Did Labour MEP candidates vote Yes or No in the EU referendum?

This has become the fulcrum on which the PN is basing its rhetoric in the MEP election campaign. Obviously, one cannot just sweep under the carpet how adamantly against full membership the Labour Party was in 2003. But would exactly does the PN want? Would it have preferred that Labour stick to its guns and continue to bang on against membership a full six years down the line? After all, it’s not exactly against the law to change one’s mind, but this is not good enough for many Nationalists who seem to expect a full-blown confession and apology, preferably dripping in someone’s blood. “In the corner, on your knees, hands on head and think hard about what you did and why you’re sorry!”

Ultimately, of course, this self-righteous indignation is all pointless; another thinly camouflaged “excuse” for why hard-core Nationalists would never vote Labour – not that they need one. They would rather torture themselves watching endless repeats of their erstwhile nemesis Eileen Montesin brazenly endorsing David Casa because he was such a good, polite little boy when they played together on the steps of Ta’ Giezu church.

The echoes of the EU referendum still reverberate so strongly because it is in the PN’s interests to keep fanning this particular flame. What I’ve noticed is that fewer and fewer voters are getting as riled up as the PN is demanding that they should be. The party is so busy looking backwards that it is stumbling with every step it takes, clueless to the fact that while everyone else has moved on, it hasn’t. It’s like when some people go on and on about how terrible the political tension was in the 1980s.

It happened. It’s history. Get over it.

Saying that today’s Labour candidates should be despised and that none of them deserve our vote because of 2003 is like saying we should spit at every German who crosses our path because of what Hitler did. Taking the PN argument to its logical conclusion, what the party is saying is that only one political party should represent Malta in the EU. Labour candidates, some argue, are greedy converts to the EU because of the filthy lucre, licking their chops at the prospect of that juicy salary (because, of course, Nationalist MEPs are only in it for the love of their beloved patria). I’m waiting for someone to suggest that Labour should just fold up shop and be barred from fielding any candidates because of their past antipathy towards the European Union.

It’s not as far-fetched as it sounds – there was Vince Farrugia again this week, hysterically shrieking to people that they should only elect five PN MEPs. I’m starting to seriously worry about his blood pressure. And, if we are going to drag the past into these elections, let’s do it all round. After all, Vince gave quite a helping hand to get Alfred Sant elected in 1996 with his vehement opposition to VAT, which went down well with the business sector he represented. People still remember the delirious carcades in which those dreaded cash registers were tied and dragged behind cars. This is a candidate who can’t seem to decide whose side he is on (although he does know which side his bread is buttered on).

Heavens, I do declare, the whole thing is in such bad taste.

Low blow

Like the campaign itself, the Muscat-Gonzi debate on Monday seemed to focus on every issue except the real issue: who are the best candidates for the European Parliament?

The latest spin of the heavy duty spinning machine is an attempt to whip up a frenzy of envy over the e60,000 Mr and Mrs Muscat spent on their two cars (they’re left-wing, you see, and if you’re left-wing you’re supposed to drive a Ford Escort with “Eat my Dust” on the bumper; otherwise you’re a social-climbing wannabe who has risen above your station). Undeniably, they would have been more politically savvy to have scaled down their choice of transport, but I seem to remember Alfred Sant and KMB being mocked for their humble vehicles and frugal lifestyles so, in the end, Labour politicians can never win.

There is some truth in saying that you can’t harp about the cost of living and then go around driving fancy cars. However, what the Joseph Muscat detractors are missing is that for once, Labour supporters (and those edging cautiously towards Labour, along the sidelines) have a husband and wife duo with whom they can firmly and comfortably identify. Joseph and Michelle represent a large swathe of families from working class backgrounds who have aspired and managed to get ahead in life. What, may I ask, is wrong with that?

I hope we are not saying that we want to revert to the kind of situation where those who weren’t born “privileged” are doomed to stay in their place. I agree that money does not buy class, but people with real class do not sneer at those they consider inferior. This insidious class distinction, verging on hatred, is seeping from various pores.

In fact, what I found disturbing during the debate was a word used by the Prime Minister after Joseph Muscat (rightly or wrongly) called him a liar. Gonzi screwed up his weathered face into a pained expression and admonished young Joe not to be so vulgar (baxx). To use his exact words, “ghalfejn qed tirreduci l-politika ghal dan il-livell baxx?”(why are you reducing politics to such a vulgar level?).

The connotations of that word, for those watching, do not need to be spelt out.

Well, we shouldn’t be surprised should we when Gonzi has sanctioned those print ads, which jeer at Labour politicians on the basis of social class. Perhaps someone should tweak his ear gently to remind him that, since so many Nationalists are refusing to vote, he needs the votes of that social class.

He’s at it again…

Is Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando deliberating trying to trip up the Prime Minister or is he just being brash in the face of all those who dared criticise him? Whatever he hoped to achieve by doing it, organising a party for MEP candidate Alex Perici Calascione on the Mistra land, which caused such a furore last year, has simply set off people’s fury again. Alerted that voters have reacted with outrage, Gonzi smoothly declined the invitation to attend, citing some silly excuse.

Yes, it’s JPO’s land and he can do what he likes with it, but in people’s eyes, honey, it looks bad. Very bad.

Some light relief

Like every election, this one has had its funnier moments and its share of (unintentionally) comic candidates.

On one side you have Glenn “I love my donuts” Bedingfield, while on the other you have Marthese “Betty Boo” Portelli with her pencilled eyebrows and incredibly long fluttering false eyelashes. Then there’s the quirky Cecil “John Lennon” Jones – for the life of me I couldn’t figure out why he was urging us to vote for his party “Eat Europe”. Until I discovered that the “Kul” in Kul Ewropa stands for kultura (culture).

Alan “wet T-shirt” Deidun’s on again/off again stand on divorce is funny verging on the pathetic. In the space of 24 hours he practically backtracked on everything he said. One look at the onslaught of online comments and he swerved from being a conservative who’s staunchly against divorce to “well, maybe, just for genuine cases”. Nice to know this guy has such firm principles.

And finally, late on Thursday night, I sleepily caught a glimpse of a Net News headline scrolling across the screen that screamed “DJ Gianni interviews Joseph Muscat”… and I was jolted awake, my mind whirring. Did he attack him, hold him against his will and force him to get up and dance the boogie-woogie?

Nope. He simply interviewed him.

Apparently the Christian Democrats have invented a new Commandment: Thou shalt not mix with those lowlifes.

[email protected]