This article has been prompted by three items of news that appeared in the media last week. Centre stage was held by the visa scandal, which was uncovered by The Malta Independent.
There is no doubt that government is in panic mode and doing whatever it takes to deliberately obliterate this scandal. But for the first time, the Labour media machine is facing a surrealistic situation. This time round its mechanism has clogged up. All previous scandals have been successfully annihilated. In many instances, this came about with the help of the Opposition.
There was the Citizenship by Investment Programme scandal. The PN failed to hammer this story, primarily because this system was introduced immediately after Muscat took over as PM. However, the Nationalist Party was, at the time, in disarray after Labour’s overwhelming electoral victory. But the first action that killed all negative criticism was the deal that the PL managed to clinchwith the EU. Ironically, it was the Nationalist Party that forced government to go and deal with the EU. After this deal, individuals close to the PN started getting involved in the sale of passports. This has negatively affected the NP’simage with the electorate and was a serious blow to the party’s credibility.
We next had a number of scandals related to the Lands Department. They were all being thrashed as long as Dr Michael Falzon was responsible for this department. However, Muscat decided to replace Falzon with a “switcher” and a miracle occurred. The PN ceased being vociferous about these scandals. The first thing that Deborah Schembri did on taking office was to establish contact with her old party to reach consensus and an agreement with the Opposition on the reform of the Lands Department. When various respectable individuals started criticising the law, the Nationalist Party decided to oppose this reform. At this point, Schembri went on the Labour television station and expressed her frustration that after reaching agreement with two Nationalist MPs - whose name she has not revealed till now - the Nationalist Party changed tactics and decided to oppose the proposed reforms of the Lands Department.
Concurrently, we had the Panamagate scandal. This too is no longer in the news. All the negative propaganda regarding Panamagate stopped when individuals, close to the Deputy Nationalist Leader, Dr Mario de Marco, were named as having a secret account and thereforewere part and parcel of this same scandal. The networking of friends went as far up as the office of the Prime Minister. It was in the interest of the NP to bury once again all its criticism of the Panamagate scandal. This made the peoplefeel more annoyed at the NP than angry at PL. The Opposition started to appear to be one and the same as the party in government!
Now, the Maltese nation is facing yet another serious scandal: the selling of visas. In my opinion, the Opposition’s performance is, once again, lacking even though I have to admit that Dr Simon Busuttil seems to be doing his utmost to imposehis way and move against all internal resistance to get to the bottom of this scandal. At the same time, I do not agree with Dr Busuttil’s statement that this is a socialist scandal. This type of approach worked in the 1980s and 1990s but it will not work today. It should be remembered that Labour is divided between the old guard that considersitselfsocialist and the parvenu lot that normally identifies itself as the Moviment people. It is the old guard that is mostly disturbed by these scandals. The Movimentlot is all out defending the government and discrediting the so-called “whistle-blower”. By dubbing this visa scandal as a “socialist” ploy, the Opposition is irritating those Labour individuals who are angry at Muscat for the way he is governing. It should be remembered that the person who denounced this outrage is Ivan Grech Mintoff, himself a socialist!
What is most interesting in this case is the following. Last week, we had both the deputy leaders of the Nationalist Partydiscussing scandals. Dr.Beppe Fenech AdamitoedDr.Simon Busuttil’sline and spoke forcefully about the visa scandal and the related threats to Ben Nasam and his children. He hit out at the police’s total inaction. Interestingly, Dr Mario de Marco ohas said nothing till now about this scandal, even though we are now confronted with a clear threat to ourfreedom of expression and the life of individuals.
De Marco, instead,chose to refer to the fish-farming saga. What I find ‘fishy’ is that de Marco’s stand was only reported in the Malta Today. It is clear that Malta Today is backing government’s efforts to either discredit the so-called whistle-blower or todeflect attention fromthe slime story.
I have nothing against the fact that de Marco speaks about this issue. What I am questioning here is that while de Marco felt it was important to speak about the slime story, he was totally invisible on the visas scandal debate. One can argue that fish-farming falls under the ‘economy’ portfolio, which de Marco is shadowing in Parliament. Moreover, in the previous legislature he was the minister responsible for MEPA, which is the authority that issues the permits for these farms to operate.
From an environmental point of view, de Marco’s reply left much to be desired. Stating that the solution is to move the fish-farms further away from land is untenable. I am not a marine biologist, but if these farms are doing harm to the sea-bed, by moving them away from the coast, Government will not be solving the problem. Perhaps, bathers will be spared the slime. But I doubt it. If currents are inward, the slime will still move towards the coast, while the damage to the seabed will remain unchanged.
In an attempt to save de Marco’s face, Ryan Callus spoke on the same subject to the Malta Independent, without repeating the suggestion that the fish-farms should be relocated further away from the shores.The Prime Minister joined the fray creating a rather bizarre position when he declared he was disappointed with the Planning Authority (PA) on this matter. It has been reported that the Prime Minister expected a tougher stand from PA. At the same time, it is an open secret that the PA never takes any decision that goes against the wishes of Castile.
Joining in thedispute, Mr. Glenn Bedingfield rightly stated that Dr Mario de Marco is the last person who should speak about the environment. He reminded de Marco the electoral campaign, even though one has to admit that before the election, all the environmental groups were in favour of this separation. Even, high profile consultants of the PN were in favour of this demerger. It was only afterwards, that the true reasons for such a separation became obvious. Then, de Marco made a very vociferous objection in Parliament to this separation.
Mr Glenn Bedingfield forms part of the Labour mechanism and what he writes has to be acceptable to his employer; Government. It is rare for de Marco to be attacked in the Labour media. In this context, writing a blog against Dr Mario de Marco is extremely odd. Has Labour had a change of heart towards Mario de Marco? Was there a lack of communication between Mr. Glenn Bedingfield and the central administration? Or is this yet another ploy, aimed to stir upmore controversy on fish farming and detract from the more serious business of the visa scandal? Or is this only a case of disorganized Labour Propaganda?Is there a link between the fact that the Prime Minister’s took a stand against fish-farmingandthe fact that Demarco stopped hammering on this issue? Only time will tell.