Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1053035
24 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 18 NOVEMBER 2018 OPINION Raphael Vassallo 'We are all just prisoners here, of our own device' I won't lay claim to being the first person in the universe to spot an uncanny resemblance between the phenomenon called 'Brexit', and the lyrics of a certain 1977 Eagles' hit single called 'Hotel California'. In particular, the line: 'You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.' A while back, I used that as a headline to describe the increasingly dangerous precedent that Britain's failed attempt to pull out of the Eu- ropean Union was about to set. A situation whereby Britain would be permitted to 'check out'… only to find it increas- ingly impossible to actually leave the hotel. But there is another, less often-quoted line from the same song: the one I used as a headline for this article (hint: it's in big bold letters, at the top of the page). There is, after all, a word for people who want to leave a particular institu- tion, but find they are forcibly prevented from ever doing so. They're called 'prisoners'… and the institution in question is called a 'prison'. This analogy assumes even greater precision when you consider the specific reasons why the British people are finding it so hard to leave the EU. What happens to real pris- oners who try to escape from real prisons, as a rule? Some might be shot by an armed guard, as they are caught in the spotlight trying to scale the prison wall. Or eaten by sharks, as they try to swim the channel towards freedom. Or sprain their ankle (if they're Dustin Hoffman), only to eventually get their entire leg sawn off, without anaesthetic, by Steve McQueen. Others still might be sus- pended upside-down, and beaten on the bare soles of their feet by a psychotic Turk- ish prison director played by Paul L. Smith. Their precise fate will obviously vary from prison to prison (just as they do from 'prison-escape movie' to 'prison-escape movie'); but whatever the circumstances – and maybe with one or two exceptions here and there – it is invariably 'fear of the conse- quences' that determines their inability to ever leave. The more I look at what's happening between Britain and the EU today, the less of a difference I see between those two scenarios. And it started long before that June 2016 vote even took place. Remember the actual arguments (such that they were) that characterised the 'Remain' campaign before the referendum? It was never, 'we should remain in the EU, because the EU is a fantas- tic thing we are all proud to be part of'. On the contrary, it always sounded like: 'The EU? Yeah, it's kind of crappy, we can all see that… but let's face it: we may as well stay in, because otherwise, we'd all be DOOMED'. Hardly the most exciting, enticing and invigorating argu- ment you've ever heard in your life, is it? Then they all won- dered how on earth they man- aged to lose that referendum in the first place… Well, it was for the exact same reason that the result did not surprise me in the slightest (despite the rather significant fact that the polls had earlier pointed in the opposite direc- tion). Even here in Malta, we have enough experience of our own to know that 'scare tac- tics', alone, rarely achieve the intended effect. Alfred Sant's 'doom and gloom' anti-acces- sion campaign did not stop a convincing majority from voting 'Yes' in the 2003 EU ref- erendum. And Simon Busut- til's dire warnings that Malta was about to 'crash straight into a brick wall' did even less to deter a larger majority from electing a Labour government in 2013. So, I suppose the first lesson to be learnt from the Brexit referendum fiasco is that… 'fear doesn't work'. And it's not just a lesson for Brits. (Seri- ously guys: get this into your heads once and for all.) Nor is it enough to try and persuade with logical arguments – even if your arguments are indeed highly convincing (in this case, quite frankly, they were not.) In order to successfully mo- bilise large swathes of voters, you have to also fire up their enthusiasm; give them some- thing to believe in; to want to believe in… in a nutshell, you have to whet their appetite with the imagined taste of what is you are actually holding up for them to all salivate over. But to do that, you have to actually have something in your hand to dangle before their eyes. Get it now? Oh, and another small thing to keep in mind is that: while it's OK (I guess) to make a mistake once… making the same mistake twice in quick succession is something else entirely. The first referendum didn't settle the issue? Never fear: we'll have a second refer- endum. And we'll even run the 'Remain' campaign in the exact same way as when we lost the first one: you know, just to make darn sure it all goes as horribly, awfully and cataclys- mically wrong as possible. I mean… isn't that how things are done? Meanwhile, just to make this truly bizarre scenario that much more surreal: some people are even describing this 'second referendum' in terms of… 'a final say'. Hmm. Much as I hate to sound like a typical Grammar Nazi ('Ich? Eine Nazi-Gram- matik-Ubermench? NEIN!') there is a teenie-weenie little mistake in that slogan. There is no such thing as 'a' final say. If the say is final, by definition there can be no other say in fu- ture. It's a bit like Highlander: 'there can only be one'. So it's 'THE' final say – just as it is 'THE (not 'A') Final Judgment' that will decide whether one eventually goes to heaven or hell (or purgatory, or limbo, or whatever). But in any case: assuming that a second referendum is indeed held on the same matter… why should the second vote be the one that settles the issue, and not the first? Or, for that mat- ter, the third? Fourth? Fifth? And so on, ad infinitum? Whenever I ask that ques- tion, I get a random assort- ment of (roughly) the following answers: 1. Because the first vote was taken before we had a clear picture of what the 'Leave' op- tion actually entails. 2. Because the 'Leave' cam- paign lied (which, for some obscure reason, seems to also mean that the result of the first referendum 'doesn't count') 3. Because the consequences of sticking to that result are in themselves so outrageously catastrophic, that they justify not only the overhaul of a sin- gle democratic decision... but, if necessary, the wholesale dis- mantling of Democracy itself: lock, stock and two smokin' barrels. What you very rarely hear, on the other hand, is the stark, brutal truth: i.e., that the people who voted to Remain (and even then, probably only a small but vociferous minority) are adamant on not accepting any referendum result that runs even remotely counter to their own political convictions. Simple as that, really… Either way, all four of those options – including the stark, brutal truth – can only add up to the death knell of the entire democratic process. (Please note: 'THE' death-knell, not 'A'. Death is something that happens only once, too…) Let's take them one by one. a) Any referendum on Brexit will have to be taken – regard- less how many times – in the absence of any clear picture of at least one of the possible outcomes. As things stand today, no one in Europe can possibly tell us what shape this Union will find itself the year after next. And I mean that literally: the European Union is poised for massive, radi- cal changes after next year's era.org.mt Environment & Resources Authority Hexagon House, Spencer Hill, Marsa. NOTICE TO CLIENTS The Authority would like to no fy its clients and the public that its offices will be closed on the 27th November and 28th November. Instead, the Authority will be rendering the following services from its offices at Hexagon House, Spencer Hill, Marsa : CITES OFFICE: Thursday 29th November from 10am un l 12 noon. In case of perishable goods, live specimens, pharmaceu cals and customs inspec ons applicants can call 24 hours in advance on 2292 3500 and select Op on 1. Clearances for emergency movements of animals and plants, including from the EU: Clients are to inform on phone number 22923500 and select Op on 3, and to email relevant transport details on ceu.nature@era.org.mt well in advance, including: flight/ vessel number and departure point; place and me of landing; and importer's details. APPLICATIONS FOR WASTE CARRIERS: Thursday 29th November from 9am un l 12 noon. PAYMENTS FOR ANNEX VII: Thursday 29th from 9am un l 12 noon. WASTE SHIPMENTS (MOVEMENT ONLY): Tuesday 27th November and Wednesday 28th November between 06:30am and 08:00am. The Authority can be contacted as usual on telephone number: 22923500.