Sunday, 27th April 2008 - 10:41CET
Mintoff endorses George Abela
Former Labour leader and Prime Minister Dom Mintoff today expressed his backing for George Abela’s leadership bid.
Mr Mintoff, 91, made a short speech before an enthusiastic crowd at a public activity held by Dr Abela in Qormi this morning.
Dr Abela greeted Mr Mintoff as “an honoured guest.”
Mr Mintoff spoke on a variety of subjects – even saying his hearing aid was a means for the Police Commissioner to know his whereabouts.
He said he wanted to see Malta to be at least as good as other nations.
He was attending this meeting, he said, not to see whether or not Dr Abela had said the truth about the 1998 MLP executive meeting which proposed that the Labour government hold a snap election.
His purpose, he said, was to see that Dr Abela achieved his aims.
Mr Mintoff complained over corruption in the country and said he did not view the next general election as being five years away. “It is up to us” he said, adding that no one should tolerate the ‘dirt’ Malta was seeing.
He also said he would participate in a meeting to be held in Valletta tomorrow with Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, whom he described as ‘saintly.’
Ten years ago Dr Abela resigned from his position as MLP deputy leader for party affairs after coming out against a proposal for the then Labour government to hold a snap election. Prime Minister Sant had called the election after Mr Mintoff voted against the government on a motion on the Cottonera project which Dr Sant had linked to a confidence vote. He subsequently also voted against the government on other issues, robbing Labour of its one seat parliamentary majority.
Picture: Dom Mintoff at George Abela's meeting this morning. Next to Mr Mintoff is Dr Abela's father.
Comments
Long live Dom Mintoff.
What has GA got to do with this? Who said we hate AS?
I criticise AS becasue he has not really resigned - still Leader of Oppositon- and he is interfering with :
1. report of analysis of why labour lost
2. leadership elections.
Ex leader should be ex-leaders. They should stop defending their legacy and let history judge. And that applies to Mintoff and george vella too.
if you are refering to my last comment I think you have missed the wood for the trees. I am taking to task the people who actually saw to it that Alfred Sant did not become prime minister by failing to give him the right advice and by being politically naive. The ones that did not deliver on the tasks they were set.The ones whose arrogance cost us another election. The ones that willfully wasted the talents of Alfred Sant. A.Sant did resign however I would like to see a show of hands from those who honestly think they had nothing to do what so ever with the third electoral defeat. If there is ,as I suspect , a great reluctance for shouldering the blame than let us have the results of the commission's findings on why MLP lost last election today!
let´s make it clear: hatred attracts neither floaters nor new voters. and if george abela is pleased with such people who vomit hatred against others, I have doubts he will ever be a good leader who can unite the party.
I am not writing to defend alfred sant or anyone else. I support none of the horses in this race but I´m disgusted by the comments posted by people who support george abela.
It´s disgusting!
Why GA wants to return after 10 years? Because Alfred Sant has resigned. I'm sure GA thought, like everyone else, that Sant wouldn't last long. But unfortunately for MLP he lasted an entire decade.
If i remember well in 1998,it was not simply the leader who voted in favour of going for an early election! The leader (at that time) simply presented a motion and then the delegates voted in favour of it i.e. going for an early election!!!! That is the truth!!!
If george abela decided to resign at that time, it was his option. His decision left us at stake, dividing the party in the yes of the general public. It did no go at all (and I´m sure many agree).
If he decided to resign, why does he want to come back after a long 10 year holiday?
Just leave us alone George! Our people sesent you for what you did!!!
Dont waste your time on Mr Louis Fenech. He does not need any advice. He knows it all. Unfortunately he is a sample of many in labour camp that have got so used to being in oppositon that the fear of change in becoming a true challenge to PN's overlong tenure in power scares them off. On the 5th of June he may be so happy that Labour will make sure of losing the next election! Viva the status quo!!
Dear Louis, nothing in my writing ever tried to test/understand if you would go or when.
All I can say is that I agree with the information you gave without me asking.
The delegates do and choose. Quite correct.
You most definitely need no advice from me. I never tried either.
And like you said, you can go or stay whenever you decide.
I feel that this has nothing to do with what I said or asked.
What I said was; it’s easy to make statements about those that resigned.
What I asked was:
If you were to be Deputy Leader and your Leader simply starts doing what he wants and not what the Party/Company needs and does not even consult with you and leave you no option but to resign, or do what he says; What would you have done?
Would you have resigned?
And if you stayed, rather than resign, since as you understand it you would have abandoned the party/company: - what would you have done in the circumstances?
what counts is what the delegates do and choose!
You are repeating the same story over and over again yourself!
Whether I`ll go or stay, it`s my choice and I need no advice from you. Thanks anyway for being so kind!
I have already made it clear, I will go only if ever george abela is elected as labour leader. But things seem to convince me to stay a little longer..or forever! I`ll let you know about my definitive decision on June 5.
I was not going to ask but I will ask it anyway as long as you do not think that I wish to argue with you since you have every right to do what you want.
Its easy to repeat statements but not easy to justify them professionally.
We, that to some small or large degree vote according to circumstances, understand the resignation of all those that resigned with the MLP. As we understand it, and especially after Muscat kindly clarified, they had no option. We consider them to be professionals because they did what was right to prove what was wrong.
If what our friend Muscat clarified earlier on re; how it transpired that the MLP went for early snap elections is anything to go by; Dr. Sants practices and ways of making decisions, was not very professional was it? He did what he wanted apparently. He did not leave anyone any options.
To put it bluntly, if you do not like what I want to do, you know what to do. Go!
Look at Marlene Pullicino. It’s a virtue what she said - I was shocked in 81 and voted NP in 87, - not a weakness. Doing what is right is what earns people respect and credibility. And not withstanding the odds, she still continues to do what is right (what the Party needs) not what she wants today.
So if you were to be Deputy Leader and your Leader simply starts doing what he wants and not what the Party/Company needs and does not even consult with you and leave you no option but to resign, or do what he says;
What would you have done?
Would you have resigned?
And if you stayed, rather than go, since as you understand it, you would have abandoned the party/company, what would you have done in the circumstances?
I hope he is able to realise this and won`t continue to do anymore harm to the party!!!
I do not attack anyone. As a regular columnist with left political leanings mostly in the english language press (not many of them around!) I criticse actions and ideas not individuals and never personally.
As I was forced to leave Labour on 1st Sept 2003 I cannot criticise internally. I am not even a member yet. The fact that I made public my endorsement of George Abela does not mean I am his abbatin. I support him whether he likes it or not,because I think, based on research, that he is the one who gives Labour the best prospect for winning the next election. It is as simple as that. No strings attached.
As with any other person GA has his pros and cons but he is our best hope to lead us where we have been finding it so difficult to get to.
So your question should have been: Why did you criticise externally in the past when you could do it internally?
My answer is that when I criticse externally it is only because I would have exhausted all efforts to change things internally. And I do not criticse ideas or policies. Even if I do not personally agree with a policy once the majority adopted it I either support or leave. I criticse when people use their power of incumbency to protect their personal interest at the expense of the party's interest. When this happens the incumbency makes sure that all doors of internal criticism are shut locked and bolted.
In 2003 I was disciplined for pointing out that electing an incumbent leader before the independent analysis report about the lost election for 2003 had even started defied all rules of logic. I warned that electing the same leader to promote new EU policies to which he had been diametrically opposed negated the party the necessary credibility to win the election. Do you think I did not do all I could to deliver this message internally before the froga was made? Do you think that those who were using their incumbency to protect their tenure would accept this logic? No my friend rather than see the logic they tried to muzzle to me on the pretext that my criticsm was damaging the party. So I left and I stopped ciriticising for 4 years. Do you think it makes me proud that Labour lost an election so that I can tell you I told so? Not at all but after all I told you so.
I love Labour and want to see it in government. I dont want anything and dont seek positions. I just want that those who seek positions do it because they really put labour first and foremost. Only then we can win elections. We can never match the resources of the PN so we have to make up for our shortfall of material resources with a big heart for the party.
Dont you think that it would have been easier for me in 2003 to accept what everybody else accepted and just let the party crash to a third electoral defeat? In my conscience I could not do it and I sacrified my political carreer in an attempt to save the party from disaster. It hurts but I don't regret it as I can sleep with a clean conscience.
As for myself, for instance, I really wish to know also if george abela voted PN in 2008, because if he did so, I don´t think that it would be appropriate to have a leader who contributed to the MLP's defeat.
However, I would have preferred if such a debate would not be so open because if we seem to be so much divided, no leader, and whoever it might be, would ever lead the party to a victory. A divided party never wins.
As to Alfred Mifsud, by attacking or criticising individuals in public, nothing would be achieved. On the contrary, it creates more enemies. I believe, that if people here mean any good to our party, such criticism should be done inside the party instead.
One should not forget that this is the beginning of the race! The actual race is, and should be, the one which should lead us to a victory. But I stress again, if any leader would tolerate people around him who criticises so open any individual, is not a real leader. A leader is a person who is able to bring everyone on board. So dear, alfred mifsud, if you are supporting george abela, there´s no harm in that, but your attitude is doing, or will do no good for him if ever he´s elected as labour leader. Be more constructive in your articles. There´s no need to attack anyone.
I wish to thank you for clarifying what I had asked. I believe that Dr. Sant is a Harvard Graduate. So what you say about his method of managing an operation and management struck me the most since I never would have never dreamed that Dr. Sant used to proceed like so, have done some studies with Harvard myself.
This changes everything. If this is like you say it is, than this is the core of the problem of why so many good people that were most definitely an important asset to MLP, resigned.
I feel that MLP key people should try to seek to put a process in place that brings out the best leader for the party. Its not easy since there are so many elements and so many that stand to gain. On the other hand all will loose of this is not done right.
The MLP came out with a campaign that was excellent and probably better than that of the NP. The core of the problem was credibility. And this is what you need to address.
I thank you once more for your time.
Re the rights of patrons and patriarchs: no one contests their right to vote for their favourite choice, its imposing that choice that is debatable.
I think I replied in plain and simple English. Of course members of the administration have a right to have their preferences. In fact they are delgates with a vote at the General Conference.
However the administartion has to be and to appear neutral in this contest so members of the administration should not openly support or lobby for any particular candidate, Same applies in my opinion, probably with more force, to ex-leaders and ex-deputy leaders.
It would be unfair on the party and on the elected leader that he/she be perceived as having been elected by the power of incumbency of any ex-leader or of the adminsitration. The leader has to be elected by the free choice of the candidates/members and has to be loyal to the party members and social democratic principles.
Dear Mr Mifsud.......You know well enough......Common sense is not so common after all !!!
@Louis Fenech
Dear Mr Fenech......Are you intending to keep on repeating the same things for another 4 weeks?........Please, give us a break !!!
I don`t want to get involved in this row between you and Louis fenech but I am also curious about whether you have approached any members of the administration not to support anyone. Is it true or not? I see nothing wrong if members of the party administration can support their own favourite also like everyone else.
yes it is true. so he did against JM. and so he did again people who did show him their support during his meetings with local committes. If he really means to unite our party, then I hope that we all agree that this behaviour should stop immediately.
@Alfred Mifsud
I ask you to think again about whom you have approached directly not to influence any delegate who is entited to vote for our next leader. It is not appropriate to mention third persons here in this blog, but we will definately meet soon and I will remind you personally. Everyone is entitled to have his own choice and democracy (as long as I understand well) does not restrain anyone to express his opinion.
No matter who will be elected, there will be a change. There has to be a change! But if we have to look forward, we need a new change! We need a ´new barrel´ as george abela himself said. But he´s definately not a ´new barrel´. He´s also associated with the past. And please don´t mention again that he was party of the victory team in 1996! Things have changed so much since then and besides, no leader alone, or any trio alone can lead to a succcess. It takes a whole team to win. It takes a leader who can bring everyone together. But unfortunately George Abela caused deep wounds already and no miracle can heal that. It´s a pity, but it´s the truth. And if we want to be realistic, we have to admit this. Go to the party clubs or in local cafes and listen to the people out there! I´m really astonished how goerge abela is pushing so hard to open the vote for all members! I really doubt if that would benefit him more rather than if he uses his energy to win back the trust of the delegates (only 900 persons)
Unfortunately you seem to be misinformed completely. If you only check GA's own website you'll hear him and see him talk against MF. Indirectly of course, as he always does. But its very easy to understand, so I'm gonna stick to my opinion cause its good.
Apology accepted.
Regarding your question whether I contacted (personally) members of the party administration and asked them not to support any of the candidates in the race believe me I don't know exactly who the members of the administartion are but I remember having discussions on the lines you indicate with Dr George Vella who I believe is not a member of the administartion.
Be as it may I have no problem in expressing my views that members of the administartion, who have considerable power of incumbency, should appear as neutral as possible in this race and keep their preferences to themselves. Same applies for ex-Leaders and ex-Deputy leaders as they also carry substabtial power of incumbency ( see my articel in TMIS of last Sunday) . For example I would have much preferred that Michael Falzon resigned his post once he is contesting for leadership.
Foir the party it is important that whoever is elected owes it to delegates/members who voted him not to the administration that supported him, as the administration may have vested interest to resist change. An elected leader with moral obligations towards a 'godfather' who may restrict the leader's freedom to instil change is not what Labour needs. And that applies to Mintoff as much as to Vella or Sant.
Hope that I satisfied your curiousity.
I get you point. And believe me I appreciated and I did not exclude that option. I also send an email to all other candidates by mail, asking them questions, and none of the others hesitated to reply to me by writing? So why does george abela only? I also asked to meet them personally and when I´ll have the opportunity to do so, I will ask to meet george abela too. I just want to hear all of them, no exception!
@Keith Chircop
that was very kind of you, but your answers (which you chose to formulate them in questions) mean nothing to me and many others, given that, with all respect, you are not a candidate in this race. And I hope that I´not considered by you as being offensive, as others chose to describe me!
Also, during his meeting with the local committee of Zabbar yesterday, Dr George Abela said that he would continue to work in the party (if he would not be elected) depending on who will be elected. It means that he´s contradicting himself when he´s saying in public that he will continue to work within the party no matter what.
I mean no harm to george abela personally, but the george abela ´the politician´ has a lot to explain and clarify if he needs people (even the staunch labour supporters) to give him their support
If GA invited to meet you directly to discuss your questions face to face what are you complaining about? I don't blame anyone who refuses to correspond via emails or blogs with someone who does not even necessarily exist and could be just using a pseudo. Good intentions my friend are so important and you can judge a person's good intentions when meeting him face to face.
And I have been following this exchange and I assure you that your writings are replete with unproven assertions. You probably don't even realise it as it comes natural to you but in the end nothing changes the fact that assertion is no proof.
@J Buhagiar
You seem an objective and experienced person and you ask out of Louis fenech some questions which he just cannot have the answer for. From the minutes of the 1998 executive meeting now leaked to the press it is clear that there was no material discussion on the crux of going for early election but that the matter was referred for discussion at general conference level.
It is very strange that Sant seemed to have a very formal type of adminsitration where informal discussions were not giving their proper weight in the process of removing conflict and searching for compromise. How on earth could one explain keeping on with endless burning parliamentary sessions where Mintoff was allowed some 12 hours of soliloques rather than adjourn parliament and seek a quiet internal compromise behind the scenes? How is it possible to imagaine that on such issue of going to the General conference with a resolution for seeking early elections there seem to have been no informal discussion within the leadership trio to ensure they had consensus before even bringing the matter to the executive? Clearly Sant was incredibly intelligent but had no idea of how to lead to band club let alone a political party where informal discussions and consensus building are the order of the day and formality is just the stamp on a long process of informal consultations.
Small wonder that Sant lost three consecutive elections!
2) You appeal for unity but at the same time, you're firing your guns at other candidates in this race.? Is this a new definition of ´unity´ found in an unnoticed dictionary?
==> What you mean by "firing your guns at other candidates" ? Has GA attacked them?
3) You pledged to remove any existing faction within the party. But how come you're creating one of your own including people who, like you, left our party such as Dom Mintoff, Alfred Mifsud and Domenic Fenech?
==> How would such a "faction" OUTSIDE effect the party if GA were elected leader?
4) You declared that you suffered on seeing the party being defeated but at the same time, it remains a question of how you voted in 2003? If you were pro-EU, did you vote PN so Malta could join the EU ´in the interest of our country´ as you said?
==> Should we put a man down if he puts "the interest of our country" first? Does that make him a traitor?
6) How can you attract floaters and new voters when your own hard-core seems to resent you already?
==> Staunch MLP supporters will vote for MLP no matter what. To win the 2013 elections, MLP needs someone to attract floaters and new voters. So what then, if floaters and new voters like GA more than staunch Labourites do?
7) How do you want people to believe that you can transform the party into a winning team when you had 10 years chance to do so but decided, instead, to leave your fellow supporters at stake?
==> How could ANYONE within MLP have transformed the party into a winning team with Alfred Sant at the helm?
first of all I apologise if I was mistakenly misinterpreted of being insulting. Believe me, that is not my intention. On the contrary, everyone should know the whole truth! And my writings are not, as you indicated, full of assertions.
That´s why I ask you again: Is it true that you even contacted (personally) members of the party administration and asked them not to support any of the candidates in the race?
@ the rest
I wonder why george abela keeps choosing to ignore to reply to my questions in writing! I´m not seeking an answer to my questions from any of his supporters, but from him personally. When I wrote to him personally, he invited me to meet and talk rather that replying to my email with answers. Why? So many others are concerned about the same truth!
Prosit you are getting better. You see, you can make your point without insulting!
I merely answer the points where you mentioned me personally and only in so far as I am concerned.
5. You state " How come you're associating yourself with the past, and above all, with people such as ....Alfred Mifsud....."
Without fail the five contestants agree on one thing i.e. that they have to attract back to the party those who were alienated. So why do you blame GA only? You can just as well blame all five.
8. You state: "However, both you and Mifsud seem to have one thing in common. Both appeared to make obstacles to Sant´s leadership through criticism on newspapers at the cost of the party itself. "
Your facts are wrong. GA never wrote any criticism of the party for the whole of 10 years he was alienated. As for myself I only criticised Sant after his re-election in 2003 when it was clear for whoever wanted to see that Sant's leadership in post EU era would deprive the party of credibility for its newly adapted policy and was compromising Labour's chances to win the next election. Unfortunately I was proved right. This was so clear to all that Labour is probably the only party in the world that did not put up pictures of its leader on billboards in an election campaign. That Sant was a liability was a well-known fact.
My loyalty to the party forced me to speak up to avoid disaster whilst many others like yourself just sat pretty awaiting the disaster to happen.
The Board of Discipline who tried to muzzle me could not quote a line or phrase where I was not saying the sacred truth. Events showed that it was not me who caused damage to the party but those who to protect their seat compromised the party's interest.
To the party I always gave and never took or asked for anything. Not many among those seeking election to leadership can make such claim.
You have raised a very important issue.
You said that Dr. Abela continued to deny having been one amongst those who approved the motion calling on the party to go for early elections in 1998 despite that people present during the same meeting have proved otherwise, and the minutes of that meeting have been published on a local printed newspaper!
Next, within 24 hours of this meeting Dr. Abela resigned.
I am just a floating voter and I wish to ask you a very important question. Before I do, I wish to prepare the environment by explaining myself better.
I, myself, have been in many meetings, and all is not as easy sometimes.
It was not the first time that although I was not in favor of the strategy being proposed to get there (I was in fact against,) and I clarified why I was against too; I was overruled by the majority. But it was not important and so I stayed.
But one day it was about a major serious issue. I was against what the CEO proposed. I was against how most members tended to go along with this too. Although I was against the strategy and the road proposed to resolve this, I was overruled and the motion was approved and documented to be implemented.
Immediately after - if I stay on the board, I would have effectively been part of that act.
Staying but Flip-flopping - making all aware that I was not part of that is not an option any professional would consider. I also did not want to create any unrest to the CEO either – I had already disagreed with his many, other past decisions and stayed.
So I resigned within the next day. This way, although it can be said that I was part of that motion – I most definitely disassociated myself from that decesion and its future consequences be this fame or blame.
My question is:
Was Dr. Abela’s input during that meeting, in favor of going for early elections?
Or
Was Dr. Abela against going for early elections since chances are that the Party would loose?
I would appreciate if you could clarify this for all of us readers.
RE
"How can you attract floaters and new voters when your own hard-core seems to resent you already?"
On which scientific poll did you base this assertion ? Did you use the same method that cost us the election again? Pray do tell as to who makes up this mythical hardcore? Is it a very small knot of well insured demigods who find it very hard to look at their own reflection in the mirror of truth?
I suppose your version of unity is assuming that you can't voice dissent? If anything can be said to be a defining difference between MLP and PN is the issue of voicing intra party dissent. So you really want to emulate Gonzi PN. Not within the spirit of egalitarianism we purport to believe in no?
RE Vision and association with the past
.You really believe that verse 1, chapter 1 of the worker's movement history was written in in 1992, and goes something like this
"in the beginning it was George Vella's word , and George Vella saw that it was good, so please shut up and accept the annointed lamb which may be led to the slaughter if WE so desire ( When will he rest I wonder?)
How did you honestly expect George Abela to transform the party into a winning team ( needless to say from outside the glass fortress)when he was competing against the talented vision of those who kept insisting on wasting the talents of Alfred Sant .
Gosh man , you are still labouring under the misapprehension that it was G.Abela ,Alfred Mifsud , Domnic Fenech and Lino Spiteri etc etc that harmed the party's chances of re-election ( could'nt have been Mintoff we really squashed him in ’98 yes!!)
. Some faith you had in the party's administration and leadership! Were we so short on vision and talent? Was there no one to replace them ?
Can't you see that it was the uncompromising stand against EU membership that really harmed the party. Is it just a question of the truth being too painful to digest? It is positive that we now have the opportunity to discuss the issue . Why are you so afraid of a little criticism?
Somebody should have the courage to acknowledge publicly what we all know. This will definitely help the healing process. This is what the Labour party always stood for, it is the party that was never afraid of the hard questions and decisions. Lets get it out of our system and move on.
Many questions still need to be answered by George Abela himself. He's the candidate in the Labour leadership's race who has been most in the limelight! So, I thought it´s best to ask George Abela directly to answer to these questions!
1) You continue to deny having been one amongst those who approved the motion calling on the party to go for early elections in 1998 despite that people present during the same meeting have proved otherwise, and the minutes of that meeting have been published on a local printed newspaper! Why did you surprise all the party within 24 hours of this meeting and declared your intentions to leave and wreck the party during the following extraordinary general meeting?
2) You appeal for unity but at the same time, you're firing your guns at other candidates in this race.? Is this a new definition of ´unity´ found in an unnoticed dictionary?
3) You pledged to remove any existing faction within the party. But how come you're creating one of your own including people who, like you, left our party such as Dom Mintoff, Alfred Mifsud and Domenic Fenech?
4) You declared that you suffered on seeing the party being defeated but at the same time, it remains a question of how you voted in 2003? If you were pro-EU, did you vote PN so Malta could join the EU ´in the interest of our country´ as you said?
5) You want to give the Labour party a new vision. How come you're associating yourself with the past, and above all, with people such as Dom Mintoff, Alfred Mifsud and Domenic Fenech ? `New wine cannot be made in old barrels` you said. Are you a ´new barrel´?
6) How can you attract floaters and new voters when your own hard-core seems to resent you already?
7) How do you want people to believe that you can transform the party into a winning team when you had 10 years chance to do so but decided, instead, to leave your fellow supporters at stake?
8) The memo sent to Alfred Sant in 1998 revealed that you were not Alfred Mifsud´s favourite. However, both you and Mifsud seem to have one thing in common. Both appeared to make obstacles to Sant´s leadership through criticism on newspapers at the cost of the party itself.
Maybe its best to give George Abela enough time to think and reply, keeping in mind (and for sure) that he reads these blogs! Many ears are wide open and eager to hear his version! I already wrote to him personally but he always refused to answer me in writing. He prefers to meet and talk! Why not reply in writing to be able to reach a wider audience and clear doubts from many other people's minds! Let's wait and see.
Let me illuminate you that your facts are wrong.
1.AS had NOT denied GA's claim that informal disucssion were held in 1997 between them including Lino Spiteri and John Attard Montaldo with a view to change of strategy regarding freezing of application for EU membership
2. GV denied that he was involved in any such meetings. GA never said George Vella was involved so George Vella is denying what GA has not said!!
3.Mangion denied that any member of the administration offered presdiency to GA if he withdraws his candidature. Again this is denyong what GA has not said. GA said that an influential person within MLP made such offer not that it was offered by a member of the administration. There are many influential persons who are not part of the MLP administration
4. GA never accused MF of anything. All he said was that MF was also against early elections in 1998.
So your judgement is based on wrong facts. get your facts right and then form whatever opinion you want,
..
Unlike you I can argue without insulting. As to my credibility who are you to judge? Your assertions are no proof and your writings are full of assertions.
And no I do not 'instruct' anybody what to do. This is a free country. I express opinions and back them with arguments and research not with assertions and platitudes. And when circumstances change I show consistency and change my opinion. And when time proves me wrong I admit being wrong, learn change opinion and move on.
I tolerate being called funny because that's an opinion but being called opportunist is a matter of fact assertion which unless proven is libellous.
you are funny! you want to sue others for libes but you can say whatever you like! when the party` disciple board gave you an order to stop doing more harm to the party, you chose to ignore everyone and sought other ways how to continue to say what you want!
you are funny! you can support anyone you like but you are so critical of anyone who does not support your horse! Is it true that you even contacted (personally) members of the party administration and instructed them not to support any of the candidates in the race? I`m just asking (I`m carefull cause you might even want to sue me now )
Many people and `black on white` published documents are proving your credibility wrong!
You called me an opportunist. The dictionary defines opportunist as 'somebody who takes advantage of something, especially somebody who does so in a devious, unscrupulous, or unprincipled way'.
I challenge you to sustain your claim or have the courage to send me your details so that I sue you for libel. I have suffered for standing up to my principles and I am not asking or seeking any position.
Unlike many who being wise after the event I was carageous enough to stand up to my opinion that Alfred Sant re-election as leader following the adoption of pro- EU policies in 2003 prejudiced labour chances for winning the 2008 election. Does that make me an opportunist?
.
well, it might be true that you re not a die hard but you are definately a `die hard` of george Abela.
Well, let me set things straight....I am still hurt for what dr abela did to us in 1998 and you will not heal my wounds by your partisan words. I really wish that we members can vote cause I will definitely not vote for george Abela..and will also encourage others to remember the events of 1998 like I do.
And by the way, which experience do we have of goerge abela within our party? HE LEFT US SUPPORTERS IN A STORM? ABANDONED US WHEN WE MOST NEEDED HIS GUIDE, when he was our deputy leader. No way I can trust him one more time...and as a leader, no way!!!
NO! I `m totally against george abela as labour leader..and many others are also!! whether you like it or not, you will not deleate our memories.
Let me illuminate you with GA's allegations:
1. Against Alfred Sant when he said AS was in favour of joining the EU in 1997. AS denied and GA didn't prove his point.
2. Same story, against George Vella when he said GV was in favour of joining the EU in 1997. GV denied and GA didn't prove his point.
3. Against a 'top party official' who he said had asked him not to contest the leadership race. Charles Mangion as acting leader denied this story, and once again GA failed to reply with proof.
He also accused Michael Falzon of not doing anything to stop the 1998 election in 1998 during his first public debate. I don't know if I need to say more, but these facts all happened during the last 50 days!
Even more strangely is the fact that GA is finding allies in people like Dom Mintoff and Alfred Mifsud. What could this mean? Surely it doesn't show that GA is the man to unite Labour today! He's just making friends with people who left the party like him. These are not people who wish Labour well. They are just opportunists!
J.Buhagiar:
You say JM is inexperienced. Surely your comment is solely based on the fact that JM is 34 years old. Cause not even GA is experienced in parliament. And sorry, I'd rather have an unexperienced but dynamic and loyal individual as leader, then an experienced person who will create further dis-unity. If PN were to follw your experience advice than they might as well have elected Ninu Zammit or Louis Galea as their leader. Clearly both were far more experienced than Gonzi.
And don't make such a fuss about Gonzi being such a great leader. After all we all know that Gonzi is not of the calibre of his former PN leader. He won the election not because of his ability, but cause of MLP's failure to be properly organised. JM will more than be a match to GonziPN.
Mr. A. Muscat, let me tell you at the outset. I can assure you that I am not a die hardof either party. Never was never will be. All I stand to gain is a MLP leader that one-can-depend-on.
Dependability arises out of a Consistent, Professional, Respected approach of the majority. Fortunately I see that Dr. Abela has via his proven consistent professional approach to all matters that arose in the past, EARNED my respect and that of many MLP and NP supporters too. Strength: These are the people you need to attract. Die hearts have no say in elections. Why: When Dr. Abela could no longer support Dr. Sant’s strategy (not MLP strategy) (Dr. Abela was never disloyal to the party itself) as if this were his own, he resigned. So before you reply to my writing, all I ask is that your read the following;
1 – Read my input that I wrote earlier down below about Dr. Abela’s resignation. All of you ignored it! Your interpretation – he abandoned us - is absolutely unprofessional and incorrect. You are doing the MLP a dis-service + failing to understand Dr. Abela’s professional approach is worrying!
2 – And unprofessional approach and knowledge is also leading you to think that being young, energy, new ideas, etc are the attributes required for a good leader. By contrast you dismiss a mature lawyer with a proven track professional record and the EXPERIENCE required that will stand to his/your advantage not to fall into the pitfalls of the opposition as has happened before.
So read this for starters! I would rather you read all this document – it helps to understand that like attitude, strategy and experience changes everything.
Financed from the AGIS Programme - European Commission - Directorate-General, Justice, Freedom And Security.
Title - Mid-Dlam ghad-Dawl (Daritama) by
REV. DR. MARK F. MONTEBELLO O.P., S.TH.B. & L., PH.LIC. & D., MSC. (CRIM. JUST.) UNIVERSITY OF MALTA.
"While Mintoff was in power frantically transforming backward Malta into a significant, modern and industrialised country, he was ferociously opposed on all fronts by the defenders of the status quo.
This gave the new PN leadership, headed by Edward Fenech Adami, a convenient excuse to whip up an odium that brought about terrifying consequences.
The two opposing sides had, by now, settled into their trenches, but the war tactics of Fenech Adami were tinged with a malevolence that made their opponents play in their hands. These tactics included the ploy of playing the victim while callously provoking bloodshed; and the socialists were inconsiderate enough to fall headlong for the trick.”
why is just george abela coming out with all such allegations and fairy tales? why the other candidates are just promoting themselves, rather than coming up with such funny stories? he`s the odd one out!! and do you expect us to believe him?
I followed what george abela has been saying since he declared that he s running for the post of labour leader, and most of the time, he`s just defending himself from the past, which seems not to have been forgotten by the majority. He`s attacking other candidates in the race. And he`s also coming up with such fairy tales to attract sympathy!! come on!! should we expect this from a man usually described by some as `intelligent` ?
george abela is doing nothing than dividing us! and I wonder why the PN are supporting george abela!
what do you expect? he alleged that he was offered to be nominated as president. all G. Abela has been doing these last weeks was accuse the Labour Party of this and that, and you expect that nobody answers such allegations?
`Compare the leadership record of GA` He left the party at stake in 1998 despite being the deputy leader for party affairs, i.e. he did not fulfill his full responisbility!! and would you expect us to believe that he would be a good leader? That`s pasrt of his ecord too....and we cannot simple forget history as if nothing ever happened.
so why doesn`t george abela, being 60 yrs old, think about retiring rather than continuing to cause such a divide between us labour supporters....
What insinuations has GA made about anyone? We have a very funny situation. Twice now it has happenend. Labour seniors come out to deny something that GA has not said. Is it not obvious that the party machinery is all out to create obstacles for GA and in the process help JM?
Question is : Does Labour want to win he next election. JM would one day be a fine leader but so far he is totally inexperienced to overcome Gonzi. What leadership record has JM got? He got elected to MEP as he had the whole party machine working for him among the Labourites. Winning the election needs votes beyond the basic Labour pool.
Being an MEP does not require much leadership skills. Really MEP's don't decide much especially on an individual basis. How many MEP's have become prime ministers? Normally Prime Ministers when they do their share of local politics then proceed to finish off in Europe.
And given the power of incumbency that leaders immediately gain does it not worry anyone to elect someone so young with a prospect of remaining leader for some 40 years!!
Compare the leadership record of GA. He turned the MFA from an amateur to a professional organsiation. And since he left labour has not won a single general election. On the contrary when he was in the leadership Labour turned a 13000 deficit into an 8000 surplus!!
Common sense please not just emotions and platitudes!!
JM, he's the future of Labour and maltese success.
I agree with your statement. Alfred Sant as opposition leader in parliament is unacceptable.
The problem is not Alfred Sant (I mean the person). The problem is the MENTALITY - something that seems to be so difficult for you to understand.
I just cannot understand why many Labourites do not realize they can have a very good leader like George Abela and will instead shout with joy when Joseph Muscat (at 34 years of age) is elected as 99% will happen.
Being 60 years old (I'm refering to George Abela) doesn't mean you are stupid. His ideas are very intelligent and he will re-unite the party with all the (nowadays called old-fashioned, traitors, stupids) like Mintoff etc.
People didn't vote MLP not because Sant doesn't have the needed charisma. They didn't vote MLP because the party is still miles away from the PN.
The more MLP is like PN, the more the chances of winning the trust of floaters. But it's a pity you don't want to be like PN and therefore reject all the positive things implimented in the last years.
MLP still blame their defeat to the independent media (and blame Bondi and Peppi); still blame government's power to approve MEPA permits; still blame the fact that many pro-Nationalists were allowed to vote even though they now live abroad, still blame the government of lying and promising heaven on earth...
STOP all this and START reasoning.
Only George Abela can lead the MLP to regain credibility.
At the end of the day: TODAY (after more than 20 years in power) Nationalists are still more trusted than MLP. For MLP this should be worrying!
How will you reconcile a fourth electoral defeat? Whom will you blame next time around? The cogs that survived the earthquake?
NB any surprises in store for 1st May celebrations?
how was he convincing on Dissett? by defending himself all the time and throwing stones on others? George Abela is not credible in what he says anymore ( especially on the issue of 1998) so why does he persist?
But let's be more realistic and constructive....it´s disgusting here.. if this is, or will be the labour party of today and tomorrow, then this is not the right party for me!!
and by the way, to all those who are supporting George Abela on this blog...you are doing no good at all to him by engaging yourself in this hatred and disgusting way of defending him. so please..at least be or pretend to be more convincing if you want people like me - who have no strings to any candidate - to support your horse!!!!
Joseph Muscat = Alfred Sant? with all respect to Dr. Sant, but if these 2 were identical, Muscat would not have committed himself to a radical change (terremot) within the Labour Party if elected as leader.
But to say that George Abela is far better than JM is a matter of opinion. Personally, I don't see how a person who left a party can re-enter at this stage, saying that they only left because they disagreed with certain policies. Any sly political strategist would use this in a future election, saying that if George Abela jumped ship on Labour in the past, his own party, can he be trusted with the reins of government, since this entails far more responsibility?
George Abela is not a mediocre candidate, far from it. But unfortunately, if Labour is to change its outlook, it has to cut ties with certain parts of its past, and Abela is part of that past. If Labour really wants to start over, a young candidate who has enthusiasm and energy might be just what they need to push them forward.
but unfortunately Muscat is being pushed by sant's friends: whatever the delegates do on the 5th of June they should not give in to Dr.Sant's antics and make sure that if elected Muscat will not take advice from these ppl.................I'm not saying that they should banish Sant from the MLP ( as Sant did to Mintoff) but Sant. Jason et al should be given a warm thankyou ( ??!!??) and shown the back seat ...their time is up!!
You make me laugh. Elect GA to change mentality? He's stuck with Mintoff, and you call that a change in mentality?
JM is the man to lead the party FORWARD. GA will just take the party back to 1987.
And the truth is that PN want GA as leader. They fear JM's bid. I am not inventing this.
Professionally, you cannot continue to support board members, the CEO and the strategy (road to get there) that you do not believe is right for the Company or MLP. If you stay, you have to manage the decisions taken as if these “were” your own. It is very unprofessional to flip flop in and out and/or say that the strategy implemented was not your own. You would be rightly dismissed anyway and that would be the professional and right way to throw you out.
So all that stayed effectively AGREED with what was done by MLP. And they rightly managed it as if this were their own. Those that resigned, and many did, did not agree! Punto e basta.
Many, and that includes Dr. Abela did not agree with the strategy implemented to address water & electricity, the EU, Early Elections, and a host of other issues.
Resignation effectively disassociates you from the CEO. If you remain silent, it is proof that you are a gentleman and that you are prepared to leave all behind you, without trying to gain any credit by hurting who? To hurt the CEO you would need to hurt the Company! That was not an option Dr. Abela would consider.
Needless to say, those that remain take all the fame or blame. Hence the reason why it is not easy to answer Bondi questions.
Dr. Gonzi is a professional. He has already penalized JPO for his political bad practices (the Police are responsible for the rest.) This way he would know what to say to all that ask in five years time.
And I am afraid, a professional approach is required by the MLP; unless MLP board members want to remain out of Castille office for at least the next 10 years.
When it comes to Dr. Abela, forget his strengths. They are not the important.
Dr. Abela is an opportunity for the MLP. He is a treath to GonziNP.
Resignation (especially with Silence thereafter) is a Virtue guys, not a weakness.
It gives you the chance of a new start if the former CEO and Board fail!
Resignation and leaving all your political career behind is what distinguishes the man from the boys.
Its not that J.Muscat is copy and paste of A.Sant , that would be implying he hasn't got one idea to call his own which would be unfair. What is probably not helpful is that he is seeking the backing and endorsement of those that forged labour's defeat. I’ve yet to see how he will manage to withstand bad advice. Will his proposed earthquake reform at mile-end dislodge the faulty cogs or are they smugly fully insured against damage? On another note I would also take David Zammit's advice and look no further than Guze Ellul Mercer's inclusive poetry of ' lejn din l-għaqda fis nittajru Xjuħ u zgħazagħ Ħaddemin' or is the current thinking that workers from whichever strata of society they come ( in-nies tax-xoghol kollha ) are simply all under 35 ? Or do you think we should debunk this anthem because its narrative is no longer relevant today? That's the break from the past that you want and is that how one looks forward? You mean to wipe the slate clean and start from which glorious electoral victory tell me? Are you even dimly aware of your own socio- historicity?
WHO IS THE CONTENDER WHO SEEMS TO BE OFFERING A MORE LIBERAL MLP?
.............sorry its not Joseph Muscat ( not that much up to now!)
.......not even G.Abela............................Micheal Falzon??.........he's worse than Eddie when it comes to being conservative
it's only EVARIST BARTOLO.....................I am a PN activist but if there are any delegates out there who consider themselves to be liberal they should go for Evarist!!!
@K. Chircop: Joseph Muscat is not a mirror image of Sant, but he's been in Sant's faction for years. The power of that faction is the reason why we're hearing Muscat's name so often as opposed to Evarist Bartolo or Michael Falzon. Hence, if Muscat is made leader, the same clique that has been leading MLP for the last 15 years will be in power.
I don´t really care about who´selected as party leader. I will support anyone, as long as he or she are elected by the delegates of our party!
However, I don´t really share the same opinion. It is so evident that the PN (when watching NEt TV or reading their paper), they are using their usual character-assassination campaign on Joseph Muscat. With regards to George Abela, the PN media are more sympathetic and sometimes he´s being featured in a more positive way than the other candidates.
To be honest that scares me. I believe that they are more scared of Joseph than George in doing so. Why? I don´t want to engage myself in this debate. But I don´t like to be a ´puppet´ of anyone (as it is so evident in the case of many here in this blog) We should set the facts right, no matter about who the person is!
If you don't change the MENTALITY and therefore choose Muscat (who reasons like Dr. Sant and is not open-minded like George Abela)... you will NEVER get the floaters' trust back.
Is it so difficult to realize the difference from Abela's way of reasoning and the old-fashioned way the others reason????
Alfred Sant and Muscat have many points in common and reason very much alike. You are not realizing that THESE COMMON POINTS will never get MLP in power!
Listen to George Abela and start a fresh new page with him! Otherwise Muscat will do nothing better than KMB, Fredu etc
(1) How and in what way did Alfred Sant endorse or partially endorse Joseph Muscat?;
(2) How is Joseph Muscat a pure copy+paste of Alfred Sant?
Behind all masks:
PN would be very pleased to see Muscat as MLP leader!
GA is a very good organiser and a man who makes people stop and listen when he speaks. Unfortunately his image is blurred by his own past and present actions. Leaving the party in 1998 is one of them, and forging alliances with likes of Dom Mintoff (who himself left the party) is another. GA is evidently confined to the old Labour system.
On the other hand JM is young and that, in my opinion, is a big advantage. Also to his advantage is the fact that despite being so young he has already proved his worth as an MEP. He is dynamic and full of ideas for the country. Also, with his moderate stance, he could be the man to heal the rifts within the party and put back order in the shortest time possible.
Also.. I wouldn't ignore Evarist Bartolo's bid.
Mr. Cassar, I have every right to call Dr. Joseph Muscat my friend. I am no brutus, all the other contenders know where I stand. I think you follow these blogs avidly, so I hope that you did not miss my comments wherein I praised my friend Joseph. Yes I am backing George Abela for leader, Others are within their rights to prefer others.
Why am I being accused of hitting Joseph below the belt, because I straightforwardly asked him to rectify reports considered to be spin by ‘Il mument’ and for which some persons irresponsibly blamed George Abela?.
There are plenty of questions to be asked about things we are seeing happening, and it seems that even sensitive material in the hands of MLP officials is being issued. But this does not matter, as long it does not concern my friend Joseph.
I respect your judgement about Dom Mintoff, but even if he voted against his party 10 years ago, perhaps the whole story is not yet know of what made him do it.
Mr. Cassar why are you linking this story with the fact that Dom Mintoff endorsed Dr. George Abela? Who knows maybe Dr. Abela might pay a price for this, because today’s young generation, as you said is completely not being fed the whole truth about some of Mintoff’s decisions.
Mintoff is not Divine and I cannot say that all he did was right, but at the same time today’s young generation would be more correct if they read our island's history and realise how their parents or maybe their grand-parents were till the seventies, begging in the streets or else emigrating en masse to Australia, United States, Canada and all.
Mr. Cassar put your mind at rest that I had the decency to clarify matters with Joseph Muscat himself and I leave it to him to say who is keeping him from rectifying his position, earlier that he intends to do in the ‘Il-mument’ next Sunday.
I do agree with you on your last phrase uttered in our dear maltese language. ‘Kull qalb trid ohra’ Mhux hekk Salv.
I hope that you concede this is a general statement that could be applied to anybody who is backing a candidate or other. Fortunately, I am not expecting anything back. Today I am a pensioner, but even if a senior citizen, still broad-minded, progressive and moderate and as much enthusiastic to see our dear party on the right trek towards a victory in the 2013 general elections.
Some are arguing that to attract young and new voters our party needs a young leader. Since when ? If I'm not mistaken AS was about 13 years younger than EFA and still lost the 1998 and 2003 elections. Why ? May be Eddie was much more credible on all issues presented to the electorate ?! And in 2008 Lawrence Gonzi was no teenager!!
Some are asking GA what was his vote in the last and previous election. Very intelligent question . Would it be more interesting to ask all other candidates what was their vote on the EU referendum ?! Many spoke and wrote against joining the EU way back. I'm sure their vote was NO. Will that attract floaters , undecided or ex nationalists. GA's views on EU accession are known to all and that sure makes him most credible.
Which now brings me to the Mintoff issue. Aren't we all talking about inclusion in our party? If so , how can anyone expect GA to shut the door at Dom Mintoff and sending him off from his meeting ? What's wrong with Mintoff expressing support to a candidate ? Are you trying to deny him this right ? When are we going to learn ? WHEN ?? Aren't 3 defeats in a row plus a referendum not enough ??
Did you see anyone from the opposite camp rejected, especially during the election campaign ? The nationalists are miles ahead of us regarding such issues.
One last thing. We are in the process of electing a new leader. George Abela is a born leader and a winner. And a leader is not made , invented or forced. We cannot take any more chances.
I fail to see how Mintoff's endorsement proves that Gorg Abela is a politician completely stuck in the past. Nor do I share your assumption that the past and the future are necessarily opposed and at loggerheads with each other. Surely what matters is how the candidate's policies for the future relate to & come to terms with the past. I understand that Gorg Abela is proposing a unified pro-European Labour Party which emphasises the protection of workers' rights. In this sense, it is a significant break with the past ten years, when the MLP was predominantly Euro-sceptic and tended to expect workers and trade unions to blindly support the party more than tailoring party policies to workers' needs.
Apart from being discriminatory and distasteful, I find your characterisation of older people (or do you really mean older working class people?) as a "roadblock to reform" to be a symptom of the divisive mentality which also characterised that decade of Labour failures. Gorg Abela is fighting against this in the best labour tradition (ejjew nghajtu xjuh u zghazagh). If parallels need to be made, there are obvious ones between his candidacy and those of Barack Obama (in terms of unity) and John Edwards (in terms of workers' rights) in the United States.
For obvious reasons, floating voters tend not to be the keenest attendees at political meetings. Many prefer to keep their cards close to their chest and only take an interest in politics during general elections. Also many young people prefer to express their preferences through internet discussions. A look at the MLP discussion pages on Hi5 would go a long way towards proving that Gorg Abela does appeal to younger voters who want a radical as opposed to a cosmetic change in the MLP leadership and administration. David Zammit, Sliema
But what bothers me most about Dr Abela is that he is already 60 yrs old and even if he succeeds in becoming the next leader, he would give up his post after 5 yrs (as he declared). This is nonsense!!!! do we have to go for all this trouble to elect a new leader in 5 years time? This does not appeal to me. Every time there's an election for a new leader, people disagree or have different opinion(which is pretty normal) but it doesn´t do any good to the image of the party. So for me Dr Abela is definitely not an option!!!!!
Tony Farrugia hit the nail on its head two days ago when he said that in a carbon conscious world, we've got a fossil fuel candidate willing to lead the Labour Party. Truth is George Abela has just confirmed that he is a politician completely stuck in the past. Should he be elected leader of the Labour Party on June 5th, the people rallying around him will for sure be the roadblock to reform. I attended both of his public meetings. I ask David Zammit - Where were the young people and the fist time floaters? I could count the young people on one single hand! The cartoon in todays times of malta says it all. Old wine in old barrels.
Martin
Bkara
you are right......
This is what we're talking about here.
I however was not implicating in any way that Mr. Mifsud was an opportunist personally. My command of the English language may not have been too good with explaining myself. I once more apologise and would like to state that the little I have seen Mr Mifsud he has always seemed like a man of integrity and a sound debater. As a labourite however I am hurt by labour exponents argumenting and attacking each other publicly. I appeal all other members of the labour party to forget all their differences and work together.
Let's say GA is the new labour leader, will you turn labourite and vote labour, after all the aggressive shooting of words you have jotted down in your post? I doubt it. So why this love for GA from the PN side? This makes me seriously worry. Does anyone really think that GonziPN and supporters wish well to the MLP? If there is anyone who believes this, s/he needs mental help!!!:)
Turning back to George Abela’s blunder, I am sure that Mr Cachia knows how many Labour families left the party because of Dom Mintoff’s futile war on private and church schools in the eighties. Those students whose lives have been disturbed by those events still abhor the Labour Party because of Mintoff and are very unlikely to come back to the fold with him on board irrespective of what Alfred Mifsud’s polls tell him about George Abela’s appeal to middle of the roaders and floating voters.
Dom Mintoff will go down in Maltese political history as the former Prime Minister who brought down his own government when he voted against a motion about the lease of the land earmarked for the Cottonera waterfront project. This behaviour was unanimously condemned without reservations in the now famous meeting of Labour’s executive group of the 8 July 1998. In case you forgot, George Abela who is now basking in Dom Mintoff’s sun, voted in favour of this condemnation. But as we say in Maltese “Kull qalb trid ohra” Mhux hekk Salv?
What I sincerely wish is that the social services and pensions to be revised - the worker in Malta needs cheaper houses, social safeguards against neo-colonialists - we sold a bank for free, the PN guarded us against foreigners buying second properties, there is much to reform - be it PN or MLP (for which I think the latter should change the party name to Partit ta' Hidma to keep up with contemporary modern).
As for Dr Sant I feel he eliminated the militant thugs and if anything told us the truth of the thorns of EU while equally bad for the PN to having described the EU as only as a bed of roses.
The truth was said the country gave its verdict and decided but it takes two strong leaders that in my view are worth their mantle to spear the well-being and social Christian values up high. To me of hybrid values, George Abela is a worker's man. George Vella must realise that he and all his buddies wanted to impose their will on the electorate when he, signed a document with the EU to open all imports and getting no benefits from the EU way back in 1997 and froze our chances to to among the 10 new members of the 25 EU member in 2004. As for the MLP you need unity and not individual pride for divided you'll fall and united you stand. As a PN voter I still will stand to gain from a strong opposition party for there are loads of challenges ahead of us still to face.
Today, I heard Dr. Joseph Muscat stating that if he is elected leader, it is very likely that an earthquake will be hitting MLP headquarters.
It is a pity we cannot have a tandem of leaders: Dr. George Abela and Dr. Joseph Muscat, because all points out that the MLP is in such a bad shape, that the changes needed are to the level of tremors and earthquakes.
Come on, delegates use your brians and not your heart; endorse Dr. George Abela and Dr. Joseph Muscat as joint-leaders. Sorry folks, it is past midnight, I must be dreaming!!!!
Can anyone please confirm whether Joseph Muscat really formed part of Labour's Strategic Team for the last General Elections ???
Sorry Saviour Cachia.........but i find it really hard to believe that he did actually form part of such a group.
made it clear that he is in favour of the EU, but Mintoff, in his short speech, also said that the Republic is being taken away from us from the EU and PfP, so it means that Mintoff is against the EU - oh, he has something in common with AS ideals. So, it is clear enough that both of them does not have the same opinion on how to govern. Mintoff went there only to hear what GA had in mind, and not to show that he is influencing GA or any other past relations. On the other hand, GA accepted Mintoff's appearance and did not throw him away/called him a traitor.
Why shouldn't we respect the presence of Dom Mintoff, everyone makes mistakes, but it is not fair on Mintoff, to throw him out of the party after the good he had done in the past. In the end, Mintoff also said that he hopes that George Abela will be the Labourists next Leader - is that something bad that the father of MLP identifies GA as our best leader for MLP? Also, Mintoff should be respected for all the good he has done, and not blame him only for his thoughts.
Moreover, in 1998, Dr. Sant made mistakes: in the way he managed the government. He did not care about the labourer when he increased the VAT and duties without any consultation - a concept which Mintoff always fought to achieve in his times, and Sant was destroying it - so, we cannot blame only one person for losing the 1998 election. GA has nothing to do with Mintoff's and Sant's decisions during this period, and so we have to judge GA on his vision (manifesto) and aims and not on his past presence.
Who will be the best, and 'clean' (no inclinations with the anti-EU, violence, not part of a lost election) person to win Gonzi in the next general election? For me the person who has the necessary tools to lead, win and govern is GA - who has a track record of being a good organizer and present/part in winning elections. PN should/are afraid of him that is why they are using the so called 'reverse psychology' tactic - Be aware of them and don't be part of their trap - cause if GA loses, PN are the only winners!!
But I have one question to those that are feeling sorry for Mintoff, which question has not yet been answered.
Since Mintoff always ended his speeches (Malta l-Ewwel u qabel kollox), is that what he was thinking when he brought down Sant's Government in 1998?
When in 1980, and thanks to Mintoff himself, Malta was receiving an aid package from Libya, including cheaper fuel and finally Ghaddafi decided to stop us from drilling for oil, Mintoff held a meeting in Valletta and said these exact words. (Dawn l-ewwel kienu hbieb kbar tghana u issa bli ghamlu saru l-akbar ghadu tal-Maltin). So respect does not come at any cost! Some people do not forget and do not forgive either!
NB. Please don't consign the over forties to the dustbin unless you want to completely ignore the latest stats on the demographics of an ageing Europe. ( We are in Europe aren't we?)
Please Mr Saliba do not hesitate to contact Dr Abela on his website www.georgeabela.info
Dear Mr. Brincat, kindly note that not everyone is a hard core labourite. Having been brought up in a Labourite family, i can but say that I am a very open minded person and we need fresh ideas not ancient ones.
I just cannot still understand all this big deal about electing the new leader.
G.SAMMUT------Do not presume to talk for the rest of the younger generation....I am young and I have no problem if anyone shoved the PN's history in my face, if anyone mentions Gorg Borg Olivier and Eddie Fenech Adami Nationalists approve because they are proud of their Leaders!! The Pn realised the importance of youths ages ago.....and the total majority of the 30,000 new voters voted PN last March!!!
ALFRED MIFSUD------Is it true that in 1998 you wrote a letter to Dr.Sant against Gorg Abela and Mintoff as reported in a newspaper????
Do you honestly think Labour would win then?
You like people like Muscat (Alfred Sant 2) who fits exactly to your way of reasoning!
PN would be pleased to see Muscat as MLP leader as they would be sure of an extra 5 years in power after the 2012-2013 election.
Abela is far better than all other candidates but you don't share this view... your head is more than 6 feet under sand.
Keep dreaming of winning a GENERAL election... your dream will never come true if you don't change YOUR mentality and start realizing that the PN's policies were right from day1.
You won't win again unless you'll start being totally pro-EU, support liberalisation, accept privatization of companies, avoid controversies over social budgets like the last one, have a reformed TV/radio agenda, stop the annoying slogans (like we need a new beginning, families are facing problems, people are dying with hunger, Armageddon is coming...) at every mass meeting and be a serious opposition that backs the Government when facing a huge problem like oil crisis or pensions and not just criticizing.
But there again...my words are too arrogant for you... too pathetic for you... too biased for you... too pro-GonziPn for you...
So keep your Muscats, Sants and Jasons...keep in touch with Super One's propoganda...keep doing politics the 'eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' -way... keep praising your Manuel Cuschieris and Tony Abelas...
and keep loosing again and again and again...
We don't need you!
And this applies especially to george abela. I ´m sure he´s very aware of this. so if he truly loves the party, why is he doing this to us?!
The thing is, see, is that younger generations (like me) don't really care about what our political 'parents' did so many years ago. We live here and now and we want to look forward. Therefore using the same logic of 1 + 1 = 2 than an old face = old antics, old hatred, old cliques, etc. There is therefore, in my opinion, a founded reasonable doubt on George Abela's call for a more open, natural and inclusive Labour Party especially by the younger generation. Bringing up the past and shoving it in our faces on a daily basis does NOT score any points.
In the end it is not about Mintoff as a person. He has every right to support one candidate or another. it is not about George Abela being 65 because he can still be a great leader. It is about being stuck in the past. It is about using that past to one's own political convenience. It is about not looking forward. But perhaps my words are useless because I'm guilty of being young and the young have no right to meddle in politics right? What do I know!?
Anyways,
Good Luck Evarist, George, Joseph, Marie Louise & Michael
You accuse me of being an opportunist par excellence. You either explain and prove your assertion or at least have the decency to send my your details so tha