MLP strategists' dirty tricks campaign

It has become all too ob-vious that the 'strategists' who plan the MLP's political moves have embarked on a 'dirty tricks' campaign to brainwash party delegates into accepting and approving what they had already decided what the party should do when the EU Constitution comes up for debate in the Maltese Parliament, namely, please Dr Gonzi and the officials of the European Socialist Party by agreeing with the PN government and give Dr Gonzi what the PN have been waiting for for so long - the chance to make Malta's Republican Constitution not worth the paper it is written on!

The two main protagonists leading the 'yes movement' in the MLP are MPs Leo Brincat and Dr George Vella, supposedly the only author of the political report. But, it seems, that Mr Brincat may have had a say in that report, since he has been expressing the same views and expressions found in Dr Vella's report, almost literally, for quite come time!

The obvious plan is to make MLP delegates hear only one side. Any other view must be suppressed. Party delegates have only been given just the 'personal' opinions of Dr Vella and Dr Joe Brincat (which did not include Dr Paul Lia's views). Other reports, prepared by other Labour MPs (Dr Anglu Farrugia and Dr Joe Sammut) are not being given to MLP delegates lest "they be confused", as Dr Vella suggested in his report!

Note how the 'strategists' plan is unfolding: 1. First, two reports were commissioned and prepared. They were kept under wraps for months until the local council elections were over. When they were finally published during a press conference, the legal report was said to have been prepared by two lawyers, Dr Brincat and Dr Lia.

While the political report was drawn up by Dr Vella, Dr Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici revealed that the legal report was only finally prepared and signed just by Dr Brincat since there had been disagreement between the two lawyers on certain conclusions not found in Dr Brincat's report. And yet the legal report was published and given to party delegates as if it had been written, agreed to and signed by both lawyers! Despite Dr Mifsud Bonnici's insistent accusation, Dr Brincat has kept his mouth shut!

2. Party delegates have not been given the chance to hear coltrasting arguments, even if Dr Vella had first said (page 34, para. 3 of the booklet containing the reports): "This (report) is just my own personal opinion which I am submitting for consideration together with other opinions when the necessary debate takes place."

So the "other opinions" could be much different to those of Dr Vella. And yet, not only is this not happening, but what is taking place is the opposite! Even Dr Vella is contradicting himself by, first, refusing to take part in a discussion programme on Smash TV hosted by Brian Hansford because Dr Mifsud Bonnici was going to be the other invited speaker. Hence Dr Vella did not want "another opinion" to be heard - and ended up on the programme on his own, so that viewers could only hear one side but not another! Contrary to what he suggested in para 3 of page 34.

3. While Dr Vella first wrote (para. 5, page 35) that "we must rely, first and foremost, on legal advice", he completely forgot what he had just written, and in the same page, para. 7, he wrote: "Such an action (a negative vote), even if justified on legal grounds, in foreign eyes (!) we would seem to be in the same boat as those extremist (my italics) parties in Europe... which are against the concept of the EU, against this country's membership of the EU (!) and against the Constitutional Treaty"!

So Dr Vella forgot the "importance" of legal advice and put more importance on how we "would look in foreign eyes"! He described as "extremist parties" even those which did not agree with EU membership - as Dr Vella himself, Dr Sant and the 134,000 voters who had voted Labour had been just two years ago! I exclude the four Labour MPs (as claimed by Dr Eddie Fenech Adami - and this is one of the few truths he said during the election campaign) who were in favour of membership even before the referendum.

I ask Dr Vella: were all these people and the MLP, including himself, "extremists" then? So why should he brand parties which still hold the same views as he did "extremists"? What kind of EU magic has changed Dr Vella from a brave Eurosceptic into a trembling EU appeaser? Were we "extremists" because our party put the interests of Malta and the Maltese before that of the EU bureaucrats, our new colonial masters?

4. Dr Vella continued to contradict himself in the last paragraph on page 34: "I do not believe that in this case (the debate on the EU Constitution) we can allow a free choice to our supporters. We have to give a clear guideline, which is understood by all, and which will not confuse anyone."

Precisely the opposite of what he had suggested when he wrote that "this is just my own personal opinion which should be considered with other opinions when the necessary debate takes place"!

This is what MLP 'strategists' are doing. They are putting into practice Dr Vella's suggestion, namely, not to give a free choice to party delegates, by making sure that party delegates are brainwashed daily with just Dr Vella's and Dr Brincat's political legal advice! While denying even MLP committees from holding seminars where different views were going to be heard by party delegates.

And only last Sunday we heard that the MLP Parliamentary Group had decided to vote "yes" to ratification, when, while Dr Sant announced this, he was also reported by L-Orizzont (May 9) as saying: "After the publication of these reports the executive agreed that a general conference will be held towards the end of June and the beginning of July so that it would be the MLP delegates who will decide what position the MLP should take on the constitutional treaty" - when he had just said that the decision had already been taken by the parliamentary group (after a vote was taken and a number of MPs had voted against, something which Dr Sant did not mention!). Amazing!

Such 'dirty tricks' risk losing Labour the election much more than Leo Brincat's view that "instead of pampering our diehards" the countless thousands of MLP supporters who are against the betrayal of Malta's Republican Constitution) the MLP should "reach out for those level-headed (my italics) Labourites and floating voters... in order to secure a governing majority during the forthcoming general election" (The Sunday Times, May 1).

By inference to Mr Brincat those countless thousands of 'diehards' are not "level-headed", while the few thousands are "1evel-headed" because they voted Yes in the referendum!

All those Labour supporters who consider themselves "diehard supporters" should thank Mr Brincat for the compliment when the time of reckoning arrives at election time.

And by the way, is he ready to swear on oath that if the MLP wins the election he will not accept any position in any EU institution? This should help voters' minds from harbouring any thoughts that Mr Brincat is being influenced by the EU's 'gravy train' in what he is saying and writing. After all, such a challenge was made to IVA officials by MLP speakers before the referendum and the general election, remember?