A vindictive transfer and the PN’s grassroots
It is opportune that I share with readers a message I received following up my last blog, wherein I accused the current PN administration of having become an exclusive club for lawyers.
Dr Simon Mercieca is senior lecturer, Department of History
This particular response came from an individual who was a PN candidate in the last election. My interest lies in sharing what this ex-candidate has to say about the internal situation in the PN and his personal situation. I quote: “You have hit the nail on the head. You have made me reaffirm my decision to leave politics once and for all. I never felt welcome in the PN, now all the more a party of lawyers (issa aktar u aktar partit tal-avukati)”. He added that, “honest people coming from working class families (albeit I have tertiary education) are not welcomed by PN.”
As we all know, there are many who have made sacrifices for the PN, including forfeiting their careers. This particular former candidate happens to be one of them. He told me that because of his political exposure during the 2017 election, he was removed from his position at work and given a lateral transfer to another section within the government structure where he is currently employed.
As customary, this former PN candidate discussed the case with party officials but received no backing, even if, this is a clear case of a vindictive transfer. But the PN, being a bunch of advocates, think that vindictive transfers are only those that can be proven in court! These are vindictive actions that are done within the beloved realm of the rule of law. This was a case in point. The word transfer is no longer in fashion. Now the jargon in use is a lateral move. In truth, they both mean the same. This person was given a lateral move exactly when it became public that he was going to be one of the PN candidates for the 2017 election.
I am stating this because the party’s reaction beggars belief. It just washed its hands with a laconic statement that such a transfer is to be expected… No interest or empathy whatsoever for this individual’s plight. The sole advice that the party was able to give to this person was to consider looking for another job in the private sector!
Needless to say, the feeling of being betrayed has increased the misery when thinking of the time and support given for an ideal and a party. It has become clear that the PN is not interested in loyal and clean individuals. It has finally dawned on this ‘former candidate’ that the PN makes it a habit of using people especially for elections but who, not forming part of the inner core, are considered mere numbers. Lenin labelled such individuals ‘useful idiots’. Once the party achieves its purpose, these ‘useful idiots’ are discarded and dumped by the wayside.
The party’s primary interest is to continue nurturing a classist mentality and cradling its inner core. This explains why it raised a hullabaloo for a Facebook ‘like’ presumably made by the Minister of Finance under a comment wishing David Casa the death penalty. However, while the entire party machine was geared to make a false case for Casa, not even a murmur was heard in defence of this former candidate who went through such a trauma. I maintain that the case of the former candidate is by far more serious. To be fair to Delia, this happened when Simon Busuttil was still leader. Nonetheless, I can understand this former candidate’s anger now spreading to the current administration because of the party’s persistent inactivity.
Incidentally, black-listed and being now 50+, this transfer means that this employee stands no chance for promotion. Despite all the talk about meritocracy, this former candidate realizes that nothing has changed. Even if, at some point, there should be a change in government, there is no guarantee that justice would be meted out.
However, government officials did offer this person help. And those within the ministry had no problem in admitting that the transfer should have never occurred in the first place, since this person had always showed professionalism in his work. Finding more solidarity and help from Labour than from the PN, this ‘candidate’ concluded that the PN does not appreciate the work decent people do for the party.
The situation now verges on the Kafkaesque insofar as being helped by Labourites could easily earn him the tagging of being a turncoat. But he is not interested in changing sides. This ex-candidate comes from a family who is known in the village as diehard Labourities. His family had always wished that someday this person would join Labour due to his passion and love for the workers and in helping the marginalised in society. But he stuck to the ideals of the Nationalist Party because historically, they are built on true solidarity. Now, he is realizing that for the sake of defending these ideals, he has compromised his professional career: it is now in tatters.
Like many Nationalists, this ‘former candidate‘ is considering abstaining from voting in next year's MEP and local elections. This is an assertion, I have already heard from other Nationalists. By abstaining, these Nationalists will be demonstrating not only their disappointment in Delia but also their disavowal of Simon Busuttil’s faction.
There remains another problem for the PN that goes beyond abstention. Many Nationalists are resigning from the party and the current establishment does not seem concerned about this situation. The party lawyers are following in Uriah Heep’s footsteps and are not prepared to get down to the crux of the problems they are facing.
The only thing that these two factions should be considering is that those who are leaving the PN, are leaving for good. The PN is experiencing the same fate as experienced by Mintoff, in the final rundown, in the 1970s. Those who left him, because of the way they were treated during that rundown, never returned to Labour.
So far, the PN administration has failed to get any closer to the people. The only thing the PN is good at these days is in turning away decent individuals. Furthermore, those who dare criticize, are being ridiculed and accused by party henchmen of being quislings.
Busuttil had the chance to reform the party but made no attempt to do so. Instead he wasted his time milling around, trying to implement Soros’ agenda of an open society and make Nationalist principles appear obsolete in favour of pan-Europeanism. He thought that by adopting such an agenda he was going to appeal to those who come from the working classes and Labour background. Results show that he failed miserably.
The PN’s current leadership is committing the same mistakes of the previous leader. Primarily the PN lacks political expertise and those giving advice have chosen the wrong course. To worsen the situation further, the PN is now losing those individuals who can bring about small changes. They may not have the clout to be elected but they do have the potential in persuading floating voters to return to the fold. Instead, the party is lost in internal pitched battles where established politicians attempt to affirm their hold on some district or other at the expense of the younger budding politicians.
This is what also happened under Busuttil, when his acolytes were focusing on stabbing in the back other Nationalists rather than fight their political adversaries, and then abandoned those who stood for the ideals of the party. The new wave has not rectified this bad habit.