I was not among his supporters at the beginning of this legislature. Not that I supported anybody else in the Nationalist Party: I simply did not support the Nationalist Party.
At the beginning of the legislature he faced a daunting task. He certainly showed boundless courage, and he wasn’t alone in this: his two deputy leaders, Mario de Marco and Beppe Fenech Adami, also showed extraordinary courage. They took it upon themselves to lead their party in a seemingly desperate attempt to save it from oblivion, against all odds and in the short turnaround of more or less five years.
The three of them have been growing in stature ever since. The courage they have displayed has certainly transformed them as individuals, emboldening them, making them stronger, pushing them to hone the skills they will need if they succeed in their mission.
Simon Busuttil has promised to make it his mission in life to introduce clean politics in the country. I do not think he’s talking about witch-hunts and purges. To my mind, what he means is the real Europeanisation of the country, the introduction of a European, modern model of governance, where office-holders are held really accountable and the rule of law is not just an airy-fairy concept but a reality for the citizens to enjoy and benefit from.
Dr Busuttil’s image has been relentlessly refining over time. The man is reserved and does not flaunt unnecessary chutzpah. He is not flamboyant and expresses his judgment only after careful deliberation. He is a regular guy, and the way he airs his views shows a firmly-balanced personality. And yet, time and time again, I have noticed that beneath this possibly misleading veneer lie a steely determination and an inner strength of character which are increasingly coming to the fore, endowing him with a pleasantly powerful personality.
The more one studies Dr Busuttil, the more one realises that this man has what it takes to govern the country in a sincere, calm, no-nonsense manner.
Some readers will doubtlessly try to look for some hidden intention or calculation behind my words or what they might view as second-guessing. They might think that, given the revelations of recent days, I’m banking on a Nationalist victory at the polls and am trying to ingratiate myself: not at all.
First of all, I think that the outcome of the next elections is still far from being a foregone conclusion. For sure, the tide is turning, but it is still early to place one’s bets.
Secondly, I have already expressed similar opinions in my book L-Aqwa fl-Ewropa, published more than five months ago, when a decidedly different mood prevailed.
Thirdly, it’s not in my character to ingratiate myself. I am rather a different type – I usually say what I think, without fear or favour. Some people love me for this, others hate me. Among the latter are Saviour Balzan (the one who speaks on the phone with Keith Schembri in the wee small hours of the morning) and a certain number among his cohort of underlings who specialise in caveman-style pseudo-journalistic writing.
But let me not digress.
As a matter of fact, I have been observing Dr Busuttil’s actions and reactions over quite some time and my public show of support was not a sudden, Damascus-like conversion, but a long drawn-out process. I have been studying the absolute self-control he exhibits which, in turn, indicates a mature man who knows what he wants and how to achieve it, while respecting others. I have also been attentively scrutinising his attitude in the face of adversity: he keeps his eye on the ball no matter what, again displaying a mature sense of priorities, purpose and proportions.
I might be laying myself open to accusations of hagiography-writing. Again, I argue that I am not resorting to hagiography. I am aware that his reserved demeanour and calm attitude could be mistaken for lack of wherewithal, and that these qualities could be misread as shortcomings. Someone who writes a hagiography tends to gloss over those qualities which certain quarters might perceive as weaknesses while exalting the virtues. I am trying not to gloss over anything, and I’m not exalting virtues. Instead, I’m trying to propose a frank appraisal of an important public figure and my honest bottom line is that Simon Busuttil has what it takes to be an excellent 21st-century head of government.
The way he speaks, the way he comports himself, the way he reflects before committing himself, his sense of direction, his unfaltering determination, his resolute, burning desire to introduce the right kind of change, his raw ambition to help the underprivileged, his sense of proportion, his sense of right and wrong, his politeness, his considerate attitude, his indomitable courage, his solutions to the problems ailing the country, his uncompromising drive to cater for the needs of the middle classes, all add up to an undeniable charisma. It is subtle and subdued, true, and this might be new to the Maltese, even though it is admired and sought-after in other European milieus. But it is a powerful charisma and can transform Malta into an efficient country, because it is efficiency that this country really lacks.
It will be up to future historians to determine whether the Panama Papers were the determining turn of fate in Malta’s political development. I was recently discussing politics with a relative with whom I am close friends and we agreed that each person’s destiny is beyond their control. True, we were not that original – Machiavelli already propounded this theory a few centuries ago, when he argued that fate and prowess are the two factors that determine how a leader’s life unfolds. Similar ideas have been articulated by contemporary thinkers too: Slavoj ?i?ek, possibly the greatest among contemporary philosophers, has advanced an intelligent (and somewhat complex) elaboration of the notion of predestination.
Whether it is Simon Busuttil’s destiny to be Prime Minister is not for us to know – as yet. What I can say for sure at this moment in time is that in my view Simon Busuttil could be exactly the Prime Minister for this country that we all deserve. And, because this is a democracy, it actually depends on us.