Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1085429
17 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 24 FEBRUARY 2019 INTERVIEW level of criticism (coming mainly from Labour) that the Nationalist Party has actually done the opposite: i.e., that, in trying to hit out at Malta's government over corruption, it is harming the entire country. How do you respond to that accusation? This is something that re- ally fascinates me, actually. It's like, 'the problem is that we talk about corruption'. The real problem is not that we talk about it; it is that the govern- ment is doing things that need to be talked about. If the gov- ernment was clean, transparent and there was no corruption… there'd be nothing for us to talk about. So why are people who are talking about what they're meant to be talking about, get- ting the blame for actions that are being done by the govern- ment itself? I don't get it. It would be like me punching you and giving you a black eye, and then criticising you for having a black eye… but if I was the one who punched you in the first place? All the same, however: given the history of the Nationalist Party – which was not exactly 'clean, transparent and non- corrupt' when in government – what credibility does the PN really have to talk about corruption? At the end of the day, no party is perfect. But I think the cor- ruption we're talking about today, at this point in time, is very widespread; it is insti- tutionalised; it is about facts which have come out… it is not an 'allegation' that secret com- panies were opened in Panama. These are facts that we're talk- ing about. But then, there's an irony in all this. Earlier you asked me why the PN only talks about corruption. Look at this interview: what have you asked me about, but corruption? There's a reason for that, though: it is the agenda set by the PN … No, it isn't. If you followed [PN secretary general] Clyde Puli's speech at the general council… he said 'this is not a one-issue' party. It's what I tried explaining earlier… Then again, if this is too much of a 'one-issue interview', I can always ask some of the questions I planned to ask later… No, come on. That's not what I meant… Seriously, though. You seem uncomfortable when confronted by questions about the PN's recent past… What I meant to say was: look, I can only speak for my- self. I believe that yes, it's true that corruption has been on the agenda, and yes, you have a right to question it. But me, as Roselyn… my plan is to keep talking, of course, about cor- ruption; but it is not the only thing I'd like to talk about. There are other issues that I feel passionately about; and as much as I admire the work being done by my colleagues – whom I respect a lot; I have on- ly praise for my colleagues, and for anyone who enters poli- tics… because I know how hard it is. I'm finding it very hard myself; I don't mind admitting that… but much as I respect my colleagues, I am Roselyn. I am an individual; I have my own issues, my agenda… and while corruption forms part of it, it is not be the only area I'll be fo- cusing on. Looks like we both need to explain ourselves, then. You were quite right: we are focusing too much on corruption. Let me ask something a little different. I have observed a tendency, whereby people who are very outspoken in daily life, tend to enter politics on the basis of their outspokenness… only to suddenly find that there are certain things they can no longer say or do. Are you worried that politics might have that sort of effect on you personally? That's a very difficult ques- tion. I consider myself to be very much a 'happy-go-lucky' kind of person. People who know me might describe me as outspoken, fun-loving, out- going… in the sense that I'm always joking, always being myself. And yes, sometimes people actually do point it out to me. They say, 'Ros, you're in politics now… you need to be a bit more careful'. And it's true: I am in politics, and I'm still quite 'new' to the political arena. I feel I have a lot to learn. Even in my area of specialisa- tion – employment law – I feel I have a lot to learn. Let alone in politics. So yes, I do some- times I feel I have to be stricter with myself, in terms of what I say and how I say it. Having said that… I wouldn't want to lose my personality along the way. I, as Roselyn, don't want to 'change'. If people are uncom- fortable with this easy-going, fun-loving person… well, you can't please everyone, can you? Is there any specific area or topic you feel you have to treat with extra caution, because of your political position? To be honest, until now I've always spoken my mind. I am probably a little more cautious in how I say things, however. When I'm posting on Facebook, for instance… before politics, if I read something I thought was hilarious, I'd share it without a second thought. Today, howev- er… I'd ask myself: 'How would other people interpret that?' I'd pause to consider what impact it might have, how it might be interpreted politically… where before, these were never con- siderations at all. So yes, now that I think about it, being in politics does have that effect. Earlier, you mentioned 'gender equality' as one of your areas of interest. It is very much an issue today, with government contemplating a quota system to increase female representation in Parliament (currently it stands at 12%). What are your views on how to achieve gender equality in Maltese politics? Let me put it this way. I'm 40. And ever since my univer- sity years, I've been passionate about this topic. I was on the National Council of Women; I submitted publications on the subject to the EU… and to be perfectly frank… I'm so tired of talking about the sub- ject. Understand what I mean, though… I'm tired of talking about it. I want to see change. Not just talk, talk, talk. And this is why I've reached the point where I agree with gen- der quotas. If you asked me many years ago, I would have said 'No' to a quota system. But time passed; I did my re- search; I delved deeper into the world of work… and eventu- ally you realise that, yes, there is a gender-based disadvantage here. This is why I have come round to believing in gender quotas, even if as a temporary measure. Because we've been talking about this so much – about family-friendly meas- ures, about the need to change things, etc. – and yet, despite all this talking: if you look at statistics, we're still very far behind. So let's cut to the chase. Let's start with gender quotas as a temporary meas- ure... let's make up for the dis- advantage we have, and just get on with it. At the same time, there seems to be a difference when it comes to the European Parliament. There, female representation stands at an impressive 50% (three out of six seats… and it was originally four). How do you account for this difference? That's a very interesting point. I don't know the stats off the top of my head, but you'd have to see whether there were more female candidates [con- testing European elections] than men. That would make a big difference. It would still suggest that more women are attracted to European than to local politics, though. Yes, it would. It could be that Maltese politics is not geared towards female participation: the time sessions are held, the long hours… not that a woman can't work long hours, mind you. Of course we can. I some- times leave the office quite late. But this is not only about women; it's about parenting in general. And to be honest, it's not even just about that. Peo- ple who enter [local] politics also have to give up so much: if they're professionals, they would have to choose between their practice and their politi- cal career. I went through this myself. It's one of the reasons it took me so long to say 'yes' [to becoming a PN candidate]. This is one skill Adrian Delia certainly possesses: the skill of persuasion. But even so, it was a difficult decision. As a lawyer I have a legal practice – which is very busy, thank God – and I'm also a trainer: I have an academy, I organise courses, and I've just opened a new recruitment agency… I have so much on my plate. It would be very challenging to do Maltese politics, and keep all that at the same time. The advantage with the European Parliament, on the other hand, is… you have to give it all up; no two ways about it. But you're giving it all up for one complete package – to focus on one job, lock stock and bar- rel. The choice becomes easier to make. PHOTOGRAPHY BY JAMES BIANCHI