Prof. Josef Lauri asked me : so what is the solution ? My answer.



The basic difficulties for the formation of a coalition, as I view them, are three :

1st: there is an issue of credibility. The PN is not credible when it speaks against corruption and in favour of good governance, unless it clears the deck and solves its current issues, as highlighted in my article published today: Coalition building: beyond the arithmetic.

2nd : there is the format in which a coalition could take shape: forming part of the PN is no coalition at all, it is also not acceptable to AD; it is possible to form a separate structure specifically for the elections, but time is running out for such an option;

3rd : there are various issues of policy in respect of which there may be sharp disagreement, particularly in respect of environmental issues.  The proposed tunnel between Malta and Gozo, and the proposed car-racing track as well as spring hunting, all of which are supported by the PN but which are objectionable in principle to AD readily come to mind. There are also a number of other issues of a social and economic nature which could also be contentious.


All the above requires considerable time and goodwill, both of which are in short supply.


(The above is a reply I gave on one of my blogposts in reply to a question by Prof. Josef Lauri earlier today.)

3 comments on “Prof. Josef Lauri asked me : so what is the solution ? My answer.

  1. Fine Carm. Your points (1) and (2) need to be discussed in a political climate that is as clean as one can hope a political climate to be. But at the moment our political climate is toxic. I feel you are putting the cart before the horse. You cannot solve the problems you mention as a prerequisite to a coalition. A coalition is required in order to restore the political climate to a non-toxic level so that then the problems can be resolved and a way to solve them can be discerned. AD or anybody else joining such a coalition is not saying that they do not have these differences with the PN or between themselves, for that matter. Of course not. It just means that there is a bigger issue which is stifling proper discussion of the issues you mention.

    I see the different members of such a coalition to be telling us that they are putting their backs together in order to bring about a healthy atmosphere precisely because they then want to trash out these issues in a proper environment.

    • I fully understand the spirit of your comments. AD’s points are clear as are those of others. I think some form of compromise, although very difficult, could be possible if the PN does not keep insisting that this has to be carried out under its banner.

      • If the whole issue is JUST about having a potential PLPDAD pre electoral alliance under an XYZ banner, rather than a PN one, then one inevitably asks whether it is right for such an “issue” to be considered so crucial for:

        – AD, having apparently reached a logical conclusion that there is something amiss with the Castille triad and there is a PROBABILITY that they’re significantly corrupt, but cannot establish this with certainty because not enough undisputable evidence is available. It also appears that AD still harbours some minimal hope that the national institutions would serve their purpose and somehow sniff out the evidence or convincingly dismiss the serious accusations.

        – PN, having demanded the PM’s resignation and rallying the public to the streets, having reached the conclusion that the PM and his circle ARE corrupt, and receiving kickbacks on significant multi million contracts, which the taxpayers are & will continue to finance. The PN also believes that national institutions have been effectively hijacked and are unwilling to rock the boat.

        In this scenario, a reasonable voter would expect both AD, but ESPECIALLY the PN (considering their aforementioned conviction), to responsibly set the right priorities, weigh the risks, swallow any pride, and pull the same rope, even under a Benigni, Toto, or Ciccolina (to stick to Italian symbols) banner!

        Moreover rather than pointing at Labour’s alleged or factual sins (depending on one’s perspective), it is crucial that any such pre-election alliance (f*ck the banner) urgently but clearly articulates and commits itself, to the radical changes/proposals to be enacted/introduced to ensure that, the democratic representation, the crucial check & balances, and the effectiveness of institutions supposedly holding governments/public offices accountable, are truly in place and functional, if and when, ANY one or (preferably) MORE of the participating parties are elected to form a government.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s