Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/321747
19 maltatoday, SUNDAY, 1 JUNE 2014 In a word, you will make yourself look like a complete pillock in the eyes of an ever-growing number of people. Besides, there is the PN's own credibility at stake here. It is simply too much of a stretch to believe that ALL critics of the PN are, by definition, somehow or other retarded. One or two I'd accept; but every single person who has ever tried to draw that party's attentions to its shortcomings? They are ALL specimens of an inferior subspecies of human being? Or (even lower down the evolutionary ladder) undercover agents for Labour? Is it possible that not one of them might have actually had a point? Sorry, not buying it. It is a lot simpler to conclude that the criticism was in most cases justified; and that the PN in government – like all governments which outlive their natural lifespans – had not only become infinitely less than perfect, but had also blinded itself to this same reality. 3) The dismissal of potential in others. This follows on directly from point two. By the same token, it is just not credible that ALL initiatives by the Labour government are instantly rubbished on the runway even before take-off. Again, one or two I'd certainly accept. But to find not a single thing to even distantly commend in a year which has (like it or not) ushered in numerous changes in areas which affect people very directly: either in their pockets, as in the reduction in utility tariffs, or in their family life, as in civil unions? Not credible. In this respect the PN simply carried on where Gonzi left off in 2013… after a campaign in which ALL Labour proposals had been similarly dismissed as something out of Wonderland. And we all know how that election went in the end. 4) Sanctimoniousness. On this point I'll concede that Busuttil has managed to tone down the overbearing moral piety of the preceding administration, but there is still a faint whiff of it that lingers. It concerns the private moral compass of individual MPs, and how awkwardly this sits with the responsibility of their public office in passing legislation which affects everybody equally. Not to stress too fine a point about it, but the electorate is composed of adults who can make up their own minds about moral issues. I won't speak on its behalf, but as for myself I quite frankly couldn't care less about the private conscience affecting MPs (on a very selective basis, I might add) when it comes to approving bills in parliament. In elections I do not vote for moral custodians. I vote for whoever I think might make an effective legislator; and the less these people babble about their personal opinions regarding public morality, the likelier I'll be to vote for them. Of course, I know that it doesn't work the same way for everyone. But this only brings me to the last point. Less of a burial this time: think of it as the christening of a new policy (dare I say it, a 'new way of doing politics'). The PN should be looking to identify the sort of person it actually wants to represent in parliament, and then just stick to representing that category of voter. Trying to be liberal with the liberals, and conservative with the conservatives, simply cannot work in today's Malta. Last Saturday's result alone spells this out in no uncertain terms. I won't presume to instruct the PN which of its two internal warring factions to retain and which to evict. Instead I'll just quote the founder of the 'religio' that officially inspires the PN as a Christian Democratic party. "Thou canst not serve cod and gammon", he said. And he was right. It's a truly awful combination, guaranteed to make you want to throw up. Opinion Four funerals and a baptism C M Y CM MY CY CMY K news paper 18cm x 5clmns-ok2.pdf 1 20/05/2014 15:30 What message, exactly, does Labour's electoral victory send to the PN? I don't know about you, but for some reason I hear the voice of Joe Pesci in my head: "Now look here, punk: just because you won this election, don't go running away with any fancy ideas…"