The man who needs applause

Normally Presidents rule for 2.5 years as Socialists and Conservatives split the Parliament’s five year term into 2 equal periods. And usually parties change their candidates for each turn. A few years ago they extended Martin Schulz’s term. This time the conservatives confirmed their candidate: Roberta Metsola.

Her first election 2.5 years ago was an extraordinary personal achievement. You have to admire anyone who makes it to one of the top four leading jobs of the EU. Her confirmation is even more extraordinary. It shows that Roberta Metsola did not disappoint parliamentarians of all hues, other EU institutions, and anyone with influence on this result – governments, ambassadors, journalists, parties. On the contrary, she surprised them.

I want to speak about the way her confirmation was covered in Malta’s press. Together with pictures of her in her glory we saw screengrabs of MEP Alex Agius Saliba, sitting when others stood, growling when others smiled. Alex Agius Saliba and one of his two Labour MEP colleagues joined a very small minority who did not vote for Metsola’s confirmation as president.

I’ll touch on the reasons – such as they are – which he gave for remaining seated and not voting.

But before I do that I’d like to make an observation which I consider is of greater significance than Agius Saliba’s abstention.

This is Roberta Metsola’s extraordinary success. This is the victory of a self-reliant woman who, without anybody’s help, reached heights Alex Agius Saliba could not dare dream of. Instead of talking of the success of a woman, we find ourselves talking about what a man thinks of her. As if Agius Saliba’s abstention is more important than Metsola’s victory.

Agius Saliba’s abstention is what it is. To abstain means to do nothing, to shut up and stay put. That’s what Alex Agius Saliba did this week: nothing. He did not as much as push his finger on the voting button. He did not even have the self-respect of expressing his disapproval by voting for somebody else. He did nothing and after doing nothing he called a press conference to say a lot about doing nothing. They photographed him doing nothing and they photographed him talk a lot about the nothing he did.

I can’t think of a better example of the contrast between the plenty a woman does without looking for congratulations and gratitude and the applauding and congratulating crowd a man expects for stepping out of bed and putting his slippers on.

That’s what Agius Saliba is looking for; that we spend time analysing his abstention. As if what he thinks about Metsola’s election is as or more important than Metsola’s election.

There was the third Labour MEP who voted differently from Agius Saliba and the other one. He voted for Metsola because, he said, he supported Maltese voices in Europe. That was the point Robert Abela made when he said he was fully backing Metsola’s candidature before her re-election.

Those who criticised Agius Saliba said that by not voting for Metsola they had effectively voted against Malta. As if Malta was running for president, not Metsola. As if Malta was elected president, not Metsola.

This fake patriotism shows two things: we don’t understand the role of these European positions and we don’t understand the skill you need to fill them. Consider that among the many things Agius Saliba said he disagreed with Metsola about there was the fact that since Malta is a neutral country he disagrees Metsola should be speaking about Europe’s defence from Russia. Pardon me. Malta is neutral and therefore Malta and it’s government must respect that fact. Metsola is not Malta. You and I are Maltese. But that doesn’t mean that while Malta is neutral you and I must be neutral. Nor does it mean Metsola has to be neutral.

A person in that position must reflect European differences, seek our shared interests, and speak for a united Europe not for the village she was born in. Instead of understanding that we belong to something which is bigger than us, we think as if we’re about to vote for Malta to conquer Europe and make it all do what pleases us. As if we’re about to colonise Europe.

This is a reflection of what we think of our elections. A Labour prime minister is elected and that means Labour is everything and those who do not belong to Labour are to be treated as if they don’t exist. A democracy doesn’t work like that. Europe doesn’t work like that.

Whether in favour or against, a vote for or against Metsola is not a vote for or against Malta. We again rob a woman of her entirely personal merit and take it for our own, for our country. As a result of this conflation between persons and their country we should just how parochial we truly are.

We behave as if this was a Eurovision vote. That’s also wrong by the way because rather than vote for the best song we vote for the flag it’s flying.

Roberta Metsola did not deserve to be voted for because she is Maltese. She deserved the votes she got because of the success of her presidency part of which we struggle to comprehend. The Labour MEP who voted for her and the Labour MEPs who did not said there were things they disagree with Metsola about.

How is that surprising? This notion that we expect to vote for people we agree with on everything comes from our fanatical culture. We don’t have political parties here. We have sects. Your party is always right. These things work only for a village in the back of beyond. Like ours.

Roberta Metsola’s greatest achievement is of managing to work with people who disagree with her. Look at her victory speech. She made a list of things: someone in that Parliament disagrees with each one of them. It was the same list of things she promoted in her presidency. She spokes about tougher borders which the left disagrees with. She promoted a Green Deal for a sustainable economy which the right disagrees with. She spoke about equality for women. She upheld a strong position on Ukraine and converted initial sceptics.

In other words she led. She adopted positions without waiting for unanimity. She negotiated and persuaded those who disagreed with her on other things. She showed she could build and retain different alliances on different issues and she secured the respect of people who weren’t sure about her at first. I heard an interview with a feminist MEP who said she had been scared about having an anti-abortion president. But she found she could work with her and she began to respect her. While she still disagrees with her on other things.

This is the contrast between the politics at the level of a European Parliament President and the politics of this Littletown we live in. Alex Agius Saliba felt that after all the insults and the lies he said about her that she wanted to ship your kids to their death in a war he’d look ridiculous voting for her. Better for him to look ridiculous in the eyes of his colleagues in the Parliament than in the eyes of the people who voted for him.

True. He wasn’t wrong when he did not vote for her. It was the consistent thing to do. The mistake is in our sectarian politics and in the insults he had for her. And the simple failure to appreciate that when you vote to appoint someone to such an important position the considerations you need to make cannot be partisan or pseudo-patriotic.

You should choose instead the best person for the job. And even if she failed to convince the few thousand Labour or die Europeans who would rather burn a good Nationalist than vote for them, Robert Metsola persuaded the representatives of millions of other Europeans of all political hues that she’s the best person to lead the Parliament.

Brava madame!

MANUEL QAL, Season 1 Episode 28

Written by Manuel Delia
Video Production: Michael Kaden / NEWZ.mt