical voices became an unnecessary nuisance.

One clear example of sheer arrogance toward civil society exponents comes to mind. Barely four years after all the sweet-nothings whispered in the EU referendum campaign, environment minister George Pullicino had an ugly showdown with seasoned environmentalist Alfred Baldacchino, whom he brutally slammed as 'gakbin' (traitor) in front of bemused bystanders. He lambasted him because Baldacchino dared to speak out. This is not an isolated incident as in the past years, critical NGO activists turned from heroes to villains.

The marginalization of civil society players is another trait of this unhealthy relationship. The brutal exclusion of Forum Unions Maltin from MCESD is one clear example. I now wonder if the new delegate can help resolve this shameful and long-standing issue. Wasn't MCESD meant to promote social dialogue? So why have we wasted so much time and resources? How many suggestions were made by MCESD and NGOs, and how many of them were taken on board?

There have been several ways in which the important role of civil society was put aside. Then, how many times have we seen government spin questioning civil society's representativeness and transparency? How often did agenda-setters inject negative perceptions of NGOs and their leading exponents?

Very often government and a chorus of media supporters portray critical voices as insignificant troublemakers. We have seen high profile opinion-leaders assert that civil society actions have no newsworthiness whatsoever because they are few in number and do not have professional set-ups. There are moments when NGO members were described as naive and malleable.

We can also observe that some valid groups are being shackled so that they do not have enough oxygen to flourish. Take student politics at University as one very clear example. The University should be a training ground for political and civil society leaders. Yet, government has never lifted a finger to ensure that many student organizations do not continue to be blocked-voted out of the Students' Council. It never intervened to help replace an outdated first-past-the-post election that secures a majority of votes for government sympathisers in the executive committee.

Dialogue entails two-way communication. It also entails respect for the autonomy of civil society exponents, who are often less powerful then hegemonic party and state machineries. The promise to take the PN in this direction cannot be undertaken just by a solitary Brussels-based delegate. It requires the effort of a whole party to restore trust and it is now too late in the day to move in that direction. The party has clearly already ignited its electoral engine and its electoral ambitions are far too obvious.

Dr Carmen Sammut is the chairperson of the Labour party think-tank Ideat.

More from Carmen Sammut

•

Keep it up Carmen for your articles are so refreshing. They must have hit some raw nerves in the corridors of power and with the academic body which kowtows to it. It is so refreshing to see a new breed of highly educated Labour women contributing to all the various aspects of the media and politics and brimming with ideas. I am sure that your contributions are having the right effect where it matters most, namely with the electorate. You are right up there with the men and frankly I think you are heralding a new progressive era where women will make a strong contribution to politics in Malta. Indeed as happened in may academic courses it is likely that in the net decade you will be in a majority in parliament and thus bring about the radical changes to the image of a macho style confrontational parliament.

Nathan Maugein •

Jacques please re-read the who article. I am talking about two-way communication with civil society. I also stated that autonomous NGO reponses should not be overwhelmed by powerful institutions that include parties and the state. Now let us move to the important business of student politics. You have been a University student and so you must be fully aware of our particular reality whereby an old voting system, which I believe dates back to the 1920s, is suffocating student politics. Instead of vibrant student politics we have a long-standing status quo which is contributing to widespread apathy; just look at the voter turnout in KSU elections these days. Many student organisations of all hues tried to join forces to change this but did not manage. It just happens that the status quo suits the party, which is in government. So it seems it is NOT ME who is obsessed with government control. It is the KSU voting system which is regressive and not the reasoning behind my whole argument.

Charles Gauci •

This obsession with wanting government to intervene everywhere is becoming rather worrying - especially when that kind of thinking is espoused by the chairperson of a political party think tank. Have posted here: http://www.akkuza.com/2012/03/03/carmens-regressive-thoughts-and-the-labourites-obsession-with-government-control/ about this... would be interested to hear your reaction.

Charles Gauci •

Nathan Maugein •

Yes our democratic life needs civil society players who are not overwhelmed by polarized politics on the old GWU-UHM model. And it was indeed a step in the right direction that it has dawned on us there are national issues which concern each and everyone of us and others that are related to the civil rights of minorities across the partisan divide, as in the divorce and LGBT rights debate. I believe that sincere dialogue with a strong civil society may even help restore trust in our political life. Having followed the public outcry this weekend, one must add that dialogue cannot take place as long as there are too many Joanna Gonzis, Julian Galeas in our society. We must wake up and shed old insular perspectives. If these islands do not wish to sink, we need to destroy the ghetto walls and ensure that every individual has the chance to roll up his/her sleeves to make positive contributions in all spheres of life. Ghetto walls may have suited some people during colonial times; they may have served some interests in the post-colonial period but they will surely make us perish in the era of globalisation. In a microstate of 400,000 we cannot keep treating half the population as pariahs! We are already far too small as we are!

•

Ghaziza Carmen, Prosit u grazzi ta' dawn l-artikli, kemm hu pjacevoli taqra kummenti politici ta' cert livell minghajr ma tkun imxerda mibgheda. Mhux fl-istess il-kaz tal program Dossier fuq ONE tv min Charlon Gouder u Jason Micallef, dawn it-tnejn ser jergaw jitfawna f'abbissi ta' nkwiet. Int li ghandek il-kwalitajiet kollha necessarji fil qasam tal media u issa anke din il-kariga gdida Fi hdan il-moviment tal moderati ghandek taghmel minn kollox biex dan il-hmieg ta' xandir jieqaf.

•

A number of good points made. Our political parties view civil society and NGO's in a strange way and expect them in a way to fall in line with their political aims. In their eyes the biggest enemy is an independent society with its own mindset which does not play court to either of them. It is great if an NGO or grouping supports my party and tolerated if a grouping allies itself with the opposition (you can always set up and support a rival party loyal institution. Our parties want all our organisations to take the GWU or UHM as role models to follow. However gradually and inexorably times are changing. The classic example was the divorce issue where persons of goodwill from both sides came together and scored the greatest change for civil society all outside the clutches of the party hegemony. The same can be said about the environment and censorship where a strong lobby is conditioning the way parties now dare speak. Recently we had the case of ACTA agreement where despite the official government line pushed promoted and defended by Simon Busuttil civil society immediately raised its arms and cudgels to oppose. Unfortunately our University which should be the nursery of independent thought and promoter of structures which support clash of ideas does not help in any way. Indeed one lesson academic staff and students have demeaningly learnt is that it does help your career prospects if you slavishly be seen as supporting one party or the other. For persons like me educated in a climate of constant dialectic and confrontation of ideas this is an abomination. However I am very hopeful and positive that things are rapidly changing and in the last two years I have noticed a sea change and a strong fresh purifying breeze starting to influence society. Fortunately also the leader of the opposition Joe Muscat does seem to believe and want the evolution of an independently minded and thinking civil society although many in his party might sill tsubscribe to the old hegemony model.