Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/294639
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 13 APRIL 2014 Opinion 20 M ust be the inf luence of Brian May. What else can explain the sudden phenomenon whereby we all seem to have gone slightly mad? OK, before proceeding allow me a small disclaimer. I do not mean 'slightly mad ' in any medical sense of the word. I am fully aware that there are media conventions regarding infirmities of the mind… and that using words such as 'pott y', 'dott y', 'deranged ', 'demented ', 'wacko', 'cracked ', 'mental ', 'cuckoo', ' loony', ' loopy' and 'gaga' is a big no-no in these politically correct times. But that only applies to genuine mental illness. This means that it is impolite to describe people as 'pott y', 'cracked ' or 'one screw short of a porno'… but only if they really are pott y, cracked or one screw short of a porno. People who suffer from no such mental impairment fall into a different category. And besides: the sort of madness I refer to is of the much more mundane and less colourful variet y you encounter every single day. For instance, the abilit y to hold two (sometimes three or four) entirely contradictory positions at the same time; or the propensit y to perform remarkably daft actions which do not seem to make sense from any perspective… while at the same time complaining of the daftness of identical actions when performed by other people. In other words, exactly the sort of behaviour exemplified by Joseph Cuschieri this week. That's right, the Labour MEP who suddenly announced that he would not contest the next European election in protest against discriminatory tactics by the PL electoral machine… only to submit his nomination at the Electoral Commission just two days later. From an outsider's perspective, this U-turn – quite possibly the most abrupt volte-face ever performed in public by any politician, any where in the world – certainly does look slightly mad. Under normal circumstances, sane and level- headed people do not make defiant public statements about their intentions one day… and then go on to completely contradict those statements the next, without providing any form of explanation to account for the change of heart. The only logical explanation for such behaviour is that the object of the person's complaint – in this case, the tendency of the Labour Part y machinery to favour some candidates over others before an election – will have been addressed in the meantime. But as it is clearly impossible for the Labour Part y to have revised its electoral media strategy in the space of literally a few hours – that's how long Cuschieri 's determination seems to have lasted – we can safely assume that there was no change to the state of play Cuschieri had actually complained about. Nor is it realistic to expect any such change. Political parties the world over push some candidates more than others. It is an inevitable consequence of the democratic electoral system in all its guises… and Cuschieri himself should know this better than most. But what makes his actions decidedly odd is not so much the validit y of his complaint itself. Cuschieri is after all perfectly correct in pointing out that the Labour Part y's electoral machinery gets used to favour certain candidates at the expense of others. Whether he is right to complain about it is another matter, but let's take this one step at a time. Nor is it just the Labour Part y to indulge in a little pushing and shoving when it comes to getting the right people into the right positions (or, more cogently, the wrong people out of them). One recent example we all saw was the curious case of Kevin Plumpton, the Nationalist candidate who was 'punished ' by the part y for apparently contradicting his part y leader on the issue of the IIP citizenship bill. Plumpton was precluded from PN media activities and prevented from speaking to the press. Coming a few months before the MEP election, that is the equivalent of branding the mark of Cain on poor Plumpton's forehead: "This is our candidate, in whom we are mightily displeased." And if the PN sticks to the usual pre-electoral pantomime script, it will also issue a last-minute reprieve: possibly even giving Plumpton a nominal push in the weeks ahead of election day… you know, just to dispel any perception of having copiously defecated upon the hapless candidate's actual chances of ever getting elected. About the only thing that makes Plumpton's case in any way unusual is that the decision – and justification – was taken in full public view. Normally, this sort of thing happens behind closed doors. But this doesn't mean it won't be visible to anyone who cares to look. This brings me to the doubtful wisdom of Cuschieri 's outburst this week. After all, few people are better positioned than he to comment on the delights of part y preferences as a means of ensuring electoral success. Let's face it: what chance would Joseph Cuschieri have had of being elected to the European Parliament at all, had he not vacated his local parliamentary seat to accommodate the seat-less Joseph Muscat in 2008… thus indebting the entire part y to himself through a perceived act of self-sacrifice? Unlike Plumpton-gate, those negotiations were not public. So we' ll never know exactly what was promised or how it was achieved in practice. But it was prett y obviously a case of 'you scratch my back, I' ll scratch yours'. Give up your parliamentary seat for the leader, and we' ll see to it that you get elected to another (better paid) parliament to compensate you for your pains. Cuschieri therefore benefitted from precisely the same machinations that he now complains are being used against him. He got elected to the European parliament on the strength of a whispering campaign whereby the Labour Part y 'informed ' its voters that it expected young Joseph to be rewarded for his gesture. So how dare the Labour Part y suddenly start whispering a different tune? How dare they promote other candidates in his place, after all he did for them six years ago? Well, herein lies the nuttiness. Apart from spectacularly contradicting himself in less than 48 hours, he has also publicly declared that the same PL feels its debt towards him has now been paid in full. By his own admission, the Labour Part y no longer considers him worth expending any further energy or resources on, and would much prefer investing in other – presumably better – candidates. Hm. Yes, that's a fantastic plug to give yourself just a few weeks before an election, isn't it? "Vote for me, even my own part y thinks I'm useless". Almost as bad as a naked selfie… and arguably even more revealing. For thanks to Cuschieri 's little pirouette this week, we not only know that the part y is now using its machinery and inf luence for benefit of other candidates to take his place... but we also know that yet another backroom agreement must have been reached in the meantime. How else to explain Raphael Vassallo 'We're only in it for the money…' Under normal circumstances, sane and level- headed people do not make defiant public statements about their intentions one day… and then go on to completely contradict those statements the next Joseph Cuschieri