Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1476201
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 14 AUGUST 2022 OPINION 10 Raphael Vassallo OPINION If Frank Psaila is a 'turncoat'… who the heck isn't? I can't claim to be very well acquainted with former PN information secretary Frank Psaila; although we have met a few times before; I did inter- view him on at least a couple of occasions; and he has been a consistent presence in the Mal- tese political landscape for well over a decade now. I thought I'd point all that out, because the rest of this article will no doubt be inter- preted (not incorrectly) as a 'defence' of Frank Psaila: who – by virtue of having accepted a number of public service po- sitions (three, I believe) under a Labour government – is now being branded a 'turncoat', and much worse. But if I defend Psaila from such accusations, it has very little to do with my own per- sonal opinion of the man him- self. I don't mind admitting, for instance, that I've always regarded to him as one of the more moderate, and less bel- ligerent exponents of the Na- tionalist Party. And in the days when he was still a PN activist/ candidate… yes, there were moments I thought he might make a half-decent future MP perhaps. Or even, why not? A possible future leadership con- tender (let's face it: he couldn't possibly do much worse than the last three, could he?)… Having said this: ideologically speaking, we are far too many lightyears apart, for any of that to ever translate into political support. So (sorry, Frank… but I'm being 'frank', too…) fact of the matter is that I still wouldn't vote for him, in any of those capacities. All the same, though: for what it's worth, my own re- action to his resignation from the Nationalist Party last May was that… it's a shame, really. For starters: because the PN can't realistically afford to lose the last few remaining moder- ate voices it still retains in its choir (that is, in fact, precisely why it has been reduced to the screeching, hysterical cacoph- ony it is today). And besides: it tells us infinite- ly more about the PN's current leadership issues, than about Frank Psaila himself. For un- less I am much mistaken, it is actually the party leader's re- sponsibility to instil a sense of 'belonging' – and consequent- ly, 'allegiance' – to the party. And given that Bernard Grech has manifestly failed to ever do that, since taking over two years ago… you can hardly blame so many people (Psaila was actu- ally the umpteenth PN member to jump overboard, since 2020) for 'losing their allegiance', to a party which had given them so little reason to feel any such loy- alty in the first place. But that was just an aside. The real reason I feel compelled to stick up for Frank Psaila is of a more… well, 'linguistic' nature. Call me a boring old fart, but I belong to that tiny minority which keeps insisting (in vain) that the words we use, on a daily basis, actually have mean- ings, you know; and connota- tions, implications… and above all, CONSEQUENCES. And with so many people out there, being so very quick to resort to such inflammatory accusations as 'turncoat' (and 'traitor', 'Judas', etc)… well, it would help if they actually bothered looking those words up in a dictionary first. The precise definition may vary, of course… but it always boils down to roughly this: 'someone who deserts one par- ty or cause, in order to join an opposing one' (And you should be able to work it out for your- selves anyway: to be a 'turn- coat'… you have to actually be wearing a 'coat', that can be 'turned'.) In other words: you have to be an active member of the or- ganization you choose to defect from; and even then, your ac- tions cannot be limited to sim- ply 'deserting your own side'. No, the dictionary-definition is quite clear on this point. To qualify as a 'turncoat', you have to 'join an opposing party' - or 'jump ship', if you prefer - and in so doing, you must also ex- plicitly 'betray your own cause' (which, by definition, cannot be the same 'cause' that you are in process of defecting to: but more of this later). Now: does any of that actu- ally apply to the case of Frank Psaila? Because it sure as hell doesn't look like it, to me. Let's start with the obvious. Psaila resigned from the Na- tionalist Party immediately after the election, last May. In so doing, he took off the 'coat' that he is supposed to have somehow 'turned' in the mean- time… and presumably, hung it alongside all the others, in the Dar Centrali's increasing- ly-overcrowded 'cloakroom', before walking out of the front door. So if he 'deserted' the PN at all… it happened more than two months ago. Meanwhile, unless the Nationalist Party has turned into the equivalent of 'Hotel California' while I wasn't looking – i.e., "You can check out any time you like; but you can never leave" – I fail to see why Frank Psaila shouldn't have the full freedom to simply resign from that party, at any goddamn time he so chooses (and for any reason under the sun, too). As for what other employ- ment he decides to go for after- wards: well, that's also his own affair, at the end of the day. But still: it does bring us to a far more important reason, why the term 'turncoat' is clearly misplaced in this context. Unlike so many other Maltese politicians in the past – some of whom literally 'crossed the floor', from one side of the House to the other – Frank Psaila did not 'join the Labour Party', after resigning from the PN. Nor did he 'jump ship' in any other conceivable sense of the term. All he did was accept appoint- ments to three (3) separate gov- ernment boards… a fact which may admittedly raise a few eye- brows, here and there (in the sense that: I can understand how a lawyer, with so much experience in politics, might do a good job of 'social hous- ing'. But that the same lawyer would also be an expert on 'the licensing of medical products and devices'? Or 'the granting of professional warrants to ar- chitects and civil engineers'? I mean… how's that for 'mul- ti-tasking', huh?) But that, as far as I can see, is the only reason to even ques- tion any of those appointments. Because unless we are forced to add 'good governance' (and es- pecially, 'the rule of law') to the list of 'widely misunderstood and/or misapplied expressions in Malta right now': there is (or there's supposed to be) a dis- tinction between 'the govern- ment'… and the political party which happens to be adminis- tering it, at any given moment. And there's an even bigger difference between the internal structures of a political party… and the entire National Pub- lic Service (including all the boards, agencies, authorities, regulatory bodies, etc, which are supposed to be 'autono- mous'). Indeed, the whole point of the 'rule of law' has all along been precisely this: that national in- stitutions are kept at an arm's- length from other branches of the State… so that they can carry out their daily opera- tions, regardless which of two political parties happens to be in power. Now: I admit that's a convo- luted way of saying that 'the people calling Psaila a 'turn- coat', clearly do not understand the mechanics of governance in any functioning democra-