What have Silvio Berlusconi and Alfred Sant in common?
Silvio seems to have taken a leaf out of Alfred’s book. One of his central promises for the forthcoming Italian general election is to ‘de-tax’ earnings from overtime.
Strange bedfellows or is Silvio a fellow traveller in disguise?
Friday, February 29, 2008
Trivial Pursuit for Fausto Majistral
Since nothing new is coming out of the election campaign I have a few absurd questions for Fausto. It is a sort of trivial pursuit.
Now I was wondering if the good Lord for some reason makes a sign in the sky for voters to give 1 to AD or to AN candidates. Let us assume that 50% plus 1 heed the Good Lord's sign and give number 1 to one of the minor parties which gets an absolute majority of number 1s. My query is:
1. Since most of the candidates of these parties are running on two districts, who gets to fill the seats they have to vacate? Presumably they will have to be from the other parties if voters continue giving preferences to other candidates of other parties. If the votes are non-transferrable who gets elected?
2. Since the party obtaining the absolute majority of votes has the right to Govern, how are the numbers going to be made up? Who gets to sit in parliament?
In my dreams I also thought what if people give a 1 to the party of their choice but all the other preferences from 2 onwards to the candidates of the other party? Would we get different people in parliament? Would it be a better Parliament? Would they choose the better people?
Fausto do you have answers? You seem to know everything about politics and the electoral system.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
People hearing without listening
Seeing what is going on in this electoral campaign I could not help recalling the above verse from Simon & Garfunkel’s famous song “The Sound of Silence”. It seems that everything that had to be said has been said and that people are now just repeating themselves. It is now the deaf preaching to the deaf – “people talking without speaking”, “people hearing without listening”.
It is clear to me that the two party system in Malta has exhausted its useful life and has now become restrictive and unsatisfactory. The two parties are no longer enough to represent the opinions of the Maltese. Personally I cannot identify with anyone of the major parties such that I feel that I am excluded from the democratic process.
Both the PN and MLP are dominated by small cliques surrounding the respective leaders and in our system where supporters are not encouraged to discuss let alone disagree, fresh ideas are hard to find. Therefore in our ‘democracy’ we have a small band of people with a fixed opinion who dominate their respective parties. One of these parties then dominates the land by forming the Government. Sometimes parties like to consider themselves as a ‘broad church’ representing various opinions or diverse sectors, but in actual fact they are not. They represent the dominant clique surrounding the leader.
Uncritical supporters are rewarded, thereby generating legions of yes-men. The system of patronage and clientelism supports the ‘democratic’ process. Whoever is in Government has a superlative advantage to dispense advantages in a myriad of ways. A promise of a future reward is far less powerful than an actual reward. I wonder how many politicians in the main parties have never promised rewards in return for votes. If that is not corruption I wonder what is.
We cannot talk of a pluralist society where it comes to Malta. Anyone who dissents is rejected and ‘spitted’ out by the system. Each side of the political spectrum has people who have been rejected. Some go away quietly and disengage from public life while a hardy few try again.
This two party system has created a system where everything is seen in extreme terms, either black or white without any shade in between. One side calls the other as corrupt while the other paints the other side in a sort of doomsday scenario. People who have been criticizing in the past suddenly lose their critical edge and anyone who continues to criticize becomes ‘a groucher’ or whatever. We are at a stage where parties think they own votes and the voter rather than the other way round. The parties consider the voters as the flock and dissenters as wayward sheep to be brought back within the fold.
In my opinion we need to break this system and become more pluralistic by allowing more people of different opinions the chance to be represented in Parliament. The only way to get the system changed is for a sufficient number of us to defy the major parties and vote for change by electing other opinion in the highest manifestation of our democracy i.e. the House of Representatives.
It is clear to me that the two party system in Malta has exhausted its useful life and has now become restrictive and unsatisfactory. The two parties are no longer enough to represent the opinions of the Maltese. Personally I cannot identify with anyone of the major parties such that I feel that I am excluded from the democratic process.
Both the PN and MLP are dominated by small cliques surrounding the respective leaders and in our system where supporters are not encouraged to discuss let alone disagree, fresh ideas are hard to find. Therefore in our ‘democracy’ we have a small band of people with a fixed opinion who dominate their respective parties. One of these parties then dominates the land by forming the Government. Sometimes parties like to consider themselves as a ‘broad church’ representing various opinions or diverse sectors, but in actual fact they are not. They represent the dominant clique surrounding the leader.
Uncritical supporters are rewarded, thereby generating legions of yes-men. The system of patronage and clientelism supports the ‘democratic’ process. Whoever is in Government has a superlative advantage to dispense advantages in a myriad of ways. A promise of a future reward is far less powerful than an actual reward. I wonder how many politicians in the main parties have never promised rewards in return for votes. If that is not corruption I wonder what is.
We cannot talk of a pluralist society where it comes to Malta. Anyone who dissents is rejected and ‘spitted’ out by the system. Each side of the political spectrum has people who have been rejected. Some go away quietly and disengage from public life while a hardy few try again.
This two party system has created a system where everything is seen in extreme terms, either black or white without any shade in between. One side calls the other as corrupt while the other paints the other side in a sort of doomsday scenario. People who have been criticizing in the past suddenly lose their critical edge and anyone who continues to criticize becomes ‘a groucher’ or whatever. We are at a stage where parties think they own votes and the voter rather than the other way round. The parties consider the voters as the flock and dissenters as wayward sheep to be brought back within the fold.
In my opinion we need to break this system and become more pluralistic by allowing more people of different opinions the chance to be represented in Parliament. The only way to get the system changed is for a sufficient number of us to defy the major parties and vote for change by electing other opinion in the highest manifestation of our democracy i.e. the House of Representatives.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
The University 'Debate'
A lot is being written about the ‘debate’ held at University between the party leaders. Much has been written about the noise and booing during the ‘debate’ such that no-one has paid attention to what was actually said.
My take on what happened is very different. The Malta Labour Party should hold its head in shame that they have never ever managed to get the sons and daughters of the working class into University. The University has remained the dominium of the middle class. The disparity is glaring.
Why is the educational system failing the working class? Why is the working class continuing to fail to raise itself? Does not the MLP realise that it has to widen its appeal in order to succeed or to govern efficiently? The backbone of society is no longer the dockyard worker but the middle class and that can be achieved by education.
My take on what happened is very different. The Malta Labour Party should hold its head in shame that they have never ever managed to get the sons and daughters of the working class into University. The University has remained the dominium of the middle class. The disparity is glaring.
Why is the educational system failing the working class? Why is the working class continuing to fail to raise itself? Does not the MLP realise that it has to widen its appeal in order to succeed or to govern efficiently? The backbone of society is no longer the dockyard worker but the middle class and that can be achieved by education.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
The Sant Government and Victor Laiviera
Let me describe what I remember of Alfred Sant’s 1996-98 administration. The impression I got at the time was of a bumbling administration, muddling through and lurching from one crisis to another. It seemed that Sant and his administration had bitten off more than they could chew and were totally unprepared for Government.
He had promised to abolish VAT because it was wrong for Malta and to restore the previous tax system of import and excise duties and levies. On discovering the hole in Malta’ finances he shot himself in the foot by creating an even bigger hole through the abolition of VAT. Then he found that he could not restore the previous system because of the rules of our major trading partner that is the EU. The EU even forced him to introduce an excise duty on Maltese made goods which never carried any import duties before. He showed that he did not have any plans and policy was made as he went along.
This was not the only misstep. I remember a particular anonymous article in Orizzont entitled “if I were the Finance Minister’. Whoever wrote the article aired the view that if he were the Minister of Finance he would devalue the Lira. This fooled no-one and the article started a stampede of flight of capital. Likewise the then Minister of Finance wanted to re-introduce the Capital Declaration with the Income Tax return. Another flight of capital ensued. Both plans were abandoned.
Then there was the debacle of the increased water and electricity rates. The increases were computed amateurishly creating huge anomalies between the various categories of consumers. These had to be revised. There were several other U-turns which showed that policies had not been thought out before being implemented.
However it was not all doom and gloom. Tourism was, for example, one of the few bright spots of the administration. But these successes were few and far between. That is why in 1998 Sant was voted out. In twenty months he had managed to lose his electoral majority. In other words he blew it.
I need convincing that a Sant-bis will be any better this time around. I have serious doubts.
He had promised to abolish VAT because it was wrong for Malta and to restore the previous tax system of import and excise duties and levies. On discovering the hole in Malta’ finances he shot himself in the foot by creating an even bigger hole through the abolition of VAT. Then he found that he could not restore the previous system because of the rules of our major trading partner that is the EU. The EU even forced him to introduce an excise duty on Maltese made goods which never carried any import duties before. He showed that he did not have any plans and policy was made as he went along.
This was not the only misstep. I remember a particular anonymous article in Orizzont entitled “if I were the Finance Minister’. Whoever wrote the article aired the view that if he were the Minister of Finance he would devalue the Lira. This fooled no-one and the article started a stampede of flight of capital. Likewise the then Minister of Finance wanted to re-introduce the Capital Declaration with the Income Tax return. Another flight of capital ensued. Both plans were abandoned.
Then there was the debacle of the increased water and electricity rates. The increases were computed amateurishly creating huge anomalies between the various categories of consumers. These had to be revised. There were several other U-turns which showed that policies had not been thought out before being implemented.
However it was not all doom and gloom. Tourism was, for example, one of the few bright spots of the administration. But these successes were few and far between. That is why in 1998 Sant was voted out. In twenty months he had managed to lose his electoral majority. In other words he blew it.
I need convincing that a Sant-bis will be any better this time around. I have serious doubts.
Confidence in the Maltese
The Times reported the following ‘Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi argued this morning that the MLP’s election promises showed it did not have confidence in the Maltese’.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/election2008/view/20080217/news/gonzi-sees-lack-of-confidence-by-labour
This is quite thick coming from a Government that has done everything in its power to sell most of Malta’s economic backbone to ‘foreigners’ such that much of this economic infrastructure is run by foreigners. It all started with banking and continued with the airport, port facilities, telecommunications and post office. The PN government has often expressed its intention sell the remaining major bank to a foreign financial institution. Foreigners were even drafted to run lotteries which the Maltese had been running for close to 80 years.
Who showed lack of confidence in the Maltese and Maltese capital? What does the prime Minister say of the fact that the CEO’s of the largest Maltese companies are all foreigners?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/election2008/view/20080217/news/gonzi-sees-lack-of-confidence-by-labour
This is quite thick coming from a Government that has done everything in its power to sell most of Malta’s economic backbone to ‘foreigners’ such that much of this economic infrastructure is run by foreigners. It all started with banking and continued with the airport, port facilities, telecommunications and post office. The PN government has often expressed its intention sell the remaining major bank to a foreign financial institution. Foreigners were even drafted to run lotteries which the Maltese had been running for close to 80 years.
Who showed lack of confidence in the Maltese and Maltese capital? What does the prime Minister say of the fact that the CEO’s of the largest Maltese companies are all foreigners?
Saturday, February 16, 2008
To EU or not to EU - The Lisbon Treaty
In an article in the Malta Independent of the 16 February 2008, Austin Gatt would have us believe that Sant would take us out of the EU if elected. http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=64998
Perhaps Gatt has forgotten that over the past year the Maltese Government told us that it has been strenuously discussing, lobbying or whatever with the EU for assistance with the problem of illegal immigration. Nobody has implied that because Malta was or presumably still is lobbying the EU, it wants to opt out of the EU.
Alfred Mifsud rightly points out that ”it is very doubtful if any of these (temporary derogations) can be renegotiated or extended unless we can trade them for our consensus on some crucial EU decision. Such events can hardly be pre-planned but have to be exploited as and when they arise using the necessary combination of negotiating skill and diplomacy”.
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=64951
It is very significant that for whatever reason Malta chose to throw away its only bargaining chip without a whimper and just before the general elections through the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. This was ratified without even a discussion let alone consultation with the electorate. The ratification of the treaty was approved by both sides of parliament. Malta was the second country in the EU to ratify the treaty. An opportunity for leverage was therefore lost. It seems to me that the MLP are keen to bury the EU issue and ratified the Treaty without any ado.
Therefore no matter what Austin Gatt would have us believe, the EU is no longer an issue of either of the major parties.
Perhaps Gatt has forgotten that over the past year the Maltese Government told us that it has been strenuously discussing, lobbying or whatever with the EU for assistance with the problem of illegal immigration. Nobody has implied that because Malta was or presumably still is lobbying the EU, it wants to opt out of the EU.
Alfred Mifsud rightly points out that ”it is very doubtful if any of these (temporary derogations) can be renegotiated or extended unless we can trade them for our consensus on some crucial EU decision. Such events can hardly be pre-planned but have to be exploited as and when they arise using the necessary combination of negotiating skill and diplomacy”.
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=64951
It is very significant that for whatever reason Malta chose to throw away its only bargaining chip without a whimper and just before the general elections through the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. This was ratified without even a discussion let alone consultation with the electorate. The ratification of the treaty was approved by both sides of parliament. Malta was the second country in the EU to ratify the treaty. An opportunity for leverage was therefore lost. It seems to me that the MLP are keen to bury the EU issue and ratified the Treaty without any ado.
Therefore no matter what Austin Gatt would have us believe, the EU is no longer an issue of either of the major parties.
Vote Lawrence get... Vote Fredu get...
It is a hard choice.
If I vote for Lawrence, I will get Austin, Tonio, Ninu, Jesmond etc. A vote for Fredu, gets me Fredu, Charles, Anglu ecc. Hobson's choice if ever there was one.
...
Reading comments by Fausto and Daphne certainly don't help their side.
...
I am profoundly allergic to personality cults since the days of 'Is-Salvatur ta' Malta'. Now we have Lawrence this and Lawrence that, eulogies to the Great Leader, that whatever we have is due to him, without him we are nothing, babies love him etc.
If I vote for Lawrence, I will get Austin, Tonio, Ninu, Jesmond etc. A vote for Fredu, gets me Fredu, Charles, Anglu ecc. Hobson's choice if ever there was one.
...
Reading comments by Fausto and Daphne certainly don't help their side.
...
I am profoundly allergic to personality cults since the days of 'Is-Salvatur ta' Malta'. Now we have Lawrence this and Lawrence that, eulogies to the Great Leader, that whatever we have is due to him, without him we are nothing, babies love him etc.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Bread and butter issues
As a voter I am not only interested in the big picture but also in the micro picture, that is the bread and butter issues that affect us in our daily lives. There are plenty of these issues. Let me talk about something that affects many people including this blogger.
This is the distribution of pills. Anyone who has ever needed this service, knows about the enormous wait to get these pills. I can get them only through the help of a relative who generously goes through the hassle for me. I hope that the belated entry of the 'Pharmacy of your choice' will go a long way to alleviate this problem.
However I dread the day whenever pills have to be collected because the availability of certain medicines is like a lottery. You never know whether they will be available. In my case there is one particular medicine which is rarely available because Government says it is too expensive.
Government never allows discounts on taxes expensive or not. I thought that we pay taxes so that we can get a service. Therefore before any of the parties continue to offer so many tax rebates why don't we spend any surplus (!) money we might have to ensure that existing services are provided efficiently?
This is the distribution of pills. Anyone who has ever needed this service, knows about the enormous wait to get these pills. I can get them only through the help of a relative who generously goes through the hassle for me. I hope that the belated entry of the 'Pharmacy of your choice' will go a long way to alleviate this problem.
However I dread the day whenever pills have to be collected because the availability of certain medicines is like a lottery. You never know whether they will be available. In my case there is one particular medicine which is rarely available because Government says it is too expensive.
Government never allows discounts on taxes expensive or not. I thought that we pay taxes so that we can get a service. Therefore before any of the parties continue to offer so many tax rebates why don't we spend any surplus (!) money we might have to ensure that existing services are provided efficiently?
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Divorce and Sant
The following was reported on the Times of Malta website on the 12 February 2008.
Sant non-committal on divorce
Labour leader Alfred Sant said today that his party will wait for civil society to express itself on divorce.
Asked whether the MLP would open up the discussion on divorce and what his party’s stand is, Dr Sant said:
“We’ll wait for civil society to express itself and once there’s momentum on this, we’ll open the debate that, if needs be, will lead to the necessary reform, as had happened in 1996-1998.
The MLP is currently focusing on family issues as part of its electoral campaign.
It seems that the Alfred Sant does not have the courage to say that he is prepared to open the discussion on divorce should he become Prime Minister. This is not the categoric denial by Gonzipn to discuss divorce.
I have made my opinion known on this issue. It is a basic human right to form a family and to have it protected. The lack of divorce denies people the right to form a family should they have the misfortune of going through a failed marriage.
Sant non-committal on divorce
Labour leader Alfred Sant said today that his party will wait for civil society to express itself on divorce.
Asked whether the MLP would open up the discussion on divorce and what his party’s stand is, Dr Sant said:
“We’ll wait for civil society to express itself and once there’s momentum on this, we’ll open the debate that, if needs be, will lead to the necessary reform, as had happened in 1996-1998.
The MLP is currently focusing on family issues as part of its electoral campaign.
It seems that the Alfred Sant does not have the courage to say that he is prepared to open the discussion on divorce should he become Prime Minister. This is not the categoric denial by Gonzipn to discuss divorce.
I have made my opinion known on this issue. It is a basic human right to form a family and to have it protected. The lack of divorce denies people the right to form a family should they have the misfortune of going through a failed marriage.
Any problem big or small, Super Gonzi is the one to call
The Times of Malta reported on Gonzi's proposals on the environment. In my opinion the Government's record in this field is abysmal. Very little has been done so the proposals made to day are interesting. I am very sceptical about the feasibility of the offshore windfarm. Considering the Government's poor record in project management, I shudder to think what would happen with such an ambitious project in the middle of the ocean. I hope that the Government will not organise another queue down Republic Street to collect the free bulbs.
However what a black mark on George Pullicino. What has George been doing over the past five years? The next election slogan - Any problem big or small, Super Gonzi is the one to call.
However what a black mark on George Pullicino. What has George been doing over the past five years? The next election slogan - Any problem big or small, Super Gonzi is the one to call.
This is for Fausto Majistral
I have reposted. I hope that this time the comments option is available. Sorry for the earlier problem.
"This blog was created as the voice from that part of the political spectrum which, while possibly holding the best prospect for getting this country out of the mess it is in, is also the one that does not get a hearing."
Fausto this quote was taken from your first post on your blog dated September 05, 2004. What happened since then? Is the country still "in a mess"? Who put Malta "in the mess" in the first place?
"This blog was created as the voice from that part of the political spectrum which, while possibly holding the best prospect for getting this country out of the mess it is in, is also the one that does not get a hearing."
Fausto this quote was taken from your first post on your blog dated September 05, 2004. What happened since then? Is the country still "in a mess"? Who put Malta "in the mess" in the first place?
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Austin and Megastructures
Last summer Dr. Austin Gatt suggested a future episode for the series Altered Statesmen showing that he likes television. Perhaps he also watches the series Megastructures. One thing is for sure it is very unlikely that the Manwel Dimech Bridge will ever feature on this series.
I have been inconvenienced greatly by this project. Everyday I am reminded of the things that are wrong with the PN administration and which have to be corrected. First of all the most efficient and cost effective way to construct this type of bridge is make it out of steel. It is too costly and time consuming to build the form and shuttering to cast the bridge in concrete. Likewise the casting of concrete, in one continuous pour, is also expensive. In other words the bridge would be have been completed much faster and at a lower cost if the Government had made it out of steel.
On top of this there is the complete mismanagement of the project with enormous delays in completion dates and presumably cost over-runs when the final bill is known.
I have been inconvenienced greatly by this project. Everyday I am reminded of the things that are wrong with the PN administration and which have to be corrected. First of all the most efficient and cost effective way to construct this type of bridge is make it out of steel. It is too costly and time consuming to build the form and shuttering to cast the bridge in concrete. Likewise the casting of concrete, in one continuous pour, is also expensive. In other words the bridge would be have been completed much faster and at a lower cost if the Government had made it out of steel.
On top of this there is the complete mismanagement of the project with enormous delays in completion dates and presumably cost over-runs when the final bill is known.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Who is the bigot?
Father Joe Borg wrote a piece called “The Mullah of Mosta” in his Times of Malta blog. http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20080207/fr-joe-borg/the-mullah-of-mosta. It is purportedly a piece against bigotry. First of all “The Mayor of Mosta” is wrong, very wrong. But isn’t the writer himself a bigot?
The Father Joe Borg chose to call the Mayor of Mosta a “mullah”. A “mullah” according to Wikipedia is “a title given to some Islamic clergy, coming from the Arabic word mawla, meaning both 'vicar' and 'guardian.' Depending on the circumstances it can be either a term of respect (a learned man) or abuse (a bigot and fanatic).
In large parts of the Muslim world, particularly Iran, Turkey, central Asia and the Indian subcontinent, it is the name commonly given to local Islamic clerics or mosque leaders.”
In other words he is the equivalent of a “priest”, “monk”, “Father”, “Monsignor”, “archpriest”, “reverend”, “dun”, “patri” or whatever. Why didn't the learned Father not describe the Mayor of Mosta as “The Arcipriet of Mosta”?
Furhermore and I quote “He treated the Local Council more as a madrasa than as democratic and popular structure”. Again according to Wikipedia a “Madrasa” is ”the Arabic word for any type of school, secular or religious (of any religion). It has been loaned into various other languages… In common English language usage, the word madrasah has been taken to refer to an Islamic religious school, and usually carries a loaded political meaning.”
In other words it is a school or a “seminary – minor or major”. Why didn’t Fr. Joe Borg compare the local council to a “seminary” rather than to a “madrasa” or are seminaries “democratic and popular” structures?
I am afraid that besides the Mayor of Mosta, the Reverend Fr. Joe Borg is another bigot. As an expert on the media Fr. Joe Borg should know the value of “loaded words”. As a “man of God” he should know better.
The Father Joe Borg chose to call the Mayor of Mosta a “mullah”. A “mullah” according to Wikipedia is “a title given to some Islamic clergy, coming from the Arabic word mawla, meaning both 'vicar' and 'guardian.' Depending on the circumstances it can be either a term of respect (a learned man) or abuse (a bigot and fanatic).
In large parts of the Muslim world, particularly Iran, Turkey, central Asia and the Indian subcontinent, it is the name commonly given to local Islamic clerics or mosque leaders.”
In other words he is the equivalent of a “priest”, “monk”, “Father”, “Monsignor”, “archpriest”, “reverend”, “dun”, “patri” or whatever. Why didn't the learned Father not describe the Mayor of Mosta as “The Arcipriet of Mosta”?
Furhermore and I quote “He treated the Local Council more as a madrasa than as democratic and popular structure”. Again according to Wikipedia a “Madrasa” is ”the Arabic word for any type of school, secular or religious (of any religion). It has been loaned into various other languages… In common English language usage, the word madrasah has been taken to refer to an Islamic religious school, and usually carries a loaded political meaning.”
In other words it is a school or a “seminary – minor or major”. Why didn’t Fr. Joe Borg compare the local council to a “seminary” rather than to a “madrasa” or are seminaries “democratic and popular” structures?
I am afraid that besides the Mayor of Mosta, the Reverend Fr. Joe Borg is another bigot. As an expert on the media Fr. Joe Borg should know the value of “loaded words”. As a “man of God” he should know better.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Two strikes and you're out
It seems that the general rule for Governments is two strikes and you’re out. Since the sixties no party has won three elections in a row. Borg Olivier led PN Governments in 1962 and 1966 and was voted out in 1971. Mintoff won in 1971 and 1976 but lost the 1981 election to the PN who won an absolute majority of votes. So Mintoff overstayed and the Labour Government was finally voted out in 1987. Fenech Adami won in 1987 and 1992 but lost in 1996 to Sant. Sant’s Government quickly imploded and collapsed in 1998. Fenech Adami won in 1998 and 2003. Will this year confirm the rule or will a new record be set up?
I am confused
I must admit I am now completely confused. When we had the financial hole, we had tax hikes galore to fill the hole. VAT went up by 20% (3% on 15%), Eco-Tax (sorry contribution) was introduced, increase in social security contributions, increase in road tax, increase in registration tax on second hand cars, surcharge on water and electricity, departure tax, together with a myriad increases in charges for Government services big and small. Somehow because or despite the increased tax burden, Gonzi tells us that the economy has flourished. Now it is reducing tax that will make the economy flourish. Something is not quite right. Seems that Gonzi can have it both ways.
It seems that euros are oozing out of the woodwork such that Government does not need our money. If that is so why all the fuss that the country cannot afford to pay for this and that. For example do we afford pensions or not? Why do we need to raise retirement age if Government has so much money that it wants to give it away?
It seems that euros are oozing out of the woodwork such that Government does not need our money. If that is so why all the fuss that the country cannot afford to pay for this and that. For example do we afford pensions or not? Why do we need to raise retirement age if Government has so much money that it wants to give it away?
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
PaNic and Income Tax
I seems that the PN is now in a panic over Income Tax. Now Dr. Gonzi says that he intends lowering the highest tax rate to 25% for incomes under € 60,000. However this proposal smacks of panic rather than a well thought plan. GonziPN is reacting rather than controlling the agenda.
First of all I am mystified how the shortfall in Government revenues can be made up from other sources. Secondly what about the corporate tax rate of 35%. People will remember Mintoff's infamous old section 16 orders when the personal tax rate was 65% that is much higher than the corporate rate of tax. One of the best moves in tax occurred when the personal rate and corporate rate where brought in line at 35%. The full imputation system of Corporate tax would have to be abandoned. I bet the Inland Revenue would be inundated with requests for the 10% refund on tax at source on dividends.
I can't believe that I am complaining about a reduction in my tax bill. Yet to be honest this idea is less than half baked and born out of panic. Gonzi should do better than this. There are ways that could improve the taxation system.
First of all I am mystified how the shortfall in Government revenues can be made up from other sources. Secondly what about the corporate tax rate of 35%. People will remember Mintoff's infamous old section 16 orders when the personal tax rate was 65% that is much higher than the corporate rate of tax. One of the best moves in tax occurred when the personal rate and corporate rate where brought in line at 35%. The full imputation system of Corporate tax would have to be abandoned. I bet the Inland Revenue would be inundated with requests for the 10% refund on tax at source on dividends.
I can't believe that I am complaining about a reduction in my tax bill. Yet to be honest this idea is less than half baked and born out of panic. Gonzi should do better than this. There are ways that could improve the taxation system.
Overtime and Income Tax
Labour's proposal on overtime is a bad idea. It targets a part of part of the workforce. Not everyone works overtime. What is the advantage behind such a proposal? What is in it for the self-employed. First of all I declare that I am self-employed and therefore it effects me directly. I pay tax on all my income whether during "normal" working hours and after "normal" working hours. I know that cynics will say that the self-employed cheat on their taxes anyway. But that is beside the point. Not everyone is a cheat.
Secondly I shudder to think of those Government employees who work overtime in summer because the working day is too short who will not pay any tax at all.
Bad bad idea.
Secondly I shudder to think of those Government employees who work overtime in summer because the working day is too short who will not pay any tax at all.
Bad bad idea.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Labour madness
One of the central proposals of the MLP is cutting the surcharge on water and electricity by half. I have been trying to find things to like about Labour but everytime they come up with something to push me away. This proposal is sheer madness.
Cutting the surcharge is bad in many ways. Subsidies, hidden or otherwise, are usually wasteful and distortive. Like food, water and electricity do not come for free. Both require expensive economic resources which are imported. It is up to each and every individual to consume wisely and efficiently. If the price of these services is subsidised, the result would be waste. When people feel the pinch of higher prices, people willl tend to economise and use it wisely. If the Government has money to burn it should use it encourage people to find ways to use these resources efficiently. It would be much more productive if Government spent the money on subsidising energy saving lamps and encourage people to replace incandescent lamps.
Secondly energy efficiency is important in view of the need to cutting co2 emissions. Subsidising consumption would be counterproductive.
Furthermore the Labour leader has failed to explain how he proposes to finance this subsidy. After the sacrifices we have made to sort out the mess in Government finances created by Fenech Adami and Cachia Caruana, I do not want it messed up again. In any case since we are now part of Euro land and the Maastricht criteria have to be adhered to, a future Labour Government would have to make up the shortfall from somewhere else. Unless Euros start falling from the sky like manna, a future Labour finance minister would have to resort to new taxes or hikes in existing taxes such as VAT and Income Tax. There is very little room for cuts in expenditure since the bulk of Government spending is in the form of salaries and social services.
Very bad idea indeed.
Cutting the surcharge is bad in many ways. Subsidies, hidden or otherwise, are usually wasteful and distortive. Like food, water and electricity do not come for free. Both require expensive economic resources which are imported. It is up to each and every individual to consume wisely and efficiently. If the price of these services is subsidised, the result would be waste. When people feel the pinch of higher prices, people willl tend to economise and use it wisely. If the Government has money to burn it should use it encourage people to find ways to use these resources efficiently. It would be much more productive if Government spent the money on subsidising energy saving lamps and encourage people to replace incandescent lamps.
Secondly energy efficiency is important in view of the need to cutting co2 emissions. Subsidising consumption would be counterproductive.
Furthermore the Labour leader has failed to explain how he proposes to finance this subsidy. After the sacrifices we have made to sort out the mess in Government finances created by Fenech Adami and Cachia Caruana, I do not want it messed up again. In any case since we are now part of Euro land and the Maastricht criteria have to be adhered to, a future Labour Government would have to make up the shortfall from somewhere else. Unless Euros start falling from the sky like manna, a future Labour finance minister would have to resort to new taxes or hikes in existing taxes such as VAT and Income Tax. There is very little room for cuts in expenditure since the bulk of Government spending is in the form of salaries and social services.
Very bad idea indeed.
Divorce or having a second chance
The right to a family life is a fundamental human right. Also our society believes that everyone has a right to a second chance is whatever we decide to do. The most hardened criminals have a right to a second chance in life. Even the Catholic Church gives sinners plenty of chances not just a second one. Yet in Malta ordinary decent citizens do not have a right to a second chance to find comfort and love in marriage should they be so unlucky to have gone through a failed marriage.
Apart from the Catholic Church, those who oppose divorce say that it brings increased marriage breakdowns. But marriages have been breaking down, are breaking and down and will continue to do so in the future with or without divorce. The effect of divorce is that it allows people to enter into a fresh marriage and form a new family. No law will prevent citizens from forming a new family to find love and security. Divorce prevents the new family from having the regulatory security and benefits that marriage brings with it. Why should people be denied this right? A failed marriage is a sentence for life.
This is a major problem for thousands in Malta. Yet divorce seems to be a non-issue during this election. It is time to wake up. Which party will bring it to the attention of the electorate?
Apart from the Catholic Church, those who oppose divorce say that it brings increased marriage breakdowns. But marriages have been breaking down, are breaking and down and will continue to do so in the future with or without divorce. The effect of divorce is that it allows people to enter into a fresh marriage and form a new family. No law will prevent citizens from forming a new family to find love and security. Divorce prevents the new family from having the regulatory security and benefits that marriage brings with it. Why should people be denied this right? A failed marriage is a sentence for life.
This is a major problem for thousands in Malta. Yet divorce seems to be a non-issue during this election. It is time to wake up. Which party will bring it to the attention of the electorate?
Monday, February 4, 2008
The race is on
Now we have a date for the elections. The race is on.
The Times of Malta announced today on it website that this is an election without a central theme. This is what I said in my earlier blogs. However is it true that there is no theme or that there should not be a theme?
If there is no central theme, it speaks volumes on the quality of the political parties. Is Malta therefore going to vote in a vacuum? This gives the parties the opportunity to fight the election campaign on the theme which is most congenial to them. Up to now both the PN and the MLP have presented the electorate with meaningless slogans. The drabness of both messages is staggering.
Well the economy could be one theme. Malta's economy is currently going riding on an artificial wave based on construction activity. Thousands of residential units are being built while sales to those who need a residence have dwindled. Perhaps sales are slow because of the uncertainty of the outcome of the election. People are postponing decisions until the outcome of the election is certain. What seems certain is that the current level of construction activity cannot be sustained and contractors will see a severe downturn six months after the election. Furthermore the impact of the Euro on the economy will take some time to be assessed because it is still early to judge. Time will tell.
Divorce could be a theme. But it highly unlikely that any of the parties have the courage to bring up the subject for fear of antagonising the Church. There is no way that the PN would ever propose the introduciton of divorce. What is surprising is that the MLP seems to have become just as confessional as the PN. The MLP was traditionally the party for social rights and progress but it lost that ages ago. Maybe AD will have the guts to bring it up during the campaign. AN certainly would not.
The theme of corruption has been coming up in all electoral campaigns in living memory. This time around anti-corruption will be brought up by the MLP. But unless something sensational comes up, the MLP will not get much traction from it. Up to now only small fry have been caught.
The environment. This should be an important theme for the election. Care for the environment has however been engulfed by the greed of the few and economic needs. It is already too late for Malta given the amount of construction that has been going on. For many people this will always be secondary to the primary goal of making money.
Unfortunately hunting will once again rear its ugly head in the election campaign with major and minor parties doing their utmost to appease one of the most bigoted and backward elements of Maltese society. I am sure that one of the considerations behind the timing of the election on 8 March is that it will leave unresolved the decision whether spring hunting will be opened or not this year.
Illegal immigration. AN will try to bring this theme to the fore. As with hunting the PN avoided a summer election to avoid letting illegal immigration dominating the headlines. The elections are being held before the usual season for the illegal landings. This would work in favour of AN. This is an open sore in Maltese society. Malta has to come to terms and deal with this problem. We cannot let ourselves be pictured in Europe as bigoted racists, keeping fellow humans is such sub-human conditions.
There will be plenty of other issues that should be discussed and voted upon, such as the efficiency or otherwise of Government services, waste in Government expenditure, mismanagement of Government contracts, gay rights and education. The high level of Maltese who remain illiterate after 12 years of schooling is a national disgrace.
EH
The Times of Malta announced today on it website that this is an election without a central theme. This is what I said in my earlier blogs. However is it true that there is no theme or that there should not be a theme?
If there is no central theme, it speaks volumes on the quality of the political parties. Is Malta therefore going to vote in a vacuum? This gives the parties the opportunity to fight the election campaign on the theme which is most congenial to them. Up to now both the PN and the MLP have presented the electorate with meaningless slogans. The drabness of both messages is staggering.
Well the economy could be one theme. Malta's economy is currently going riding on an artificial wave based on construction activity. Thousands of residential units are being built while sales to those who need a residence have dwindled. Perhaps sales are slow because of the uncertainty of the outcome of the election. People are postponing decisions until the outcome of the election is certain. What seems certain is that the current level of construction activity cannot be sustained and contractors will see a severe downturn six months after the election. Furthermore the impact of the Euro on the economy will take some time to be assessed because it is still early to judge. Time will tell.
Divorce could be a theme. But it highly unlikely that any of the parties have the courage to bring up the subject for fear of antagonising the Church. There is no way that the PN would ever propose the introduciton of divorce. What is surprising is that the MLP seems to have become just as confessional as the PN. The MLP was traditionally the party for social rights and progress but it lost that ages ago. Maybe AD will have the guts to bring it up during the campaign. AN certainly would not.
The theme of corruption has been coming up in all electoral campaigns in living memory. This time around anti-corruption will be brought up by the MLP. But unless something sensational comes up, the MLP will not get much traction from it. Up to now only small fry have been caught.
The environment. This should be an important theme for the election. Care for the environment has however been engulfed by the greed of the few and economic needs. It is already too late for Malta given the amount of construction that has been going on. For many people this will always be secondary to the primary goal of making money.
Unfortunately hunting will once again rear its ugly head in the election campaign with major and minor parties doing their utmost to appease one of the most bigoted and backward elements of Maltese society. I am sure that one of the considerations behind the timing of the election on 8 March is that it will leave unresolved the decision whether spring hunting will be opened or not this year.
Illegal immigration. AN will try to bring this theme to the fore. As with hunting the PN avoided a summer election to avoid letting illegal immigration dominating the headlines. The elections are being held before the usual season for the illegal landings. This would work in favour of AN. This is an open sore in Maltese society. Malta has to come to terms and deal with this problem. We cannot let ourselves be pictured in Europe as bigoted racists, keeping fellow humans is such sub-human conditions.
There will be plenty of other issues that should be discussed and voted upon, such as the efficiency or otherwise of Government services, waste in Government expenditure, mismanagement of Government contracts, gay rights and education. The high level of Maltese who remain illiterate after 12 years of schooling is a national disgrace.
EH
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Who believes in democracy?
In the Sunday 27 January 2008 edition of The Malta Independent on Sunday the Queen of Mean of Malta wrote a pathetic article article pleading with former PN voters not to vote waste their vote by voting for one of the smaller parties since this would only help the MLP.
Apart from the peculiarities of the Maltese voting system, this plea is a sad reflection of Maltese politics. Voters are asked, directed even bullied into voting to keep a party out of Government rather than to vote someone into Government. Isn't it sad that after twenty years of successive Nationalist administration the PN has to depend on a negative message. Can't the PN fight an election of a positive note.
The second point is the state of Malta's democracy. Why do we still have a system where the two antagonists agree on disenfranchising a substantial portion of the population to preserve the duopoly? The system makes sure that no-one can break the rigid mould.
The elections to the European Parliament are a case in point. The PN and AD shared the same pro-EU platform for the 2003 EU referendum. Yet the PN preferred the third MEP to go to the MLP rather than AD. The third seat could have easily gone to AD had the PN directed its supporters to continue their ballot preferences to the AD candidate. An AD MEP could have helped to break the duopoly.
According to the PN and MLP voters can any person to represent them so long as they are from the PN and MLP. So much for their democratic credentials. This elections should be used by the electorate to vote to whoever they want without fear. Maybe finally the electoral system will one day be fixed.
Apart from the peculiarities of the Maltese voting system, this plea is a sad reflection of Maltese politics. Voters are asked, directed even bullied into voting to keep a party out of Government rather than to vote someone into Government. Isn't it sad that after twenty years of successive Nationalist administration the PN has to depend on a negative message. Can't the PN fight an election of a positive note.
The second point is the state of Malta's democracy. Why do we still have a system where the two antagonists agree on disenfranchising a substantial portion of the population to preserve the duopoly? The system makes sure that no-one can break the rigid mould.
The elections to the European Parliament are a case in point. The PN and AD shared the same pro-EU platform for the 2003 EU referendum. Yet the PN preferred the third MEP to go to the MLP rather than AD. The third seat could have easily gone to AD had the PN directed its supporters to continue their ballot preferences to the AD candidate. An AD MEP could have helped to break the duopoly.
According to the PN and MLP voters can any person to represent them so long as they are from the PN and MLP. So much for their democratic credentials. This elections should be used by the electorate to vote to whoever they want without fear. Maybe finally the electoral system will one day be fixed.
What is the election all about?
This election is the first one in a very long time without an obvious theme. What is it all about? I remember a few elections. The 1981 was getting rid of the Mintoff methods and tactics. The 1987 was a repetition of the 1981 election because of the "perverse result". The 1992 election was about continuing the work begun in 1987, that is to finish the work in progress and about entry to Europe. The 1992 administration lost its way. Europe did not open the door for Malta and Malta was left out. The Nationalist Party became complacent and arrogant as if they had a divine right to be the party of government of Malta. There was therefore no dominant theme for the election. This meant that the 1996 election was misread by almost everybody and Labour made a stunning comeback.
The Labour administration was a shambles. It froze Malta's application to join the EU. While it wanted to put right the Government's disastrous finances inherited from the previous administration, it shot itself in the foot by eliminating VAT thus losing substantial revenue. It could not hold itself together and quickly fell apart. The 1998 elections were dominated by the theme to get Malta back on track for the EU and to get rid of the incompetent Labour Government. The 2003 elections were really a second EU referendum.
This leads us to 2008 where as in 2006 there is no clear overall theme. European membership is no longer an issue. Government finances are also not an issue and could never be. Even if finances are bad no party would enter into an election with a pledge to raise taxes!! None of the parties seem to be talking about the economy. To tell you the truth I am lost. I have been wracking my brains to see what this election is or better what it should be about.
I have a few ideas such as democracy, social progress, citizen's rights, efficiency in public administration such as the running of schools, hospitals and the environment.
The Labour administration was a shambles. It froze Malta's application to join the EU. While it wanted to put right the Government's disastrous finances inherited from the previous administration, it shot itself in the foot by eliminating VAT thus losing substantial revenue. It could not hold itself together and quickly fell apart. The 1998 elections were dominated by the theme to get Malta back on track for the EU and to get rid of the incompetent Labour Government. The 2003 elections were really a second EU referendum.
This leads us to 2008 where as in 2006 there is no clear overall theme. European membership is no longer an issue. Government finances are also not an issue and could never be. Even if finances are bad no party would enter into an election with a pledge to raise taxes!! None of the parties seem to be talking about the economy. To tell you the truth I am lost. I have been wracking my brains to see what this election is or better what it should be about.
I have a few ideas such as democracy, social progress, citizen's rights, efficiency in public administration such as the running of schools, hospitals and the environment.
I don't know if there will ever be any readers of this blog, but really I don't mind if nobody ever reads this blog. The purpose of this blog is for me to let off some steam about what is happening in this country on the eve of the General Election. If I had been after fame or notoriety I would write for the Times or any of the other papers or join a political party. I will be trying to tear down the pompous bigheads who write in the papers. At the same time I will try to stay positive.
If by any chance anyone reads this blog I would gladly read any intelligent comments left here.
If by any chance anyone reads this blog I would gladly read any intelligent comments left here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)