Meeting Dr Godfrey Farrugia and Dr Marlene Farrugia at their home in St Julian’s had a peculiar feeling to it.  I’ve interviewed them innumerable times individually but I thought I would go for a joint interview this time round. 

Godfrey and Marlene, as they like to be called, have been my family doctor and dentist respectively for more years than I care to remember!  They are not only excellent professionals in their particular disciplines but exemplary in the way they deal and relate with their patients.  Nonetheless even though they have been elected to Parliament, unlike some others, they retain a very close and humble relationship with the people they know. 

Speaking with them concurrently was inspirational. 

I thought of meeting them together to try and understand how they manage to get on with life and whether their relationship might be affected considering that in many people’s perception they are at the opposite end of the pond.  In fact, according to them this is nowhere near the truth.  They consider that the difference lies in the method they choose to express themselves in, nothing more nothing less. 

In fact, Godfrey and Marlene agree on a number of principles that guide their political life; they believe in the right to association, both are social democrats, both went into politics to serve and both are passionate for social justice. They believe in equal and fair opportunities and are interested in making this a better Country. 

However, it needs to be said that on the issues that are flooding our news portals the diverse way they are interpreting the current situation is immense.

On one hand, whilst Godfrey admitted that there are a number of mishaps that this country could have done without, he claims that the Government is performing well.  As a matter of fact he went on to mention one success after another this Government has managed to secure for the country.  He stated economic stability, success in environmental issues (quoting the demerger of MEPA, (coincidently the straw that metaphorically broke ‘Marlene’s’ back and made her leace the PL), the broadening of the middle class, wealth that is starting to seep down to the people and a Parliament that will finally be autonomous, amongst other. 

Undoubtedly he is unhappy that Panamagate obscured so much work that the Government has done but feels reassured that the Prime Minister would act on his words and take the necessary action he always did. 

However once again, whilst Godfrey still seemed to retain his confidence in the Prime Minister and believes that Dr Muscat would take the necessary and required action, Marlene did not mince her words and felt that her faith in the Prime Minister and a number of his associates has fizzled out.  She felt increasingly disappointed even because it is a known fact that Marlene supported Dr George Abela for the post of leadership and was convinced by Dr Muscat after he got elected and pledged her loyalty to him. However, now she feels let down saying, in not so many words, that Dr Muscat created a ‘personality cult’ around him.  In my opinion all politics is turning into adulation, however Marlene stressed that Dr Muscat prior to becoming Prime Minister rode on the credibility of a number of strong and believable leaders and professionals and he has used their soundness so that it rubs off him.  Marlene without any reluctance claimed that had Dr Abela won the PL Leadership contest we wouldn’t have had any of this clamour and the Country would have progressed surely and confidently.  She is particularly worried about the tribalism that seems to be intensifying and this is why she is spearheading a movement that will hopeful realign our political scenario.  She said that whilst she does believe that Dr Simon Busuttil has the necessary qualities she doesn’t think he has not managed to garner the right amount of support to take him forward yet.

Marlene also had a contrasting opinion on the ‘successes’ of this Government. 

She reacted to a number of issues I listed that I felt were a feather in the cap of the government.  Nevertheless, she couldn’t disagree more. 

For example, she said that whilst it was good that we have introduced child care provisions she was unhappy that we have hardly focused any of our energies to ensure that children are raised by their carers/parents – in other words there is a lack of balance between providing child care and at the same time attesting to family welfare.  She claims that she is concerned that having child care extensively available might have contributed to the economic well-being but that shouldn’t be our only objective.  She was also adamant that the success in the economy and tourism were the result of sound decisions taken by the Gonzi administration.  She was also very critical of the reduction in energy tariffs, claiming that the drop in tariffs was nowhere comparable to the decrease in the price of crude oil. 

Conversely, both Godfrey and Marlene feel that they need to serve as role models showing people ‘out there’ that even though they might not agree they are still able to have a courteous and respectable relationship.  Even though Godfrey admitted that one of the lowdown’s in 2015 was losing Marlene from the PL parliamentary group, a loss he admitted affected him immensely especially being the Whip of the PL group, having divergent views is fine and never did he feel that Marlene was an embarrassment to him. 

I came away confirming these two politicians, even in these troubling moments esteem each other.  I know for a fact the large amount of people they help and support without blowing their own trumpets.  Both reiterated that in no way should diversity of opinions, especially political ones, break down relationships – a lesson in life.