If and when I need colon surgery, please remind me not to go under Anthony Zammit’s knife. The man made an ass of himself at the Labour Party’s general conference a couple of days ago, and I wonder what his peers in the medical profession think of him right now. He spoke of the importance of having confidence in Maltese doctors like his hero did, “unlike someone else who went to the Mayo Clinic”. He missed the rather crucial fact that the doctor Fenech Adami saw at the Mayo Clinic is an internationally acclaimed specialist who is – surprise! – Maltese. He missed the other crucial fact that Mario Vassallo, another of Sant’s medical consultants, was one of the team of doctors who recommended that Fenech Adami should go there.
Anthony Zammit appears to be going out of his way to drag down as much opprobrium as possible on his head. He told the conference that he is forced to carry out fewer operations because of a lack of beds at the new hospital. Well, what can I say, Profs? It gives you the time you need to make a fool of yourself on the Labour stage. Maybe the Ministry of Health should save him from further embarrassment by giving him a few more wards for his patients, so that the only time he gets to leave the operating theatre is when he’s in bed.
The man was upset because I compared what he described as his “medical bulletins” (which is like calling the parish newsletter a newspaper) to those of Fidel Castro’s Cuba. He wondered where my professional ethics are. Sssssh, don’t tell Boob-Job Jason, but I used them to stuff my bra. I like it, though: a surgeon and professor behaving like a total prat at the general conference of a political party, wondering about the whereabouts of the professional ethics of others.
The Nationalist Party has accused Anthony Zammit of using his status as the man who operated on Sant to gain political mileage. As a brand-new candidate, it’s certainly the most useful thing that could have happened to him, allowing him to be sold as Sant’s saviour and given a much-fought-for platform at the general conference. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Anthony Zammit dragged his profession into disrepute with his embarrassing performance as a political circus animal, but he disgraced himself, certainly. You’d expect more of a surgeon and a professor of medicine; something in the way of a little dignity and gravitas, perhaps, something that helps you give his profession the considerable respect it deserves.
Instead, he behaved little better than Joe Debono Grech. Maybe he thinks that’s the way to win the hearts and minds of Labour councillors. I hadn’t realised they were still as crass, coarse, vulgar and common as they were in 1983. In fact, I’m quite sure they’re not, and that Professor Zammit has made a grave miscalculation in, as he probably sees it, going down to their level and stooping to conquer. In a way I feel sorry for those Labour councillors, sitting there listening to one litany after another from fairly educated men talking to them as if they are uneducated peasants who have to restrain themselves from expectorating onto the floor and wiping their nose with the back of their hand.
The Labour Party keeps insisting that it has changed and evolved, and that it is modern and scintillating, but then it speaks to its people as if they would have been most at home with Madame Defarge beneath her guillotine in late 18th-century Paris.
* * *
The tiresome lawyer Claire Bonello has migrated from MaltaToday to Allied Newspapers, where she continues her relentless whining against what she sees as the grave excesses of this government and of the Nationalist Party in general.
Dr Bonello appears to believe that there are only two political parties in this country: the Nationalist Party and Alternattiva Demokratika. She is a prolific writer of columns and letters to the editor, but we never seem to get a tweet, cheep or peep out of her when it comes to her thoughts about the abysmal Labour Party. Perhaps she doesn’t have any, which is both a great pity and most extraordinary as Labour might very well be forming the next government.
Perhaps our Claire hasn’t even noticed that there is a Labour Party, given that a typical article of hers is structured this way: first run the government down, accuse it of wrong-doing and imply corruption, then tell us not-so-subtly why we should vote for Alternattiva Demokratika.
The trouble with Dr Bonello is that she fails to declare her interest. Readers think that she is an independent and unbiased commentator – though why they should think that is beyond me, given her considerable bias against the Nationalist Party - because she has failed to inform them that she campaigns for Alternattiva Demokratika. Her articles are about as unbiased as those written by John Dalli, Francis Zammit Dimech and Joe Brincat, though she is considerably more eloquent, which only serves to make her propaganda more insidious.
Dr Bonello really should take more of an interest in the shenanigans of the Labour Party. After all, Alfred Sant is likely to be her prime minister within a couple of months or so – particularly if she achieves the objective of driving votes away from the Nationalist Party and towards Alternattiva Demokratika. She is too intelligent to imagine that she can drive votes away from Labour. Labour supporters are determined to achieve the seat of government, and will be marshalling every last vote.
I am a great admirer of the leader of Alternattiva Demokratika, and have been since we met first around 25 years ago, when we had very interesting conversations on the beach. He is honest, decent and articulate, and if he were to stand for election under the Nationalist Party ticket, I would trip over myself to vote for him. But my admiration is not so deep that I am content to run the risk of electing Alfred Sant as prime minister by default by removing my vote from the Nationalist Party and taking it to Alternattiva Demokratika.
The fact remains that Alternattiva Demokratika is not attractive to those who habitually vote Labour. The only votes it attracts are from people whose sympathies are more in line with the Nationalist Party, though they might have been put off by matters of religion or the extremely irritating behaviour of individual members of the Cabinet. I know because I so often feel this way myself.
Because of this, success for Alternattiva means success for Labour and catastrophe for the Nationalist Party. I don’t particularly care whether the Nationalist Party suffers defeat insofar as I am not a politician or dependent on the government for my livelihood. Where I care, very much, is that its defeat means Malta will have a vastly inferior prime minister and government. Quite frankly, I am not prepared to spend the next five years enduring a re-run of 1996 to 1998.
We claim that Lawrence Gonzi and his Cabinet are not up to the job, and then we are prepared by our actions to vote in a set of bunglers instead – indirectly and by default. Yet we don’t see the irony in this. The fact remains that the choice of prime minister is of only two men: Lawrence Gonzi and Alfred Sant. There is no third choice called Harry Vassallo or even Josie Muscat, nor is there a fourth choice called “no prime minister”. Like it or not, we are going to get either the one or the other, so for pragmatic and sensible people it should be a matter of deciding which one we would prefer – the lesser of two evils if you want to put it like that – and voting for him. If you’re a hysterical or emotional sort, then try to control yourself and act sensibly. You know that the only thing you’re going to get by teaching the Nationalists a lesson is Alfred Sant as prime minister, and then you’ll have to put up with him for five grinding years (as will the Labour Party, who definitely won’t be able to shed him then).
Voting for somebody else and then hoping that Lawrence Gonzi will be elected because we prefer him to Alfred Sant is an act of immaturity, to be charitable, and an act of insane irresponsibility, to be harsh but factual. All those Sliema types – I describe them as such because I am one myself – who are going around saying that they no longer want Gonzi as prime minister are in effect saying that they want Alfred Sant instead, even if they don’t quite realise it themselves. And if they do realise it, well then I have to question their powers of analysis. We tried him, remember? And it was a godforsaken mess.
* * *
Some people I know are planning to vote Alternattiva Demokratika, though they disapprove of the Labour Party in its current messy state, can’t stand Alfred Sant’s guts, and think that he will once again make a terrible prime minister. What they are saying is that they would rather have Lawrence Gonzi as prime minister, but they are not prepared to have a hand in his election. In effect, what they want is for other people to elect Gonzi for them – you know, like getting somebody else to do the dirty work and clean out the drains.
Well, I’m sorry – if enough people think like this then the prime minister will be Sant. It’s important to remember that we won’t be electing Gonzi for his sake – you know, to keep him in the kudos and trappings of power – but for our sake, because even if you’re pro-Labour you have to admit that he’s been a hell of a lot better in the job than the arch bungler of 1996-1998, who insisted that partnership had won the referendum, that VAT was replaceable by CET, and that pigs would fly if he said so.
* * *
I can’t believe I am still arguing about the arithmetic of elections with people who should have learned the maths in 2003. One of the reasons we are in the European Union today is because it was spelled out to the Sliema-Swieqi crowd – and again I remind you that I am Sliema born and bred – that a number one vote for AD would have pretty much the same result as a number one vote for Alfred Sant. AD ranted and raved, annoying me to the point where my admiration for them dropped by several percentage points, but quite frankly, needs must when the devil drives.
There is no place for romantic notions in a general election. Yes, it would be nice if AD were to have a seat in Parliament, but not if it also means having Alfred Sant as prime minister. The only way that AD can get a seat in Parliament is by getting a minimum of 3500 first-count votes in the 9th or 10th district, where most of the chattering classes live. To do this, it will have to persuade 3500 people who live in the 9th district (Gharghur, Msida, San Gwann, Kappara, Swieqi, Ibrag, Madliena, and Ta’ Xbiex) or 3500 people who live in the 10th district (Gzira, Pembroke, St Julian’s, Paceville and Sliema) to vote AD instead of voting PN. There is no way that any habitual Labour supporter is going to be persuaded to vote AD after seeing the party spend nine years in Opposition, though some Labour supporters did vote PN last time round because they were keen on having Malta join the EU. They’re not going to do it again.
* * *
I have heard a lot of nonsense about the forming of a coalition government between the Nationalist Party and Alternattiva Demokratika. The people who talk this way don’t seem to understand that votes don’t necessarily translate into parliamentary seats, and that what Alternattiva Demokratika needs to broker a coalition with the Nationalist Party is not votes but seats. To get even one seat, it needs thousands of number-one votes in just one district, and not thousands of number-one votes spread all over Malta. If the quota for a particular district is 3000 number-one votes and the AD candidate gets 2800 votes, then those 2800 votes might as well have been flushed down the lavatory, because they are not going to translate into representation in Parliament for AD.
It’s pointless debating the fairness or otherwise of the situation at this stage; we have to work within the parameters now, and perhaps scream and shout about it later. So, if Alternattiva Demokratika succeeds in securing 20,000 first-count votes from the whole of Malta and Gozo, as it did in the MEP elections, but these votes are spread between the 13 electoral districts without meeting a single quota, then what happens is this: Alternattiva doesn’t get even one seat, but because those 20,000 votes were driven away from the Nationalist Party, Labour forms the government. The result? Not a single parliamentary seat for Alternattiva, Lawrence Gonzi in Opposition, and that bungler with the hopeless track record as prime minister.
I suppose this is the time to remind my friends about what happened in the MEP elections, when 20,000 people voted for Arnold Cassola, who promptly used his dual nationality to up sticks and get himself a seat in the Italian assembly, an exercise in self-serving opportunism if ever there was one – the very sort, in fact, of which his cohorts at AD accuse others. The result of that election was no seat for Alternattiva, two seats for the Nationalists, no seat for the woman who worked like a plough-horse to help Malta get into the EU, Joanna Drake, and… three seats for the vehemently anti-EU Labour Party going to people who worked against membership. Thanks to the 20,000 people who thought it would be a jolly good idea to vote for Arnold ‘sometimes I’m Maltese and sometimes I’m Italian’ Cassola, the loyal, honest, decent, supremely knowledgeable and hardworking Joanna Drake didn’t get a seat in the European Parliament and the jolly joker John Attard Montaldo (or was it Alfred Sant’s former poodle Joseph Muscat, now replaced in the favouritism stakes by Boob-Job Jason?) got it instead. Do you see what I mean now?
For heaven’s sake, people, get a grip. If you want Lawrence Gonzi as prime minister, vote for him. If you don’t want Alfred Sant as prime minister, vote for Lawrence Gonzi. If you want Alfred Sant as prime minister, vote for him – or do what Claire Bonello does and try to persuade as many tal-pepe people as possible that the Labour Party doesn’t exist, that the Nationalists are corrupt and inept, that they have been there too long and that it’s time for a change – without ever driving it home, of course, that the only change possible is Alfred Sant as prime minister. It’s time we all grew up, isn’t it?
***
Whether you’re Labour, Nationalist or I Don’t Know, there’s one very sound reason why Alfred Sant should lose this election: it will rid the Labour Party of him once and for all, and give it the opportunity it needs to regroup and develop into something that works. I know that Sant will try to hang on even if he loses, but it will be his fourth electoral loss on the trot, and there is no way the party will tolerate him for a minute longer. He will be forced out, even if it means a metaphorical bloodbath. We keep talking about the need for change: what we forget is that Alfred Sant has been party leader for 16 years, losing one election after another and spinning Malta into chaos during his 22 months as prime minister. The change that’s really desperately needed is in the leadership of the Labour Party, but the magnifying-glass is off him because we’re all so busy whining about the need for a change of government. Yes, it’s a magnificent idea to change from Gonzi to Sant, don’t you think?
***
George Vella, who first came to our notice when he was used to prop up Sant’s left side while George Abela propped up the right in the 1996 elections, told the general conference that “a new Labour government” – yes, yet another new one – “will take Malta’s European Union membership to new heights”. Before we know it, they’ll be telling us that they campaigned for EU membership, that all talk of partnership is “shameful spin” and that Alfred Sant headed the Yes campaign in the referendum. That’s why I love Labour: they never fail to entertain, but the best place for fools is in Opposition.
