Leġittimu?

Ħabib tiegħi (mhux Malti) fissirli xinhi, skont hu, d-differenza kbira fid-demokraziji tal-Punent bejn l-imġiba politika tal-partiti tax-xellug u dawk tal-lemin meta jsibu ruħhom fl-oppożizzjoni.
Tal-ewwel b’mod jew ieħor jaraw kif se jerġgħu jiksbu lura l-voti li jkunu tilfu. Tat-tieni kważi awtomatikament jaraw kif se jikkontestaw id-dritt tal-gvern xellugi biex imexxi. Għalihom, kull oppożizzjoni trid tibda billi tisħaq li min jinsab fil-gvern ma jistħoqqlux ikun hemm, li b’mod jew ieħor mhuwiex leġittimu.
Kelli naqbel li tassew, dak li fisser jiġri ta’ spiss, minn Trump jakkuża lil Barack Obama li mhuwiex ċittadin Amerikan u jinsab President b’qerq; sal-PN tal-lum (jew fazzjoni qawwija fih) li poġġiet l-akkużi ta’ governanza ħażina u korruzzjoni bħala l-qofol tal-kritika tagħha. L-istramba f’dil-biċċa hi li meta ntebħet li mhijiex tikkonvinċi lill-poplu Malti b’dil-ħaġa, qed tara kif timmobilizza l-Parlament Ewropew (jew aħjar, parti minnu).
Bħallikieku mhux il-poplu Malti li hu sovran f’deċiżjoni dwar jekk għandux gvern leġittimu jew le.
IR-RAPPORT TAL-OXFAM
Skont rapport li ħarġet l-Oxfam, Malta flimkien mal-Olanda, il-Lussemburgu u l-Irlanda jixirqilha tiġi klassifikata mill-Unjoni Ewropea bħala ġenna fiskali, minn fejn jgħaddu kumpaniji u sinjuruni biex jaħslu l-fondi li jkollhom fi profitti jew dħul personali.
Dak li qalet l-Oxfam jgħiduh oħrajn… għalkemm sar ħafna kjass fostna għax il-kumitat dwar l-iskandlu tal-karti tal-Panama tal-Parlament Ewropew ma wasalx sa hawn fir-rapport tiegħu. Madankollu ħafna mill-membri tal-kumitat hekk jaħsbu, speċjalment dawk li huma favur li t-taxxi fl-Ewropa jinġabu qrib ta’ xulxin bil-għan li jinħoloq suq wieħed tassew magħqud.
Dawk li huma mdaħħla fis-servizzi finanzjarji f’Malta jiċħdu din it-tabella ta’ ġenna fiskali għall-pajjiż. Imma ili li għedtha: matul is-snin baqgħu ma għamlu xejn biex jikkjarifikaw bħala professjonisti kif iwettqu x-xogħol tagħhom. Ħallew f’idejn il-gvern tal-ġurnata biex waħdu “jiddefendihom”. Numru ta’ każi li tqajmu bil-midja internazzjonali ma għenu xejn.
GĦAŻLA
Is-soċjalisti fil-Ġermanja jinsabu quddiem deċiżjoni iebsa. Kellhom imorru fl-Oppożizzjoni biex fl-erba’ snin li ġejjin jerġgħu jlaqqgħu warajhom lill-partitarji li telquhom. Bil-falliment tan-negozjati bejn il-konservattivi, il-liberali u l-ħodor biex jifformaw koalizzjoni, qamet l-għajta għal “koalizzjoni kbira” oħra bejn konservattivi u soċjalisti, bħal dik ta’ qabel l-aħħar elezzjoni.
Peress li bdiha l-President Ġermaniż, innifsu soċjalista – fl-interess tal-pajjiż, qal, u biex tiġi assigurata l-istabbiltà ekonomika u soċjali tal-pajjiż – is-soċjalisti ftit jistgħu jinjoraw is-sejħa.
Imma jafu x’se jkunu l-konsegwenzi jekk jagħmlu hekk. Ikomplu jiġu identifikati f’moħħ il-poplu li jixbhu lill-konservattivi u allura jibqgħu jitilfu mill-appoġġ popolari.
Hekk ġara fl-aħħar darbtejn li ħadu sehem f’“koalizzjoni kbira”

English Version – Legitimate?

A (non-Maltese) friend explained what in his view, is the huge difference within Western democracies between the political behaviour of left and right wing parties when they find themselves in opposition.

The first set out to see how they can in one way or another, win back the votes they have lost. As if following some quasi-automatic reflex, the second seek to contest the right of a left wing government to implement its projects. For the right, all opposition must start with the claim that those in government do not deserve to be there: one way or another, they are illegitimate.

I had to agree his point is frequently confirmed by events, from Trump’s accusations that Barack Obama is not truly a US citizen and fraudulently became US President; to today’s PN (or a strong cabal within its structures) which has decided to place at the core of its criticism of the government, relentless claims about bad governance and corruption.

What is curious in this, is that when it realised that such an approach had left the Maltese people unconvinced, it turned to see how to mobilise the European Parliament (or better, part of it) around its banner.

As if the Maltese people do not retain the sovereign right to decide about the legitimacy of theirown government.

***

The Oxfam report

A report published by Oxfam, names Malta alongside the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Ireland as being well in line, under rules currently devised by the EU, to be classified a tax haven; a zone that is, through which corporations and rich people launder the funds they receive in profits or personal income.

What has been said by Oxfam, others also declare…though there has been much fanfare locally about how the European Parliament committee dealing with the Panama Papers scandal did not go so far in its final report. Yet, many members of that Committee do share Oxfam’s view, not least those who are in favour of tax harmonisation in Europe in order to establish a truly integrated single market.

People involved in the Maltese financial sector reject the label given to the island of being a tax haven. But I have been saying it for quite a while now: over the years these same people did next to nothing to clarify internationally how they – as professionals – go about their assignments. They let the government of the day assume exclusively the burden of “defending them”. Then, a number of cases highlighted by the international media did not help to improve matters.

***

Choice

German socialists face a tough choice. They meant to go into Opposition so that in the coming four years, they could reassemble behind them supporters who had drifted away. When the negotiations between conservatives, liberals and greens to form a coalition collapsed, the call came for another “grand coalition” between conservatives and socialists, similar to the one in force before the elections.

It was the German President himself, a socialist, who first launched the idea – it is in the national interest, he said – and it is needed to guarantee the economic and social stability of the country. So the socialists could hardly ignore the call.

It’s the same scenario like for the two previous grand coalitions in which they played a part.

Still they know what the consequences will be should they join a “grand coalition”. They will continue to be identified with the conservatives among the people at large and they will continue to bleed popular support.