Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/911593
maltatoday SUNDAY 3 DECEMBER 2017 Interview 15 Newly-elected PN secretary general CLYDE PULI admits that his party faces an uphill struggle to heal its internal wounds. But he argues it is unfair to saddle the new leadership with all the blame over a situation which has been years in the making now that people are assured that everything the PN once fought for – starting with a choice on the [supermarket] shelves, all the way to EU accession – has been safely introduced to the country, and there is no longer any over- riding issue... the PN today has to find niche issues that it can ad- dress. There has been a fragmen- tation of society: there is no long- er 'one Malta', so you now have to reach out to different 'Maltas'. To give an example concerning one of the challenges we faced at the last election: while 'good governance' is an extremely im- portant issue for the country... on its own, it was not enough to make the break the PN needed. Because it spoke mainly to what we usually refer to as the 'profes- sional middle class'... ... traditionally, the stronghold of the Nationalist Party... Agreed. But their support alone is not enough to win an election. That's why the PN is a popular party, because it represents an entire mosaic of different people. But not all parts of this mosaic may have felt represented by this concern... On the subject of 'good governance'... don't you think the PN also exaggerated that message somewhat? A lot of people (and this emerged from surveys, and even from the election result itself) clearly did not share the view that Malta had become 'intolerable' over governance issues. Perhaps they saw that businesses were doing well... that even if there was corruption, it wasn't affecting the economy or their own pocket (unlike their experience under the Nationalist administration, perhaps, when corruption in oil procurement translated into higher utility bills). How do you respond to that argument? On the subject of utility bills, a big story has only just come out about the power station that was supposed to have lowered those prices, but didn't lower them at all. It is now clear that they be- came cheaper thanks to the ini- tiatives of the PN: the intercon- nector, increased efficiency at the BWSC plant… OK, but it doesn't answer the question... Granted, but what I meant was... there WAS bad govern- ance at the time. But you could be right about the public per- ception in general. Even surveys done before the election showed that there was a shift towards the PN, which may have been attrib- utable to governance issues... but then, others who voted for us in 2013, ended up voting Labour in 2017. Why do think that happened? Because we didn't address oth- er issues. We gave that one is- sue (good governance) absolute importance, on its own... and perhaps we ignored other issues that... well, ironically, we had a very good electoral programme on those issues, too. But for the people at the bottom of the lad- der, who are on the brink of pov- erty... good governance is impor- tant, yes, but only up to a point. The cost of renting their own home is always going to be more important than corruption tak- ing place under this or that min- ister. And let's face it, it stands to reason... Couldn't it also be that a large majority simply didn't trust the PN on good governance issues either... and, in fact, trusted it less than Labour? Meanwhile, there are 'governance' issues (in the broader sense) connected with the PN's new leader, Adrian Delia: for instance, his offshore Jersey account, which contained money traceable to a prostitution racket in Soho. Doesn't this dent the PN's credentials even further on governance matters today? I don't think the people did not choose the PN because of governance issues. On the con- trary, as I already explained, those who wanted 'good govern- ance' did vote for the PN. The others didn't. Businessmen who said: 'What is this 'good govern- ance' all about, anyway? Stricter regulations? That I can't put out tables and chairs for my restau- rant? Or an umbrella...?' Those are the people who left the par- ty... [...] On the subject of Adrian Delia. First of all, what we are talking about here are simply al- legations: no proof at all. Just big stories... One could say the same about Joseph Muscat and Egrant. But in any case, they were not all 'allegations'. The Jersey account, and the money deposited into it, were facts... What were 'allegations' were the interpretations of those things. For instance, to say that somebody made money out of prostitution is, to me, a huge ex- aggeration... if I'm a lawyer rep- resenting a client, who bought a property, who rented it out to somebody else, who then illegally sub-letted it to someone else, who then used it for prostitu- tion... and all I am is the owner's lawyer... So how did money from that racket – which constitutes the illegal earnings from prostitution - end up in Delia's account to begin with? It's a lawyer's account, servicing a client. Now, if you tell me it's bad because it's in Jersey... I never said that. It's 'bad' because it seems to have been used to launder dirty money... ... and that Jersey, 20 years ago, was according to some not a se- rious jurisdiction... well, Malta wasn't a serious jurisdiction 20 years ago, either. Meanwhile the contract clearly states that if whoever rents the property, ei- ther sub-lets it illegally, or uses it for immoral purposes, the property will be requisitioned. And that is what happened. To use the prostitution argument in that sense, is also to argue that, if a grocer uses his grocery to launder money from drug traf- ficking... and he pays his taxes... then any public official on the public pay-roll – be it a minister a civil servant, whatever – would be paid out of drug money. This is an argument that makes no sense at all... With all due respect, I would say your comparison makes no sense... ... but what we always say - and Delia has always been very clear on this – is that anyone who has anything factual, let him step forward. By all means. But with facts, not allegations... It seems to be a fact that PN's support base has crumbled since Delia took over as leader last September. Recent surveys sug- gest that, if an election were held tomorrow, Muscat would win by around 71,000 votes. Do you see no connection between this ap- parent nosedive in PN support, and the cloud of 'allegations' hanging over its leader's head? I appreciate your interpreta- tion... but that's all it is. An in- terpretation. If I buy a car from you, drive it home, and it breaks down... is it my fault? I bought the car from you... So you're suggesting that the current meltdown is due to the previous 'owner' of the PN? I'm not pointing fingers. What I'm saying is that there are cir- cumstances which have been hyped up. Of course there are. The fact remains that in 2013, we lost by a wide margin. It is also a fact that in 2017, we lost by an even wider margin. From the Op- position side this time, not gov- ernment. It makes a difference: the former defeat came after 25 years in government. Then we lost from the Opposition side. It is also a fact that many people – at least, in the 'choir' – had a strong impression that we were heading towards a victory the second time round. So I feel it is entirely natural, when that didn't materialise, for there to be a huge sense of disillusionment. So to come back to that survey: first of all, let's not simply assume it's correct. In reality, it's too early to say. Even if we accept it as true, however... I don't think it's a fair interpretation to pin the blame only on Delia becoming leader. Sorry, but no: that is the situation the incoming leader found him- self facing. That's the challenge that is now his to overcome. Next up, I suppose you're going to ask me about the PN's financial situ- ation. Is Delia responsible for that, too? No. Interestingly enough, however... you are, in your new role as secretary general of the PN... Yes, it all falls on my shoulder now. What I can say is that there are challenges, certainly, and they need to be addressed in a professional way. But the situa- tion is not really how it is being depicted in the press. I'm not try- ing to minimise the issue; if these problems are not addressed, then yes, we really will be facing a cri- sis. But we are addressing them. We have brought in a group of professionals to assist us, espe- cially when it comes to mak- ing better use of our properties. Because while it is true that we are 'cash-poor', we are also 'asset rich'. The value of the properties we own is far greater than what we owe. We're not a bankrupt party, if that's what you're ask- ing. To use the prostitution argument in that sense, is also to argue that, if a grocer uses his grocery to launder money from drug trafficking... and he pays his taxes... then any public official on the public pay-roll [...] would be paid out of drug money MONEY LAUNDERING Delia...