Kaizenlog

Welcome to Kaizenlog.com If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed , Twitter You can contact us by using the contact form or submitting a comment. Thanks for visiting!

Heard the one about AD? Have you received an email about what
they’re up to? Listened in to the whispering campaign? Sat in on the
spin? Well here’s to putting the record straight and stopping the
spin and scaremongering. Here, we try and clarify the situation so
you may vote freely for the political party of your choice having
all the facts at your disposal. We do facts not fiction, sincerity
not spin.

‘They’ say that a vote for AD is a vote for the MLP. Is this true?

Incorrect. This statement is based on the assumption that all the
people who vote for AD have previously voted for PN. This is very
far from the truth. AD’s potential voting pool comes from a wide
variety of sources. There is a core Green vote consisting of people
who have always voted for the Greens, new voters (over 17,000),
people who have voted for the MLP and people who would not cast
their vote if the Green Party was not contesting. By no stretch of
the imagination can it be stated that every person who votes for AD
intended to vote for the Nationalist party. In any case votes do
not “belong” to any political party but to the voter who may use it
as s/he pleases at different times.

‘They’ say that a vote for AD is a wasted vote.

Our voting system allows voters to ensure that their vote is not
lost or wasted. By voting for AD and then continuing to vote for
other candidates from other parties, one ensures that if the AD
candidate is not elected, the second preference candidate
will “inherit” his vote and has a chance of being elected. AD
welcomes cross-party voting and encourages voters to give their 2nd
or any subsequent preference to other favoured political parties.
This would ensure that no vote is wasted.

‘They’ say that people vote AD to teach the PN a lesson. Is this
true?

Voters vote the way they do for a variety of reasons. They vote for
a party such as AD which has been consistent and honest regarding a
number of issues such as its pro-EU stance, need for a culture
change, environmental and economical improvements, civil rights and
integrity in public dealings. If another party has not been
consistent or credible about these issue it is natural that voters
will not be inclined to vote for it. After all votes have to be
earned and no party is automatically entitled to votes regardless of
its performance in the 5 years between elections.

‘They’ say that it is impossible for AD to be elected to Parliament.

If approximately 2500 in one district vote for AD then it is very
likely that AD will elect a member to Parliament. Considering that
AD has been working very hard to explain and promote its vision for
a coalition government for all the Maltese people, the prospects of
this happening are very good.

‘They’ say that a coalition is impossible because of the recent
changes to the electoral law.

A coalition government is possible when either of the major parties
does not obtain an absolute majority (50% plus 1). In this case, and
with AD having elected a representative/s, the party having a
relative majority may link up with AD to form a coalition
government.

‘They’ say that AD wants to form a coalition with the MLP?

AD will form a coalition with the major political party which agrees
with its priorities for the country as published in AD’s manifesto.
These points have been made public for the sake of transparency and
public scrutiny and may be viewed on www.alternattiva.org.mt

‘They’ say that a coalition can’t be formed because Gonzi is not
keen on the idea.

It is the electorate which decides whether a coalition should be
formed. Politicians cannot ignore the sovereign wish of the people.
If people have voted for AD to form a coalition government,
dismissing this possibility is rather arrogant. If the people want
an AD-PN coalition, then it would be very strange for a PN
politician to discard this unique opportunity, preferring to have
the MLP governing instead.

‘They’ say that AD criticises the PN only.

Over the years AD has criticised both the PN and the MLP if the
major parties policies and actions are questionable. AD’s criticism
of the MLP’s surcharge proposal is a case in point. Criticism should
not be perceived as an attack and is necessary in a democratic
society. Only despots try to crush out criticism. The PN has been in
government for 21 years. It cannot expect to be above criticism and
scrutiny.

‘They’ say that if AD is a coalition partner it will have a
disproportionate amount of power and will render the government
unstable.

It would be self-defeating for AD to hold its coalition partner to
ransom and act unreasonably as this would translate into a certain
defeat at the polls the next time round. There are many countries
such as Ireland and Germany where coalition governments ensure
representation of a greater part of the electorate and which are
stable and efficient.

‘They’ say that it is better to try and effect change by working
within a major party.

This has been proved incorrect throughout the last 20 years where a
major party has reused to fall in line with EU standards, has
refused to budge regarding spring hunting, has retained its
discriminatory position on divorce for the rich, has refused to
amend the unjust rent laws, has ignored questionable conduct by
ministers and has condoned disastrous land use planning policies.
There has been no impetus for change and there will be no incentive
for major party reform if it is aware that you will vote for it
again out of fear.

‘They’ say that a vote for the new candidates of either major party
will bring about change anyway.

This is based on the shaky presumption that all the present
underperforming ministers lose their seat and are replaced by
newcomers. This is a highly improbable scenario. Voting for the same
party which has allowed these ministers to get out of hand means
that you are allowing it to happen again. A political party
apologizing for its inaction or inability to change on the eve of
the election is an admission of failure and a gimmick.

‘They’ are saying that a change of government might bring about
withdrawal from the EU.

AD in a coalition government will resist all moves which are
intended to undermine the electorate’s European aspirations.

Who are “they”?

You will notice that the anti-coalition brigade is mostly made up of
persons who are linked to a major political party such as ex-
ministers and chairmen of public corporation. Other commentators
have business connections with major political parties and have a
lot to lose if “their” party is not elected. These considerations
should be kept in mind when weighing the credibility (or lack of it)
of the obsessed anti-coalition brigade.

Be smart… ‘they’ have a VESTED in maintaining the current
stagnation and status quo.

www.maltaelection2008.com

Popularity: 12% [?]

Listen to this podcast

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 17th, 2008 at and is filed under Malta.You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.