Xarabank hosts personality clash that leaves political debate wanting

Judges' bribery and impeachments?

Forget the issues. Nationalist deputy leader Simon Busuttil's offensive ignored Xarabank presenter Peppi Azzopardi's question, and took Labour to task on its "gimmicky" stunt to pull out Anglu Farrugia and instead have Nationalist MP Franco Debono take up his airtime on Friday.

On Saturday evening's audience-less Xarabank, it seemed this would give the two deputy leaders some sort of controlled environment in which to discuss hot issues.

But little of this happened. Spin and counter-spin, tired soundbites, Farrugia's umpteenth reference to Busuttil "locking himself in the green room" (from Friday's gatecrashing incident), and the TVM audience was left bereft of real argumentation on ideas, policies, and issues.

The overall impression of this soon-to-be-forgotten encounter was that Anglu Farrugia's clunky improv could not stand up to Busuttil's condescending charisma and rhetoric.

The PN's deputy leader's air of confidence and pedantry cut a too patronising figure for his own good, sometimes glancing at Farrugia as if he were dealing with an invalid when the Labour MP found himself unable to explain what the living wage proposed by Muscat back in 2009 was.

Farrugia's one-upmanship failed to hit home, and lacked the necessary aggression to respond to his counterpart on strong, political issues. 20 minutes into the debate, he struggled to answer a question as to what taxes the PN had raised in 2008. He could not criticize tax cuts for the rich, because Labour will keep them if elected in 2013.

Busuttil came back with flawless delivery, save for the fact that he could not illustrate exactly why Labour is being contradictory in its position not to raise minimum wage, while pledging to remove the €60 income tax that single-computation minimum earners will be paying after the government's technical oversight in the last budget.

He also could not give Farrugia a satisfactory reply when he raised a court judgement on corrupt practices during the 2008 elections: but still, Farrugia was not strong enough in driving his point home.

There were grave own-goals. When asked about his opposition to EU membership, Farrugia asked Busuttil about his lack of participation in the divorce debate. The MEP defended himself saying he was passing through a "difficult personal situation", so he stepped away from the debate but voted in favour of divorce, and went further: "I would have voted in parliament in favour as well," the deputy leader said, distancing himself from the prime minister's unpopular position.

Then he turned back to Farrugia, taking him to task for voting against EU ratification even when the majority had voted in favour of EU membership.

Alternattiva Demokratika's deputy chairperson Carmel Cacopardo piped up from the 'third party sofa' (he was not given a lectern) criticizing the Prime Minister on his inconsistency when it comes to resignations. "When his finance minister broke the code of ethics by accepting a free holiday aboard a private jet to watch Arsenal play, he did not ask him to resign; nor did he ask him to resign when Tonio Fenech's private secretary was convicted of accepting bribes which allegedly financed his electoral campaign."

An hour into the debate, Cacopardo makes his second point to make his party's case to raise the minimum wage, citing the Caritas poverty report: "It doesn't make sense to reduce income tax when you cannot address the quality of life of these people... that's why this budget is socially regressive, and we cannot understand how Labour agrees with this budget."

Farrugia made a strong point on people living at risk of poverty having risen from 80,000 to 88,000 in five years, to counter Busuttil's praise of government programmes. But as he addressed Cacopardo to tell him that poverty was one of the reasons he will reduce electricity bills with a concrete plan, the AD deputy chairperson replied: "Will you reduce water bills?", giving Busuttil the cue to join in this curious question.

Farrugia doesn't confirm, answering the question with a question to Busuttil: "What guarantee do you give me that you won't increase utility rates as proposed by the European Commission?"

Peppi Azzopardi then asked Farrugia a hypothetical question: "If elected to power, and you find yet another financial hole, will you recant on your pledge to reduce utility bills?"

Instead of answering, Farrugia tells Azzopardi he should demand Busuttil to make good for his previous claim that the Nationalist government reduced 25 taxes. Cue free time for Busuttil to read out a list of tax reductions. "I'm running out of breath," Busuttil said.

Azzopardi turns back to Farrugia on utility rates. Farrugia wants to answer on minimum wage earners, and says Labour will raise the tax ceiling for single computation earners; Azzopardi says this will raise the tax ceiling for everyone; again Farrugia struggles: "we'll make a regulation to address this injustice."

So Farrugia is a hopeless orator. Busuttil is too patronising and clever by half, albeit the general victor in this clash of personalities. And the reflective Cacopardo, in his limited intervention, cut the more credible figure on the issues he raised, especially with Busuttil too eager to wrong him on every point he raised.

Would you buy any of these men a beer after this evening? The chances are that the memory of this non-debate won't survive your first bowel movement on Sunday morning.