I really do not know why so many Labourites, just because the election was lost by a whisker, think that the Nationalists will now ponder and wonder as to how they will govern. Or that, just because Gonzi has had to cling to power by the skin of his teeth, he or his administration will somehow act any differently to the previous pre- and post- 1996 governments.
The string round the Election 2008 ballot-paper packages inside the Electoral Commission’s vaults had hardly surrendered an iota of their functional strength before the new government was already resorting to its old dirty tricks by way of trying to force decisions of a controversial national nature down people’s throats. The arrogant manner in which this self-declared neutral nation was dragged back into the military embrace of Nato’s “Partnership for Peace” (PfP) was the very first act of political treachery.
A government that was, and hopefully still is, fully aware of its lame duck status would have been wise in letting things settle down first before making such a contentious move over the heads of the majority that voted against it in the recent election, its very own supporters who knew nothing about it and, last but not least, an Opposition that has demonstrated only too well at the hustings that it deserves the respect and the consideration of long-term consultation on such important issues.
Even better, the “new” Gonzi government would have done well to first initiate a process of testing the waters regarding Malta’s declared neutrality and non-alignment. It may have its own pundits who declare, wrongly or otherwise, this and that as “obsolete” or “out of time”, but for constitutional assertions to be ignored or even changed they first need to be debated at a national level by our representatives in Parliament.
Those very representatives in their seats of power, though, are creatures of habit. They tend to go off at a convenient tangent by coming to desired conclusions and kick-starting a stubborn machine. The PfP fiasco on the part of the “new” Gonzi government was actually interpreted by many as too quick a move to appease foreign interest in Malta, like a sad throwback to the old, colonial way of doing things when the big powers met at places like Vienna and Paris to decide the futures of the rest of us. It is no wonder there has not been a single official retort on the matter that was at least more convincing than Clinton’s famous I-did-not-have-sex-with-that-woman claim of a few years back.
These same creatures of habit have struck a few more times since. The pathetic offer to Labour to choose the new Speaker of the House from within its own elected ranks was a shining example of Machiavellian hollowness. It was even pitiful by anyone’s standards. To expect the Opposition to agree to the proposition of obligingly enhancing the government’s majority in Parliament was not naïve, as some would have it. It was provocative in nature and intentionally offensive, as if saying “we are the government, we tell you what to do and we decide.”
If that is going to be the standard by which the “new” Gonzi administration is going to run things as from yesterday’s grand opening, then the future of Maltese politics is certainly not a rosy one. Not that it has ever been, but with an unstable government such as this one, the scenario could turn even bleaker.
At a moment in time when it is generally agreed that the governance of these islands is at a precarious stage – not that you hear too much of it in the official and unofficial pro-PN media – the insensitive appointment of strictly pro-government supporters in all important posts of the country continues, as if no election has been held and no clear-cut verdict that an absolute majority of those who cared to turn up for them actually voted against the old incumbent, who now continues to ride roughshod over everyone and everything.
The choice of the ruling party’s propaganda Goebbels as the new Head of Communication at Castile is perhaps the metaphorical cherry on the Gonzi cake. It is yet another partisan realignment, a defensive measure no doubt aimed at creating some sort of rearguard within the fortress against the inevitable backlash of both internal and external political volatility.
A Prime Minister who deems it fit to act like this at the very beginning of a shaky government is a major source of worry to people who genuinely believe in, and not just pay lip and newspaper-ink service to, democratic values. The appointment has been rightly perceived as a quick thank-you present, of which there is plenty more to come, to residents of the PN’s inner sanctum.
Dolores Cristina’s appointment of the new Editorial Board at PBS too has not exactly smacked of a sincere, new way of doing things when the nation is politically split down the middle. She has chosen to go “like for like” and retain her arrogant predecessor’s way of doing things at the national broadcasting organisation, i.e. making sure it is only the ruling party’s views and proposals that prevail at all times at Guardamangia.
Minister Cristina has simply replaced two party devotees with another two like-minded individuals, and one discontented Labourite with another one. While I do not for a single moment doubt the integrity and reliability of the individuals concerned, it still certainly didn’t take too much courage and foresight, and quite obviously puts her mind at rest that PBS will remain the sharp governmental instrument it has always been, under every administration, since nationalisation in 1975.
The current parliamentary stalemate however requires better judgement and finer ways of tackling decades-old problems such as the functions of the House itself,
the Constitution, national finances and broadcasting. The creatures of habit may think they can get away with murder as they play their quick chess moves, but checkmate time could occur any day in the coming five years or so.