I am quite sure that many of you have come across situations where, in your heart of hearts, you felt that the idiom 'the pot calling the kettle black' fits like a glove.  The idiom comes from old times when pots and pans were generally black, and kettles were generally metallic and reflective.  There are two interpretations of this idiom, though some sources give only the first.  In the first interpretation, the idiom refers to the fact that both pots' and kettles' bottoms turn equally black when hung over a fire, and thus the pot is accusing the kettle of a fault it shares.

In the second, subtler interpretation, the pot is sooty being placed on an open fire, while the kettle is clean and shiny being placed only on coals; hence when the pot accuses the kettle of being black, it is the pot's own sooty reflection that it sees: the pot accuses the kettle of a fault that only the pot has.

With this in mind, I pen some random thoughts about the current turbulent political situation.  It is not my intention to put any of the public figures under the spotlight.  They have already attracted too much limelight on the national stage and I believe what they wish and pray for is a power failure to help them ease their tension and weariness which the spotlight inevitably brings with it.  In this regard I willingly oblige, at least for the time being.  Without judging or going into the merits or demerits, or referring to any of the current or former members of the House who through their actions or lack thereof  have discredited all efforts of their colleagues and their political party with the electorate, I write this piece.

After the long cold winter months, Spring is normally associated with fine and pleasant weather.  Regrettably, although Spring is on us, the fresh air is fouled with toxic fumes released from the boiling concoction which has been simmering on the back-burner for many months, if not years, in the political cauldron.

In the current political arena, leading members of Parliament sitting on opposite sides of the House and representing different political parties are trying to escape the political crossfire which is aimed in their direction. This is causing distress amongst the electorate.   Occasionally, a number of the honourable ladies and gentlemen from all sides of the House voice their consternation at the behaviour of their colleagues.  The diligent ones air their views in private; others, in search of attracting the media attention, make their statements in public.  In the latter case, the already troubled pot is stirred even further.

With the two leading political parties and the other small political formations gearing up for the coming general election, the electorate will soon be engaged, or perhaps more accurately put, inundated with loads of proposals, plans, schemes, roadmaps and suggestions.  More often than not, these will be released for public consumption during highly charged party events.    Hopefully, the electorate will thoroughly sieve through all proposals floated in the public domain and decide as to what is valid and what is not.  If the electorate fails to participate in this democratic process, it will do so at its own peril.     

I have no doubt that the proposals will target the widest audience possible, with assistance in cash or in kind promised to different cohorts within our society.   The national good will feature prominently, while the quality of life and an improved standard of living of each and every citizen will obviously feature significantly in political speeches and appear in the glossy publications issued by all political parties.

But this is not quite enough.  

In a democracy, everyone is entitled to express an opinion and draw his/her own conclusions.  Of course, one may at any time change that stance.  The reasons could be many, and whether justified or otherwise is always debateable.  But the decision to shift political allegiance is always the prerogative of the electorate, and the electorate is supreme.  At times, even the staunchest and the hardest-headed shift their allegiance from one political party to another.

But it would be wrong if the electorate gives up on the opportunity to participate in the coming general election because it feels that political parties have moved very close to each other and in the shade of mega businesses.  It would be equally wrong if the electorate assumes that all politicians are in the pockets of the business community.  To begin with, not all businessmen resort to brown envelopes; and to finish, not all politicians find it difficult to identify what constitutes a conflict of interest.        

Perhaps party delegates and councillors of the PL and PN can take a more active role during general conferences and other political activities. The delegates' and councillors' silence and lack of participation in political seminars, general conferences and other events is deafening.  It would do a good deal of good if party delegates and councillors make their voice heard.  Looking back, the then MLP delegates kept mum when the party was overtaken by a handful of violent thugs. The PN councillors failed to convey to the party leadership when it became disconnected from the electorate.  Currently, despite the many alleged cases of corruption by this administration, PL delegates fail to voice any concern to the detriment of the party and the common good. Hopefully, PN councillors will speak their mind to assist the leadership of the party in taking bold decisions in the best interest of the electorate and the party when the time comes.  Together with other politically correct measures the electorate can look forward to a better future.

 

Gejtu Vella

[email protected]