I didn’t catch the debate between Dr Gonzi and Dr Muscat on the night it was shown. This meant that next day I ended up hearing and reading public reactions to it before I actually saw it myself.

As usual, it was very hard to ascertain what really happened because the comments veered wildly between two extremes. On the one hand you had the “Gonzi wiped the floor with Muscat” version, and on the other hand you had “Muscat was very good and Gonzi had better watch out”. And, as usual, the truth of who came out looking best in the debate is probably somewhere in between.

Thank goodness for di-ve.com streaming because I finally managed to sit down and watch it, and judge for myself. The advantage of watching a recording, of course, is that you can stop and start, pause and re-wind to check exactly what someone has said and how he said it.

As I watched, I was puzzled – was I watching the same debate that some others had? It was like that infamous JPO/Alfred Sant confrontation all over again – when what I saw on TV was clearly not what some other people had seen.

That Joseph Muscat chuckled and interrupted a bit too often, took too long to find his feet, and asked too many questions rather than coming up with concrete proposals – was true.

That Lawrence Gonzi came across as angry, tense, at times defensive and at others unnecessarily confrontational – is also true.

Where Dr Gonzi made his biggest tactical error however, was when he was downright condescending towards Muscat… not because the condescending attitude was directed at the Opposition leader per se, but because as a viewer, that air of “please sit down and shut up because you’re a little twerp and I know far more than you” often felt like it was being directed at me.

I can only imagine what viewers who had actually voted for the PN were feeling. Where did the affable, constantly smiling Gonzi from before the general election go? What ever happened to all those “feel good” promises, which tripped so easily from his tongue pre-March 2008?

We are not stupid

As for those questions from the audience… when will TV producers realise that many of us can tell which ones were obviously planted because we know who the people are?

Following the first rehearsed question from a certain gentleman, we learned that Peppi Azzopardi just happened (kumbinazzjoni) to have visited a factory which makes photovoltaic cells, so he ‘innocently’ asked, “perhaps, ma nafx ta, perhaps this is the way forward for the country”?

Cue the Prime Minister, with a straight face and a solemn voice, “as it happens, maybe you are not aware, but there are 17 ministries and departments that rely on solar energy.” And then he continued to reel off a string of solar-related statistics.

Oh come on.

Oh please.

Give all of us a much-needed break and respect our intelligence.

It’s like someone being given all the answers before a quiz and then trying to impress his friends because he has all the facts memorised.

And lo and behold – Gonzi then “announces” that the first wind farm in Malta is now going to be set up. Excuse me, but after 20 years of doing zilch about alternative energy and with Austin Gatt and his disciples until recently warning how wind farms are too expensive and unfeasible for Malta, why should we believe Gonzi now?

Toy story

The constant reference to playing with toys (gugarelli) was, of course, a deliberate ploy by Dr Gonzi to harp on Muscat’s lack of political maturity.

But this is where Joe Muscat tripped up. You never ever hand your political opponent an analogy like, “This isn’t a classroom, you’re not the teacher and I’m not your student,”… because unfortunately at one point Muscat did look exactly like a schoolboy raising his hand as if he knew the answer “ooh, ooh, I know, me, pick me!”

The analogy was still fresh in our minds and the image just clicked.

Muscat’s boyish looks don’t help his case either, and I suppose he must be one of the few people who actually yearn for a few wrinkles (although a couple more years in Malta’s political jungle should take care of that).

But Gonzi on his part came across as being an arrogant man who is no longer listening to the people. When Muscat told Gonzi he should withdraw his proposal to implement new water and electricity rates, we were given a dismissive way of the hand, “withdraw my proposal, no way, forget it!”

What I saw in this debate was Muscat struggling to be taken seriously by his older counterpart, while Gonzi was doing his best to patronise him. (And it certainly is not a mark of humility or cleverness when one adopts a patronising stance).

What I saw was Muscat cornering Gonzi on various issues to which he was unable to provide an answer (how many immigrants will other EU countries take? How much will gas cylinders cost? When will national breast screening be introduced? Will Nationalist MPs be allowed to have a free vote on divorce? When will the various other electoral promises be kept?).

What I saw was Gonzi beating Muscat when it came to political savvy and knowing how to elicit the right response from what was obviously a rent-a-crowd.

What’s in a name?

Joseph Muscat addressed him as Lawrence, Lawrence Gonzi addressed him back as Dr Muscat. Some were scandalised and shocked by this, others were merely taken aback because no one had ever heard the Prime Minister being addressed by his first name before.

Does it matter? Maybe.

For those of a certain generation, Muscat would certainly have scored more points if he had stuck to the more formal address, but to those who are younger, these things really don’t matter. I guess it all depends what kind of audience Muscat had in mind when he made this conscious decision to address the Prime Minister by his first name.

Was he trying to show his MLP supporters, “look, I consider myself the Prime Minister’s equal, and the Labour Party needs to start projecting this image that we are on an equal footing and not any ‘less’ of a party than the PN.”

If he had the (usually younger) liberal, floating voters in mind, the use of the first name was also probably a canny move. Liberals are non-conformist, anti-establishment and dispense with formalities anyway, so the sight of those strait-laced suits and the use of the formal titles would have probably made them switch off, mentally if not literally. Hearing “Lawrence” would certainly have jarred them awake as they lay lounging on their sofas.

(In fact, if anything, this use of the first name was probably what people talked about most the next day.)

The traditionalists were, of course, all aflutter, throwing their arms up in horror at this cheeky upstart. (But let’s face it; this sector would rather drink arsenic than vote MLP anyway).

And finally, among the audience there was also that odd hybrid of people who I shall describe as “liberal conservatives” who can’t quite make up their mind what they are. On the one hand they like to project themselves as daring mavericks and the next minute they go all Emily Post on us with lectures about etiquette and what is “done” and not “done”.

Again, I ask, does all this triviality really matter with the world’s economy falling around our heads and a bleak winter ahead of us when we will be thinking twice before turning on our heaters?

More significantly, in my view, is the way the debate was conducted. The set up clearly tried to mimic the American style of political debate, except in one crucial detail.

A real debate is timed to make sure there is equal time between the two opponents.

This is where Joseph Muscat’s camp should have done their homework before accepting to appear on the programme. In this sense, yes, he still has a lot to learn.

Isn’t it ironic?

Last weekend I went to see More 4Play, produced by MADC and featuring the comic talents of Isabel Warrington, Alan Montanaro, Louiselle Vassallo and Alan Paris.

If this brilliant collection of comedy sketches proved anything, it is that (contrary to popular misconception) the Maltese not only know how to laugh at themselves, but they do have a sense of irony after all.

No one from the multi-faceted Maltese society was spared, from the bus driver with his falling pants to the ladies who lunch, with their “kiss kiss” culture in a hilarious send-up of Sex and the City.

Each of the actors came up with impersonations of immediately recognisable people that were wickedly accurate and had the audience in tears of laughter.

It is a shame that this foursome don’t come together more often or that they don’t try and translate these sketches into television material. They work so well together and are so talented both individually and as an ensemble that they really deserve to be seen by a much wider audience.

Meanwhile, Alan Montanaro will, of course, be back soon as the Dame in the forthcoming Christmas Panto, Sinbad the Tailor. His Dame always brings the house down (I was told that his was voted the most popular Dame ever) and something tells me that during More 4Play, we already got a taste of what he has in store for us.

[email protected]