Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1487299
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 4 DECEMBER 2022 15 OPINION table fail to get this point across, then they are causing irreversible prejudice to Malta's potential as an EU Member State. Not all is lost – the next oppor- tunity Maltese households are now in- directly burdened with an extra expense of 360 euro additional transport costs. As we import so much from the rest of the EU, the expenses on each container pile up to a considerable sum. Not all is not lost. The EU periodically reviews its legislation. Transport laws are once being looked into with a view to a revision of the inter-modal transport arrange- ments. It is important that this time we speak up early. We should make common cause with other EU Member States, like Cyprus and Ireland, who like us are island na- tions on the geographical periph- ery of the single market. In that way, our voice will be amplified. It is always better to work as a team than go alone. One sure way to start changing the tide is to foresee EU devel- opments well in advance with a view to secure the intervention of stakeholders on the ground. The Chambers of Commerce, the NGOs, Unions, other entities and individuals with relevant experi- ence need to be involved in ad- vance to refine an efficient Mal- ta position equipped with solid arguments capable of swaying an EU majority in Malta's support. Secondly, we must address the systemic disadvantage that islands like Malta face when new EU leg- islation is presented on the basis of impact assessments prepared form feedback from continental territories. There is the cost of insularity which is never really taken into accounts sufficiently in EU legislation. In many areas this test of 'the cost of insularity' may be futile as new developments can impact a family in Dusseldorf just the same as a family in Zebbuġ. In other areas however, in particu- lar for transport, new EU rules may have dramatically different impacts in Malta as compared to the mainland. It is just not fair nor reasonable for the EU to propose new rules oblivious to the addi- tional costs faced by the Maltese. The €360 extra charge for truck- ing is not an isolated case. Right now we are risking a higher bill for passenger flights and for air cargo too. For the above reasons in 2020 I proposed to include an imperative new requirement for the European Commission for this to be obliged to include the 'cost of insularity' as an additional criterion when its services con- duct impact assessments for new EU legislation. My proposal was supported by many on the online forums lead- ing to the Future of Europe Con- ference. It is time to rekindle that movement. Values change. So should parties Pierre Muscat Pierre Muscat is a student reading philosophy and sociology at the University of Malta THIS is the sound of a conservative, appealing to nostalgia, while demonising the present... "Where have values gone? "Why is it that contemporary society is so far plunged into decadence? "Our once serene, idyllic, pastoral (and feudal) gem in the centre of the sea of culture is in disar- ray, actively being undone by a wild corruption, a cancer that is the Labour Party. And it appears in many faces, in construction, tourism, sport, law, and so on. But ultimately, at its core is a nihilis- tic, anti-Christian (perhaps even satanic), amoral compass that, by necessity, always points in the Wrong direction." This is only a caricature, not a real quote. But it truly brings forth the kind of imagined gulf that allegedly exists in the fundamental disagreement between the Nationalist and Labour parties. And one asks, is this also Bernard Grech's per- spective when he too pines for a past of 'values' that Malta once possessed, as he recently alluded to in a Times interview? Of course, it is hard to base such arguments on scientific or statistical research. The world moves in a different way to whatever other fan- tasy we have of how it should be moving. But the undeniable truth is that Malta is a het- erogeneous and dense society. It houses con- flicting interests: hunters live alongside hikers, birdwatchers, offroaders and so on, all compet- ing over the same spaces. But Malta also remains homogeneous when these diverse social spheres intersect and influence each other, spilling over from one to the other, their interests now con- flicting. Even in social relations, we are never too far removed from people in positions of author- ity; they too enjoy this access and can also draw on a great reserve of social capital to stay and grow in power. Historically, language changes. 'Values' too get usurped, reinterpreted, exchanged and the like. What was unintelligible once, becomes intelligi- ble today. And the currents that brought about these shifts, are far too great for even such a mi- nuscule force as the Malta Labour Party (in the grand scheme of things) to ever be responsible for them. No 'objective' analysis can say whether these currents are indeed morally good or bad. The same is true for the Nationalist Party's naive de- lusion that it can resist and turn back these cur- rents, let alone provide a concrete justification for why these changes are morally bad or why we are duty-bound to fight against them. The principal divide between the two parties is this recurring spat that locates Labour in the world of progress, and the PN in the world of the past – future, good; past, bad. And even when the future projected by a government turns out to be a mess of compromise and conflicts of interest, as in the case of Labour, the PN trips in its own shoes, with the alternative they offer only being the political grave they're digging for themselves. The question is: does endorsing a more liberal (albeit inherently deceptive) governance, such as legalising recreational cannabis to win votes, or privatisating plastic bottle recycling in the fight against climate change (while bottlers make hay as the sun shines) suggest "a lack of values" – as Grech claims – or is it that the world is actually being "valorised differently"? Grech said: "Robert Abela evidently wants to introduce abortion, even though he is pretend- ing it is not the case. He has no principles. He just wants to increase his majority. Two claims are being made here. In saying Abela has no principles on abortion, he is also saying that any person who agrees with abortion has no princi- ples, or that being pro-choice is an unprincipled position. The mention of 'majority' is particular- ly interesting: Grech obviously refers to votes, but the there is also the implicit majority, that is, the common run of people. And while support for Malta's civil liberties drive may not necessar- ily be ubiquitous, it definitely is a potent force in itself considering the polemicisation of the An- drea Prudente case. In thinking that Abela is appeasing this force for more votes, then it follows that Grech already thinks it is the most prevalent force in contem- porary Maltese society! Therefore the majority is amoral, and the direction in which it is pushing society is amoral, unless… "There is only one po- litical party (that is against abortion). That is the PN." (Times interview). This is the crescendo towards a construed moral panic, much as we have heard in previous claims on rule of law that the PN is the only party that can guarantee it. And while delusional, giv- en its three consecutive electoral defeats, it actu- ally contradicts the rhetorical complaints about declining values, about being the last crusader to defend divine principle from the infidel. Nothing is more telling about how such a stance is unprincipled and dishonest than how strategic it is. Indeed it is populist at best, amoral at worst. For how can it not be strategic when the PN wants society to reject this shift in the ho- rizons of value, if not for its self-interested ends? And it also presumes, in the PN's mindsets, that the only moral values known to man are some- what already delineated; that only a particular group of people has exclusive access to this list; and lastly, given the necessary power, they will ensure and enforce the alignment of society to this list. This is the vision of "the greater good": exclusion, limiting of possibilities and opportu- nities of imagining new ways the world can be. The PN should stop playing the role of the priest. And we should beware the seductive strategies of political talk. It is more open con- versation that we need. Peter Agius is an EU official and prospective PN candidate for Europe kellimni@peteragius.eu