EP Update – Lowell to file Constitutional, Libertas in Malta

from the Malta Chronicle:

Sources close to TMC have confirmed that far-right movement leader Norman Lowell will be filing his Constitutional Case in the courts of Malta in a last ditch attempt to revive his candidature for the European parliament elections. Contrary to what was previously reported on TMC the date for the filing of the case will in all probability be the 9th of February. Lowell is expected to call a press conference at 11 a.m. on the steps of the Law Courts. Sources also confirmed that the rabbit festival at Ta’ Cetta will go ahead in the evening on the same day. 

Meanwhile, former Alleanza Nazzjonali (National Alliance) Deputy Leader Mary Gauci who recently resigned from her post citing personal reasons is understood to be in talks with the pan-European anti-Lisbon Movement “Libertas“.  In all probability Mary Gauci. who is nearing the end of her term as a EU Commission employee, will be one of the candidates running on the Libertas ticket. The Libertas website still features a call for “high calibre candidates for the European Parliament elections in June 2009″ in the Malta section.

Light a Candle (sing their song)

Light a Candle

If I’m not careful I will fall far behind Fausto’s prolific keyboard-tapping fingers and then sometime next year I will be accused of not having spoken out on some specific feature and my silence will be equated to aquiescence. Anyways I am back from the Brussels intensive and would like to quickly answer (ah beautiful split infinitives) a couple of posts that were posted while I was honing my blogging skills with a myriad others from all over Europe. 

Fausto wrote a sweet piece “Caught in the Crossfire” in which he implied that poor Edward Demicoli was caught in the crossfire when AD accused him of waking up a bit too late when he took a stance against illegal hunting. E come sparare sulla Croce Rossa (it’s like shooting on the Red Cross) would have been a more apt metaphor to illustrate the goings on. According to Fausto, AD are guilty of not being happy with having a Nationalist MEP prospective doing the good thing and yelling “I hate hunting” to the four winds. A quick read would have you nod your head in enthusiastic agreement – I mean what do these whingers want? These new allies of the confounded left must be silenced. A more patient evaluation will begin to uncover the flaws within Fausto’s poisonous return fire. 

You see AD are not disagreeing with Demicoli’s position but rather with the fact that someone who is suddenly so anti-hunting was rather silent for a very long time and is only barking in a run up for the election when Spring Hunting has not been allowed for this year. The point AD seem to be making, and I think you do have to concede it, is where were Edward Demicoli’s anti-hunting principles when he authored documents promising protection of the Spring Hunting tradition? More than that many of us would ask – does Edward really feel comfortable within a party that still declares that it will do its utmost to protect spring hunting? (Vide PBO)

And now that we mention it: there is no case before the ECJ involving Spring Hunting. There is the equivalent of an interim measure that applies yearly when Malta does not provide sufficient justification for allowing hunting in spring. 

Now for the final point. Here’s Fausto’s take on Ed’s admirable position:

 

Now, let’s say that you think that there’s no way that spring hunting in Malta can be limited to a few species and be sustainable. How would Demicoli’s claim effect your vote? Jacques has commented on the Nationalists being an excessively broad church. Well, here’s a way to do something, lighting a candle rather than just curse the darkness. When voting, give a high preference, not necessarily the first, to Demicoli. If he makes a good showing even if not elected it would tell the hunters what to do with their boycotts.

I just can’t stop laughing. We move from  ”Wasted Vote” to the “Delirious Voter”…. in the words of tennis’ greatest philosopher “You cannot be serious!” So light a candle in the dark… vote for a candidate who is running for a party that still professes some kind of affinity with the hunters’ cause – don’t worry he will somehow extricate himself from the binds that tie him to party loyalty and whatsnot. Anyway… you will not exactly waste your vote because even if Ed is not elected at least you will have used him to teach the nasty hunters a lesson or two.

Light a candle in the darkness?? For heaven’s sake… I’ve got an easier solution for the darkness problem. Take the blindfold off your eyes… and see the light. If you really “think that there’s no way that spring hunting in Malta can be limited to a few species and be sustainable” then vote for a candidate (and party) who has some sort of credentials to put money where their mouth is. I’m not saying that that is my priority or my party of choice but please… if you wanted any proof that some party’s environmental credentials are simply for “vote phishing” purposes look no further than “Caught in the Crossfire”…

Light a candle sing a song

Look for rainbows there’s nothing wrong

Every night I cry my heart out

Coz we’re drifting apart now I know….

… Keep me in mind… when you’re all alone!

This post also appears on The Malta Chronicle

Immigration and the European Parliament Elections

 

From the Telegraph

The tiny island of Lampedusa, Italy has witnessed a “jailbreak” of around 700 immigrants from their detention centre. The centre where the immigrants were held is designed to hold 850 immigrants but is currently bursting at the seams with over 2000 residents. The Lampedusa mayor described the event as a “protest” rather than an escape.  These events come hot on the heels of a UN Report on the situation of immigrants on Malta in which the UN said that Malta could do more for the immigrants (and that’s a euphemism):

 

Malta’s detention policy for irregular immigrants was heavily criticised by a United Nations working group that described the conditions at Safi and Lyster barracks as appalling and detrimental to the immigrants’ health. The UN Working Group on Arbitary Detention yesterday presented its preliminary findings after a five-day trip that included visits to the detention centres, Corradino Correctional Facilities and meetings with the government.

Both small Mediterranean islands receive a disproportionate amount of immigrants who end up on their land while on their way to mainland Europe. Both islands are facing a logistical disaster that is a humanitarian crisis in the making. The problem for the governments of Italy and Malta is that the idea of “burden sharing” is a tough one to sell. Outgoing US Ambassador to Malta Molly Bordonaro described an agreement between Malta and the USA for the US to relieve Malta of  a number of immigrants as a resounding success. Small wonder that it was. Few other countries, especially in the EU block are willing to engage in the burden sharing business. Immigrants and immigration is a dirty business and the less hands are sullied the better.

Governments see immigration as a short-term catastrophe. Creating solutions rarely rakes in votes when the solutions mean a better life for the immigrants. It also means less incentive on the part of cynic politicians to try. More and more citizens resent the presence of immigrants on their land. Threats to jobs are mentioned and all it takes is the presence of immigrants at state funded hospitals to light the ever shorter fuse of intolerance. The racism card is waved all too easily at times but the problem goes far beyond simple black or white. 

One would expect that an issue such as illegal immigration and immigration would be a top issue for the elections for the European Parliament. But how far do the powers of the EP go when it comes to EU action on immigration? Is the EP much more than an organised pressure group on the governments? Will it win any tug of war with Council on the issue? Maltese candidates tend to tow the party line on this matter. Sofar neither of the two behemoths that squat the limelight of Maltese politics have produced satisfactory conclusions – whether you see this from the perspective of humanitarian NGOs or of far right loonies proposing to shoot immigrants on sight and turn them back to their shores.

 

On the one hand the topic of illegal immigration might not be that much of a priority when it comes to chosing Malta’ next MEPs (5 in all). On the other hand it does serve to illustrate how unrepresentative the candidates can really be when they are stuck to an incompetent, opportunistic party line that does not seem to go much farther than blaming the elements.

This post also appears on The Malta Chronicle.

Under the Hot Sun even Umbrella Parties Wilt

The MEP election run is still in low gear yet the Great Umbrella Party of Priests and Liberals is already beginning to feel the heat. Of course I am referring to none other than the Party that tries to please all and whose hodge-podge of conveniently chosen principles and promises should be entitled The Great Oxymoron of Conflicting Truths for the Gullible Voter and Fanatic Supporter. Now I can truly understand why erstwhile commentators so firmly believe that the PN is truly a liberal party albeit in cassock and sandals.

I’m sorry but the Chinese-like manner of naming things can be infectious and ever since I read of GonziPN’s renaming of the National Library as the National Palace of New Thinking I am on a roll. That is not what I am here to talk about however. I am here to show you why it is still difficult to please all of the people all of the time or – as I wrote some days ago – why you can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

So back to Edward Demicoli. The brave young turk took a stand on hunting. Against it he was and convincedly so. He is one of the kings’ men in a race for MEP running on a PN ticket to join that other Great Umbrella in Europe known as the PP. Someone else who had sheltered under the same Great Umbrella (the national one) in an earlier race held last year was irked by Ed’s position vis-a-vis all things hunting. Here’s what a local newspaper reported (my underlining):

Nationalist MP Philip Mifsud had confirmed with the party’s general secretary that the PN had not changed its stand on spring hunting before writing an article criticising his own party’s MEP candidate Edward Demicoli. Mr Mifsud yesterday wrote in The Times criticising Mr Demicoli’s categorical stand against spring hunting, accusing him of “compromising” the party to “gain some personal political mileage”.

It transpired that PN general secretary Paul Borg Olivier was aware of the bad vibe Mr Demicoli’s declaration created among Nationalist hunters. Mr Mifsud was elected for the first time to Parliament in the last election from the seventh district, a hotbed for hunters and trappers.

“I am not contesting whether Mr Demicoli is right or wrong on the issue but as a party we promised hunters and trappers that we will defend their right to spring hunting and we have to keep it. The article was my personal reaction but it also reflected that of my constituents,” Mr Mifsud said when contacted yesterday. He said constituents were annoyed by Mr Demicoli’s declaration that he will work to stop spring hunting.

Ouch. So in other words are we to understand that the Nationalist Party has a clear policy to protect the right to spring hunting? Are we Paul? If so, then aren’t we in a bit of a quandary when we choose to vote for Ed Demicoli come June? Will Ed toe the party line or stand up for his admirable principle? This is what Ed thinks:

“I believe everybody is entitled to his opinion so I will not dwell on the article. What is important is that people have a right to know who they are voting for and how they are going to be represented. I have made my personal opinion against spring hunting and on several other issues clear. Now it will be up to the people to decide come June”

Of course you are entitled to an opinion you schmuck (and I say schmuck lovingly and in a very friendly manner)… sadly the voter is also entitled to know whether you will be voting according to your conscience or in line with the latest dictat from Gonzi’s PN. Somehow I get the feeling that this umbrella business can be very unwieldy – to the point that the PN might leave it up to the ECJ to decide its policy on hunting:

Contacted yesterday, Dr Borg Olivier confirmed the version of facts as given by Mr Mifsud. Dr Borg Olivier said the PN’s position on hunting and trapping is “the same as that negotiated and agreed by the government with the EU and is part of the Accession Treaty”. The interpretation of this position is now subject to a case before the European Court of Justice, Dr Borg Olivier added.

Eh? Trust me when I say this… nowhere in the remit of the ECJ is there written that it is bound to interpret the position on hunting and trapping of any umbrella party. If the PN cannot be clear, black on white, where it stands then I am sorry for candidates with balls and guts like Ed Demicoli but voters cannot really afford to throw their ballot in favour of an umbrella that will fly off with the first gust of wind….

When the sun shines, we’ll shine together
Told you I’ll be here forever
Said I’ll always be a friend
Took an oath, I’ma stick it out till the end

Now that it’s raining more than ever
Know that we’ll still have each other
You can stand under my umbrella
You can stand under my umbrella

(Ella ella, eh eh eh)
Under my umbrella
(Ella ella, eh eh eh)
Under my umbrella
(Ella ella, eh eh eh)
Under my umbrella
(Ella ella, eh eh eh, eh eh eh)

This post also appears in the Malta Chronicle.

Liquorice All Sorts

They come in all colours

Keith Grech has been blogging sometime now on Cacoethes Scribendi. In his first reaction to the PL announcement of the list of candidates for the elections for the European Parliament Keith describes the list as “impressive“.  He goes one step further by stating that Labour has ” has managed to achieve the right mix of talent and experiences” in this motley crew.

Of course “motley crew” is my addendum – don’t expect Keith to come up with such kind of colourful phrases about the choice of his party for the next chicken run erm sorry election. Keith is my laboratory rat in this particular post but what I say for Keith’s generous assessment could apply for the assessment by a commentator on the other side of Malta’s duo-chromatic political spectrum.

They have a way with shooting words and ideas you see, and if you do not stop and think you tend to just let the information knock you senseless before you can even think of exercising your mental abilities to assess the candidates. What exactly is “the right mix of talent and experiences”? Is that an inclusive definition? As in right because it includes all that is necessary to appease a hungry voting public? But what would that mean? If every candidate has one or two traits that contribute to the whole then surely the public could find itself short-changed even if a maximum of five find their way to Brussels or Strasbourg.

It’s easy to say “right mix” but then what is the right mix? Is it an exclusive justification? Exclusive as in a good mix because it leaves out unpleasant unwanteds like lets say pro-choice individuals, homosexuals, transvestites or pornstars? What is the right mix Keith? Or maybe I should be asking the reader? What is the right mix?

Perhaps we are being too harsh. After all there is only so much the umbrella parties of ours can do to hit every electoral segment under the sun. The mother of five, the nurse, the doctor, the deejay and the party lackey. Hell the Labourites even have “the one who made way for Inhobbkom Joseph” in their midst. Some will come along and tell you that they have “vast experience of the EU institutions” as PN’s RMTT did last time round in 2004 (presumably those nights studying Craig and De Burca must have contributed to this “vast experience”).  Others might tell you that they only campaigned against EU membership for the good of the country and are now on the Labour ticket because … erm because what?

Arnold of AD will be having a hard time explaining why his electorate keeps shifting (that’s a polite way of explaining why he swings from country to country in the hope of getting elected somewhere).  Maybe that’s a European quality the others miss after all.

It’s an honest question really. What qualities will the Maltese be looking for in the next MEP candidates? Will the nihil obstat from party luminaries suffice? Will the bluff and banter of the party campaign machines be loud enough to blur the choice between next comet and lackey buffoon? Who knows… in the meantime we just have to make do with the mix…

… haven’t we always?

This post also appears in The Malta Chronicle