In August forty-nine years ago, the then Soviet Union invaded the former Czechoslovakia. In protest against the Soviet Union’s invasion of his country, Prague-born Jan Palach, 21, immolated himself in Wenceslas Square on 16 January 1969. Dr Jaroslava Moserová, a physician specialised in skin burns and who was the first to provide care to Palach, claimed that Palach did not set himself on fire to protest against the Soviet occupation, but did so to protest against the "demoralisation" of Czechoslovak citizens caused by the occupation. This was corroborated by Palach himself on his deathbed.
And how do Palach and the new PN leader converge one may ask? Obviously, they do not. The new PN leader should not be expected to do a Palach to protect the common good. However, he should not use the leadership as a means of self-preservation. Palach, the protagonist, continues to live in poems, songs, squares, streets and train stations across various EU countries, but the new PN leader is only expected to unite, lead and offer alternative policies to a decadent administration. I know for a fact that this is easier said than done. But leaders are expected to lead.
The four gentlemen running for the vacant post of PN leader, together with their respective teams, are currently working round the clock to reach the highest number of persons affiliated to the PN. The four candidates - Adrian Delia, Alex Perici Calascione, Frank Portelli and Chris Said - are contesting an election which to some extent has turned sour in recent days. Hopefully, these differences will be ironed out soon. The four candidates are aiming to influence and obtain the support of the highest number of persons entitled to a ballot paper in the Party-leader race. In the first round, some 1,500 are entitled to a voting document, after which two contestants will be eliminated. In the final head-to-head, more than 20,000 are eligible to cast their vote.
As part of the campaign for the PN leadership, last Thursday the four contestants participated in a debate organised by the Party. The second debate is scheduled for this Thursday. Hopefully, an all-round extra effort is made by the four gentlemen to come across better. Their performance needs to be improved. The content, the proposals, the body language, the genuineness, the empathy, the passion and the realism to the current political circumstances have to be by far more inspiring.
Of course, a leader must be able to communicate well, but speaking well is not all that is required. The leader must also be able to listen on all levels. Leaders who communicate well are those who not only share their thoughts with others, but also empower those working around them.
In my opinion, the next PN leader is to have courage, tenacity, and patience. He must have the courage to stand alone, the tenacity to not succumb to pressure and the patience to keep fighting until the vision is owned, shared and transformed into a national challenge. Another key trait is a combination of humility and presence. Acting aloof or at a distance from the PN structures would not make a good leader. He has to be flexible and able to change course, and then find a way to reach the Party’s goals and objectives. Being honest, having integrity, and being tough but fair are sine qua non.
In the current leadership contest, reference was made to the various means which in the past the PN employed to keep in touch with the electorate. Unfortunately, it seems that former PN gurus decided that personal contact with the electorate should be reduced to a minimum. It is now recognised that this was a grave mistake.
The PN embarked on a self-destructive course of action immediately after Malta joined the European Union. This was in contrast to the years prior to Malta’s accession to the EU when the PN managed to construct a coalition with most of the social partners and many non-governmental organisations.
Perhaps it is opportune for the contenders to let PN councillors and party members know what stand they would take, when the PN is returned to office, if one or more of the first-liners or their accolades become arrogant as some from the old school. Unfortunately, no action was taken by the PN in such circumstances, which dismayed the electorate. Would a new party leader and eventually a Prime Minister be prepared to heed a public outcry and take appropriate action? The current Prime Minister failed to take action against his subordinates notwithstanding the public’s dissension. But then that is not a high ethical political standard to emulate.
The PN should not search for a Palach, but for a leader. The PN needs to rise from the ashes for the benefit of the whole society.
[email protected]