"Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls:
Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed."
As this quote advises, the Chief Minister does not enrich himself by his vitriolic attacks on the Opposition, specifically the Leader of the Opposition. He does not gain electorally from it but impoverishes Gibraltar as a community and reduces the respect in which it should be held. He prides himself and boasts of the restoration of Gibraltar's reputation by the GSD Government. Does this behaviour by the Chief Minister enhance this reputation? I would suggest not generally and certainly not politically. It brings our Parliament into disrepute.
There is no reason whatsoever that could justify such behaviour by the Chief Minister in Parliament, whatever he might accuse the Opposition or its leader of in order to argue that his attack is legitimate. A Chief Minister, as the face of his community, needs to ride above such behaviour. He should choose less emotional and vitriolic language to defend his policies and budget, if they are as right and good as he boasts. The budget should speak for itself. It should sell itself. The prosperity of Gibraltar that he pronounces should be sufficient to tell the good story.
There is no reason whatsoever that could justify such behaviour by the Chief Minister in Parliament, whatever he might accuse the Opposition or its leader of in order to argue that his attack is legitimate. A Chief Minister, as the face of his community, needs to ride above such behaviour. He should choose less emotional and vitriolic language to defend his policies and budget, if they are as right and good as he boasts. The budget should speak for itself. It should sell itself. The prosperity of Gibraltar that he pronounces should be sufficient to tell the good story.
The Chief Minister judged and considered appropriate that he should proclaim in Parliament that in light of "... the combination of the ignorance he [Mr Picardo] displays and the deceit to which he he sees fit to resort, he is unfit to be Chief Minister ...". I do not wish to anger or disillusion Mr Caruana but it is not he who decides who may or may not be fit to be Chief Minister. In the case of the GSLP the first choice of a potential Chief Minister is made by its members (at least they get a say, not like in the case of the GSD). It is the members of the GSLP who choose the leader of their party. In the second place, more importantly, it is the electorate at a General Election who vote and choose their representatives. It is from those representatives elected into Parliament that the person, who has the confidence and support of the majority of MPs, is chosen and becomes the Chief Minister.
The Chief Minister in Parliament yesterday also described the Leader of the Opposition as "... economically illiterate, ignorant, deceitful ..." , of " ... misleading and scaremongering the people of Gibraltar on the back of his economic ignorance ...", of the Leader of the Opposition " ... having no moral compass, let alone a democratic one... and a systemic lack of sincerity". Judge, jury and executioner, hence not Parliament but rather, once again, the Star Chamber.
I always understood that "unparliamentary expressions" are not permitted in Parliament. based on this understanding I grabbed my copy of the "parliamentary bible": Erskine May's "Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament". It did not take me very long to find the following passage:
"Good temper and moderation are the characteristics of parliamentary language. Parliamentary language is never more desirable than when a Member is canvassing the opinions and conduct of his opponent in debate"
It then gives examples of unparliamentary language: the imputation of false or unavowed motives, the misrepresentation of the language of another and the accusation of misrepresentation, charges of uttering a deliberate falsehood and the use of abusive and insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder. How many of these have been breached?
So who presides in our Parliament? Who maintains order during debates? Who has the authority and responsibility to punish MPs who break the rules of Parliament? It is the Speaker. I have to ask, where was he when all this was happening? An exacerbating factor is that the Chief Minister was exercising his right of reply. The Leader of the Opposition had no right to come back on the Chief Minister. It is incumbent on the Speaker to control Parliament at all times and protect MPs from unparliamentary behaviour, more so the case when the MP being lambasted cannot defend himself with a reply in the debate.
The Chief Minister has, to make matters worse, given notice that he intends to propose a Motion in Parliament against the Leader of the Opposition. This Motion is full of "unparliamentary language". It is also a bizarrely dangerous and anti-democratic act, not least, because the Chief Minister can use his executive power and that of his Minster, who have the majority in Parliament, to ensure that this judgmental Motion is passed, without evidence, judge or jury. This further likens Parliament to the Star Chamber rather than to what it is, the Legislature. Will the Speaker do anything to protect against what, to me, smacks of abuse?
If this is the manner in which the Chief Minister treats and deals with an MP, who is an elected representative of the people of Gibraltar. If this is the manner in which the Chief Minister treats and deals with the Leader of the Opposition. What hope has a mere mortal if he incurs the wrath of the Chief Minister? I may find out ...
I always understood that "unparliamentary expressions" are not permitted in Parliament. based on this understanding I grabbed my copy of the "parliamentary bible": Erskine May's "Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament". It did not take me very long to find the following passage:
"Good temper and moderation are the characteristics of parliamentary language. Parliamentary language is never more desirable than when a Member is canvassing the opinions and conduct of his opponent in debate"
It then gives examples of unparliamentary language: the imputation of false or unavowed motives, the misrepresentation of the language of another and the accusation of misrepresentation, charges of uttering a deliberate falsehood and the use of abusive and insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder. How many of these have been breached?
So who presides in our Parliament? Who maintains order during debates? Who has the authority and responsibility to punish MPs who break the rules of Parliament? It is the Speaker. I have to ask, where was he when all this was happening? An exacerbating factor is that the Chief Minister was exercising his right of reply. The Leader of the Opposition had no right to come back on the Chief Minister. It is incumbent on the Speaker to control Parliament at all times and protect MPs from unparliamentary behaviour, more so the case when the MP being lambasted cannot defend himself with a reply in the debate.
The Chief Minister has, to make matters worse, given notice that he intends to propose a Motion in Parliament against the Leader of the Opposition. This Motion is full of "unparliamentary language". It is also a bizarrely dangerous and anti-democratic act, not least, because the Chief Minister can use his executive power and that of his Minster, who have the majority in Parliament, to ensure that this judgmental Motion is passed, without evidence, judge or jury. This further likens Parliament to the Star Chamber rather than to what it is, the Legislature. Will the Speaker do anything to protect against what, to me, smacks of abuse?
If this is the manner in which the Chief Minister treats and deals with an MP, who is an elected representative of the people of Gibraltar. If this is the manner in which the Chief Minister treats and deals with the Leader of the Opposition. What hope has a mere mortal if he incurs the wrath of the Chief Minister? I may find out ...
Dear Robert
ReplyDeleteHis Excellency the Chief Minister gave the Leader of the Opposition exactly what he deserved. Too often do we see the Leader of the Opposition hurling insults at the Chief Minister and then complaining about the replies given by the CM. Robert...those who live in glass houses should not throw stones!
Anonymous at 23:58
ReplyDeleteYou miss the point of the article.
Glass houses have a tendency to surround most people in the public eye especially governments that have been in power for 16 years ...
Dear Robert, que va a quere flores, or donations to your favourite charity?
ReplyDeleteanon @ 23:58 - EXCELLENCY? Wasn't he His Majesty last month, ahora ke es excellency?
Robert I completely agree with you ..We have witnessed a most un edifying spectacle a CM who is completely out of control .He simply should not have been allowed to get away with it ,the speaker clearly has little authority or control . There is absolutely no justification for CM's disrespectful ill-mannered behaviour..It was a shameful display typical of a common low grade play ground bully.Perhaps it is now that he realises the end is nigh that he betrays his true character..
ReplyDeleteAgreed Robert.
ReplyDeleteI imagine Peter’s ranting and ravings only succeeded in bolstering and rallying those who were already firmly on his side of the political divide whilst pushing away those undecided voters who were reluctant to vote for the GSD this time round on the basis of what the GSD regime and specifically his style and manner of leadership has devolved into during this last electoral term.
He may have had legitimate gripes, he may have passionately believed in what he was saying (and I actually agreed with parts of what he had been saying) but as a Gibraltarian I felt the way he conducted himself during the speech was nothing short of embarrassing.
Indeed, if he’s able to direct such a visceral barrage against the leader of the opposition what hope do us mere mortals have against him? It certainly lends credence to some of the stories one hears...
I believe that one of the main reasons that no one has made any mention of the fact that he hasn’t yet revealed to Robert the contents of the letter he sent to the FSC concerning Robert outside of Llanito World is because one wouldn’t be able to hide safely behind the shield of anonymity. Who would want to be subjected to such a scathing barrage of insults and abuse for daring to voice their opinion?
Fabian was finally given an opportunity to put some of the rumours pertaining to his cases to rest, specifically the reason for why he had yet to disclose any information on what had transpired. It appears that he now has the issue of the podcast to deal with, it’ll be interesting to see how that unfolds.
GREAT article RV and Good reply to anon 23:58.
ReplyDeleteYou certainly made me smile with that one :) LOL
K
It appears to me that the truth hurts. I am happy CM stated clearly what many of us think about the leader of the opposition. It concerns me that people seek to critisize CM for being direct, for the benefit of Gibraltarians, who need to be fully aware of the character of Picardo. The sad thing is people are crtisizing CM for passing on this message and not THINKING about the content of what he said.
ReplyDeleteSo many in Gib just keep pulling the wool over their own eyes. This will only take to dark places.
anon@7:42, I don't think you can have "MANY in Gib just keep pulling the wool over their own eyes" and then "what MANY of us think about the leader of the opposition". Decide!
ReplyDeleteI think you'll find SOME agree with your assessment but MANY agree with Robert's!
Anon@07:42
ReplyDeleteI agree and what is more, since it seems to be the proverb season, I would say to Mr Picardo "if you live by the sword you die by the sword".
Nothing but a robust counter attack by Mr Picardo to the CM's speech, whether we agree or disagree with the way it was delivered, will give Mr Picardo any credibility as a politician.
Good article, Robert, and I totally agree with you. I have often been embarrassed at the tone and language used by the CM, but yesterday I just felt thoroughly ashamed. This is not what we expect or want from our Parliament or Parliamentarians.
ReplyDeleteThis was not a leader of the community showing respect for the institution he was addressing but rather one totally out of control, venting his anger in a manner that certainly does not enhance the image of our Parliament.I, too, was amazed that the Speaker allowed this.
How sad for Gibraltar that our Chief Minister, who we should all respect as our elected leader, regardless of political preference, is bringing Politics to this degrading level!
A would rather a thousand years of Caruana as CM than a day of Paicardo at the helm!
ReplyDeleteAnon 8.55. Please don't be so pedantic. The double use of the word 'many' does not render either statement invalid or contradictory.
ReplyDeleteAfter this week's events in Parliament many more will now be confirmed in the view that the best way to impose some sort of order on our political class is to vote in blank. Gibraltarian politics needs a radical restructure and the best way to get the politicians to realise this is to give the political class a vote of no confidence i.e. by returning blank ballot papers. I recommend to those considering this option should read José Saramago's novel "Seeing" (Ensaio sobre a Lucidez) which imagines the consequences of such a revolt on a complacent and arrogant political establishment. I believe that in the 2006 referendum on the new Constitution which was supported by the all the "great and the good" in the GSD, the Alliance and the PDP the electorate gave clear notice of its annoyance. It will be recalled 4,798 did not vote and 4,574 voted against i.e.a a total of 9,372 voters refused to endorse the new constitution against 7,299 who voted for it.
ReplyDeletea thousand years of a political party? The thousand-year reich?
ReplyDeleteAnon @ 15:30, are you serious? A thousand years of a single political leader? Do you believe He is Eternal? (Morocco has abandoned the former sacred attributes of its head of state). And then, how wrong can the US be about a two-term limit?
ReplyDeleteAnon at 07:42 : never heard of anyone pulling the wool over THEIR OWN eyes, please explain.
ReplyDeleteRobert, great observations. You quote from Erskine May, showing that the CM used "Unparliamentary Language" in his address on the Leader of the Opposition. Here is the definition of Unparliamentary Language from Abraham and Hawtrey's "Parliamentary Dictionary" (another 'Bible' for Parliamentarians): "Unparliamentary Language - Words or expressions which, because they make improper accusations or imputations against a member of (either) House or by reason of their abusive nature, ought not to be used in a debate. The use of such language is a breach of order and, if the member using it does not immediately withdraw the offensive words at the request of the Speaker or chairman, he may be called upon to withdraw from the House or "named". (see Order in the House) (...later) and (where was the Speaker?)
ReplyDeleteanon@15:33 feel free to assume both statements are correct then but perhaps you'll find you're pulling the wool over your eyes too.
ReplyDeleteRobert what a load of convenient toss! It amazes me that you can connect up with this stuff over and above the reality of that, which surrounds why the CM thought it wise to make public the defficiencies and lack of understanding, politically motivated or not, that the leader of the opposition clearly possess. That the CM chooses to deliver his onslaught in the manner that he did is an aside. What is far from an aside and cannot be tolerated is the motivation that leads the opposition leader to grace us with such diatribe. And for this reason FP should be shown for exactly what he is and was shamed for.
ReplyDeleteWhat an embarrasing spectacle the CM gave in palriament this week! Personally, I was so shocked by the method of delivery / language of his argument, that the argument itself has lost the interest it perhaps should have had!
ReplyDeleteAlso shocked that Mr Speaker did not intervene!!!!!!! WTF!!!!!! I kept thinking he would but it was like he just wasn't there!!!! Mr Speaker's FAILURE to intervene AGAIN HIGHLIGHTS the URGENT NEED to look at our systems and people in order to amend accordinlgy and thus introduce controls.
The CMs circus act this week is an embarrasment to Gibraltar, whatever your political affilliation. It has also been the first time (I think) that he HAS PUBLICLY gone all out in the vein of what seems to happen behind closed doors at No6! Previously we have had milder versions of his "wrath"!
The local media picked up on his "wrath", even calling it that, BUT AGIAN FAILED TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS following the storm! Where was Mr Speaker? What our Mr Speaker's powers? What could he have done~? Is this behaviour ACCEPTABLE IN OUR PARLIAMENT!!!! Most of us in the community know the basic of parliament - it would have been good for our Media to ask these questions and discuss the issue! GBC oft cries that they don't have "enough" local news!!!! Do they have to be spoon fed??? I am no journalist, and I have a million questions to ask??? Why do they only ask THE OBVIOUS< and ask the CM and others to simply rephrase what has already been said?? Why don't they dig and delve deeper into a story???
Gibraltar needs to wake up NOW!
Y lo mas preocupante, that many in the Community stand by the CM after this spectacle, without even having the decency to admit that this sort of behaviour in parliament is UNACCEPTABLE!!!!! Da miedo el OBSESSION that many in Gibraltar have with the CM!
Gibraltar is a small place where the responsibility of leading must be overwhelming. I think we should not be so quick to critisize without real knowledge of what it must be like to spend 16 at the front - being constantly critisized, harrassed, observed etc. Such public scrutiny must be unbearable. Even a trip to Morrissons or La Caleta has made people gossip. Add to that the stress of the job and the absolute commitment (to us the electorate) it requires.
ReplyDeleteCaruana is entitled to express his opinion on Picardo with passion in a public forum for the greater benefit of gibraltarians. It surprises me that some have been so shocked by his directness and bluntness which I consider a good thing. Let's be honest here Picardo has referred to Caruana in many unsavoury ways. Please don't feign hyper-sensitivity now Mr P.
Its easy to take the moral highground and sound offended by Caruana's statement but I would rather the truth be told about Mr P regardless of who gets offended!
Also the failings of the Speaker only reflect on him and not on the CM or anyone else present. One is responsible for one's actions (and inactions) and not those of others.
Great blog Bob! Who watches the watcher? What recourse do the people have to protect Parliament from a Speaker who does not intervene?
ReplyDeleteHas no one ever listened to public debate between politicians in other Houses of Parliament?? They hardly mince their words.
ReplyDeleteI agree with anon 20.32, who begins with "Robert what a load of convenient toss!".
ReplyDeleteAlthough I follow your blog, I am sometimes concerned by the focus of your arguments. You are not as objective as I had thought or hoped you might be. I respect your crusade to see the system improved and indeed support you, but fear that your vision is tainted due to personal reasons. For the sake of your argument please remain objective.
Just for your info Robert.
When the GSD lose the next election we will see whether Caruana and holiday still have the same bravado.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 21:38
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 20:32 happens to be a potential candidate for the GSD ... do not ask me how I know!
I have never pretended to be objective. I give MY opinion on issues. In this piece I have been careful to opine on behaviour not on the substance of the issues in debate. So please answer to that and perhaps you can explain what personal reasons you allude to. This is an accusation without substance or evidence and no it is not just for my info ... you make accusations so support them with argument at least even of you cannot with evidence.
The icing on the cake with Roberts last attempt at supposedly being impartial and objective, is that he chooses to attack style over substance and then conveniently covers all bases with the same old democratic deficiencies. Of course there is absolutely nothing to account for in relation to Picardins perception and delivery on the economy, the debt, social insurance contributions, the budget surplus, taxes for he is just so astute and on the ball, with such accurate information at his fingertips and his humility and care for thecrst kf us mere mortals. He gives us all such peace of mind. PLC
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt that Robert (in his wisdom and crusade for accountability and transparency) will soon be putting his fingers to keyboard and discuss the total lack of credibility that our new opposition leader has displayed in the past few weeks. Otherwise I am afraid it will only be index fingers that preside over this blog, other than Special K and the crew, that is..:)
Anonymous at 22:19
ReplyDeleteI have never advocated that I am impartial or objective ... I have always said that I express MY opinion ...
So Robert, because 20:32 is a supposed GSD candidate, you'automatically suggest that its crap? Your objectivity and impartiality knows no boundries. And there was me thinking that there were some GSD candidates you might vote for.
ReplyDeleteSo Robert is neither impartial nor objective. This would suggest that his opinion carries agenda and judging by the lack of any intent to address any of the content in Caruanas repost on Wed it would be fair to suggest that he is indeed leaning, regardless of evidence or the search of balance in this blog.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 22:23
ReplyDeleteI have said nothing ever to anyone about anything said being crap and certainly not to anonymous at 20:32. I have sated a fact and each one can draw his/her own conclusion. I repeat I give MY opinion never advocating its objectivity or impartiality. It is of necessary partially MY opinion.
I will certainly vote for Danny Feetham and I will tell you why also (something that you do not do when judging me in the inimitable GSD style that does your party no favours). I will vote for Danny because he has undertaken his duties as Minister for Justice with independence and diligence, without party partiality. He has done has job as a parliamentarian with an eye to duty and benefit to people at large. He has taken a personal interest in rehabilitating ex-convicts and finding them jobs. he has understood what is the obligation, duty and responsibility of a legislator when he promoted the sexual equalisation laws, to be proved right by the Supreme Court.
So yes ... I will vote for individuals in the GSD who have POSITIVELY proved themselves but not for bitter and negative self-interested individuals.
Oh dear Robert, perhaps you have incurred the wrath of the CM already and he seems to have sent the advanced party!
ReplyDeleteIgnore them, everybody else does, they are just desperate just like their leader!
Anonymous at 22:32
ReplyDeleteWhat abject nonsense ... do you have an intellect?
Am I obliged to write about what I do not wish to write about? Is this a basis for judging me?
What a weird world you live in ...
Anonymous at 22:36
ReplyDeleteIt has come to my ears tonight that access to this site has been blocked on all Civil Service computers. If any public servant has had difficulty accessing this site from his work computer I would like to hear from him anonymously.
looks like you're in trouble now, Robert y la 'pleva del pish' is out to get you tonight!
ReplyDeletejudging from the onslought by the GSD literati, what you write about must be right! wena por tene un par de c. o. jones Robert. yo como he sufrido a las manos del Caruina se lo que da. he'll stop at nothing, no matter what or how much it costs!
ReplyDeleteLWRV @22:37. Give me a break! You have always taken pride on your middle ground non-partisan approach which has been taken to task so many times. The point being made here is that you choose to address style in Parliament over what is unquestionably a crucial issue, that being the credibility, good character, intellect (economic or other) of the leader of the opposition. But you choose to conveniently hide behind what you are obliged to - handy that.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 22:57
ReplyDeleteWhen where and how? Quote from anything I have written please ... including perhaps from what was published on the front page of 7 Days newspaper last week perhaps ...
Tu que ta en serio?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 23:07
ReplyDeleteYo? Siempre :)
Robert well spoken!
ReplyDeletePity w'e dont see more Ministers like Mr. Feetham working hard for the Gibraltarians, and not with hidden agendas!
That is a precious commodity in today's Government!
Anon y Mouse
Hi Robert - I couldn't agree with you more. The Chief Minister has gone too far but that in itself has to be expected from someone who in my view sees himself as the only person capable of holding this office. And as he sees himself as the perfect candidate for this office, no one can measure up in his eyes. What is actually worse in my mind is that the Speaker of our Parliament actually let him get away with it and seems to have allowed him to put a motion to the house that is frankly undemocratic. Is the Speaker fit to hold this office? If he is returned for another 4 years how much further will he go in transforming the office of Chief Minister to that of the Emperor of Gibraltar? This prospect is frankly frightening but certainly very possible.
ReplyDeleteNever in my life did i think I would vote GSLP but the Chief Minister has lost it and must be removed!! PEOPLE if we believe in democracy we must vote GSLP or PDP......
ReplyDeleteThe man and his cronies get more arrogant and unbearable with each election. He must go!
He must go and take the Speaker with him!
ReplyDeleteL.E.F. says,
ReplyDeleteWas not the appointment of the current speaker of the house controversial in that he was handpicked by the GSD without the full consent of Parliamen?
Was not the previous speaker more or less forced to retire for his clashes with Mr Caruana.?
This is another example of the democratic deficit we have witnessed under this GSD Government.
The speaker should be voted in with at least a 75% approval of Parliament. The speaker should preferably enjoy the full confidence of all Parliament when sworn in.
What does not seem right or transparent is that the speaker is also a supporter and member of one of the teams he has to referee.
Reforms and changes are needed for us to evolve as a people. Enough of insults and divisions. 2 wrongs never make a right.
were anyone occupying the office of Speaker to be biased, in Gibraltar, all is not lost. In a sovereign Parliament it is most important that the Speaker act impartially, there is barely recourse against his bias. Our parliament is not Sovereign, there is an authority in the Constitution above our Parliament, whether our political parties (which ALL supported our non-democratic Constitution) like to admit it or not. Consequently bias by the Speaker is allowed for by the power of the British Government to dissolve our Parliament, to introduce legislation changing the Speaker, or repeal the legislation which appointed him, all under the "good governance" discretion which the UK reserved for itself over and above our decisions as a people.
ReplyDeleteLet's remember our present 2006 Constitution was agreed to by ALL THREE political parties, which pay what is nothing but lip service to democracy, where our own affairs are concerned. Now it seems that's just as well!
I think Joe Holliday is a much better politician and has shown much solidarity with the average person than any other GSD minister.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @01.23
ReplyDeleteAre you SERIOUS?
The only solidarity Joe Holliday has shown is with ...... (reminds me of that Jessie Jay song)
Please dont be naive. Holliday is doing VERY well, that i agree with you. But in the sense of how we want our politicians to behave.
Open your eyes darling.
I.No. Sucker
Anon @01.23
ReplyDeleteYou should get a summer placement at the port authority. Maybe you could make your decision after that?
Robert@22:41
ReplyDeleteThis is not the only site that should be blocked on Civil Service computers. I would expect all non work related sites to be blocked as well.
Anonymous at 09:47
ReplyDeleteI agree but if it is a very selective censoring of this site alone, what then? Is there a valid justification for such political censorship in a democracy?
maybe the '7 days' should also be removed from all government waiting rooms too
ReplyDeleteI see the GSLP crew up back.
ReplyDeleteTo question the business practices and ethics of any business could be defamation so evidence justifying any matter needs to be made available. This blog does not enjoy the privileges enjoyed in Parliament that allows certain matters to be said there but not outside. This is another reason why the Speaker needs to control what is said.
ReplyDeleteSo my apologies to those who have submitted comments about the rumoured business practices and ethics of ministers. I am afraid I cannot publish these.
the irony of life, or libel for that matter, untruths don't need evidence when what they say is complimentary!
ReplyDeleteRobert@09:53
ReplyDeleteI have noticed that nobody has yet confirmed the blocking of this site specifically on Civil Service computers. If the CM has given express instructions to block this site would he not be drawing attention to it thereby arousing interest? I find that hard to believe.
Anonymous at 11:14
ReplyDeleteI agree.
it would be appropriate if we had civil servants setting the record straight when comments from either Robert or the rest of the contributors to this blog, get something wrong about the workings of the civil service.
ReplyDeleteIn the past we have sometimes been 'set straight' by GSD HQ instead.
To the person who made the pro holliday comment. Ese si que se va carga el GSD.
ReplyDeleteRob, you said: "It has come to my ears tonight that access to this site has been blocked on all Civil Service computers. If any public servant has had difficulty accessing this site from his work computer I would like to hear from him anonymously." It is not possible to block from all computers; only those that are plugged in to the Govt's intranet and even then there are various levels of access with the most senior civil servants having more or less unrestricted access. Clearly the aim is to encourage civil servants to spend less time facebooking - and now also llanitoworlding, it seems - and more time working, which is what they're paid to do. Then of course there are the very many hours wasted chatting to close relatives which causes great disruption to the work of Government with incessant incoming private telephone calls from close relatives. Not even attempting to to tackle this insidious problem was a glaring omission in Caruana's civil service blueprint for reform, which is a shame because it is the one thing that could really improve the efficiency of the civil service.
ReplyDeleteGianni
ReplyDeleteThank you for the explanatipn. The same arguments apply to thr 7 Days, Vox, Chronicle, Panorama etc.
However, it is not inconceivable that Llanito World may have been added to the list of popular websites such as Facebook, Twitter and MSN that are blocked for those more junior civil servants who are confined to operating within the Govt's intranet and therefore have restricted internet access. Website restrictions are imposed by the IT & Logistics Department on instruction from No. 6. Just as well those restrictions are in place - bad enough with all the time spent on private phone calls.
ReplyDeleteRobert
ReplyDeleteI was very impressed with Mr Keith Azopardi's response to the Budget Speech as published in yesterday's Chronicle. It was well argued with alternative well thought out proposals. Whether I agree or disagree with his arguments is irrelevant, it was a well presented, valid, moderated analysis and certainly worth considering.
I wonder when Mr Picardo is going to release a robust response to the CM's attack. Whatever the contributors to this blog may say nothing but a strong public counter attack will retrieve his credibility as a party leader.
We in Gibraltar have fallen into the unfortunate habit of complaining - instead of focussing on appreciating the benefits of living here. We must be more discerning surely. As you think so you become.
ReplyDeleteWe complain about the civil service and their 'cushy' numbers and then when measures are taken to ensure that they do not waste time on the computer on facebook, LW etc instead of working, we once again complain. OMG!!!
Obviously the opposition promotes this disgruntled discontent among us. This is wrong. I refuse to be scaremongered or manipulated by those who manipulate realities to suit their own ends. Please discern.
RV@12:47
ReplyDeleteMuch as I try I can not find the connection between Gianni's explanation and 7Days, Vox, Chronicle, Panorama etc. Am I missing something?
Gianni@13:09
ReplyDeleteWhat you have explained about access to popular websites by Civil Servants confirmed my gut feeling when Robert mentioned the word in his ear about the blocking of this site. Thanks.
Unfortunately, the personal calls issue is not exclusive to the Civil Service, it is endemic in the private sector as well. Furthermore, I can assure you that it is not restricted to "gianis" either. Thanks for your clarification of the issue.
For all those of you who are not convinced by either party....
ReplyDeleteVOTE BLANK!!!!
LETS MAKE A 'VOTE BLANK CAMPAIGN'.....
ITS THE ONLY WAY TO SHOW GIBRALTAR WE ARE DISSATISFIED...
Voting for the 'lesser of two evils' is NOT GOOD ENOUGH!
Anonymous at 14:23
ReplyDeleteWhat I am saying is that a selective blocking of Llanito World without blocking the other press would smack of censorship.
All blogs, shopping sites, social networking sites are blocked on Government department computers.
ReplyDeleteI would dearly like to agree with anon at 13.14 who extols the PDP's comments on the budget because I think that Gibraltar needs a change from the likes of Caruana and Picardo but the PDP's "reaction to the budget" must be one of the most unimaginative things ever written, even more so than the time table for bus routes. I like Keith Azopardi but he has made a veritable vice of "moderation". It would be hard to find any where in the world such a boring approach to politics. He should give more responsibility to Nicky Cruz who comes across much better. If they are not careful the PDP could be the first party that bores itself to death.
ReplyDeleteThe PDP most certainly has its uses. It is of course very well known and it has been reported in the Lancet that for some time now insomniacs have used the speeches of the Leader as a cure. Now a recently married friend tells me that he is able to dampen his ardour for his buxom young wife by thinking of PDP policies which have a salutary depressive effect and avoids premature you know what.
ReplyDeletePaul
ReplyDeleteThank you, noted and fully accepted, although I do not understand for an IT perspective how "all" blogs can be blocked.
I agree with 21.04 but beware of a reported side effect which is that PDP broadcasts have been known to scare very young children.
ReplyDeleteboring? and yet once he deputised Caruana! What a vindictive lot you are!
ReplyDeleteIts not about vindictive!
ReplyDeleteThe problem here is, no-one knows who anyone really is anymore. The pool of high quality or potentially high quality politicians is well and truly exhausted, recycled and rehoused x 100.
We need to scrap and start again, taking the 'few good men' with us... and trust me there are few. On that we might be able to build something 'good'!
Right now and at the very top, priorities are upside down... Huge shake needed.
And this does not at all mean the GSLP is the solution!
So you post a comment ridiculing the leader of a relatively new and upcoming party, calling him boring, when in all fairness, he is the same person today that he was at 14, at 24, and at 34 years of age including the many years he spent as part of the lineup of the GSD, and you don't think you are being unfair to the man?
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should consider why few people want to take the plunge into politics. Could it possibly have something to do with not wanting to be ridiculed and vilified by those whom they happen to disagree with?
Instead of making fun of him, perhaps you should attempt to engage him in serious and mature debate. Te dejava en paniales, that's for sure and maybe then you would be the boring one!
I am interested in the analysis made by Anon 00.25. Again the govt has bribed the voters but this time not with the voters' own money but with the voters' debt. The electors are too generous, they politely listens to propagandist and ambitious leaders and mediocre candidates. Few MPs should hold office.
ReplyDeleteAnon at 23.41 says that Keith deputised for Caruana but since going out on his own Keith has come up with no new ideas. His political value was at Peter's coat tails. Of the budget I say it is funded by debt which people still at school are going to be lumbered with; every one with an ounce of intelligence knows that.
Anonymous at 10:02
ReplyDeleteI do not consider that opining that someone in politics is unable to excite interest due to lack of imagination, over moderation and boring is "ridiculing" them.
Anon@21:04
ReplyDeleteTell your friend with the buxom wife to try reading "Economics for Dummies" before he goes to bed. It works a treat, or so I've been told.
If I were he I would put in the order in as soon as possible as, it appears, demand has increased unexpectedly since the 4th July. It's got pictures in it as well which makes it easier to understand.
By rights the PDP should be having a field day as the GSD and the Alliance have both dropped their masks and shown their ugliest faces. Supporters must ask themselves why the PDP has made no impact. The PDP has made a big mistake by using "moderation" as its ideology and "newness" as a slogan because they come across as weak and unimaginative. Unfortunately for the PDP the worst crime that a politician can commit, worse than corruption and even stupidity is to come across as boring. I must admit that I cannot remember any of Mr. Azopardi's debates but I can imagine that he always goes for the middle ground and exudes moderation. Platitudes, sir are no substitute for the vigorous political debate that all progressive societies need.
ReplyDeleteAnon@10:14
ReplyDeleteThere you go, you are making a statement straight out of the UK sensationalist press when you say "debt which people still at school are going to be lumbered with". You seem to ignore the £28.3m Budget Surplus and the consistent growth (6.5% for 09/10) of our economy. The point is that our debt is quite manageable even after tax cuts.
I am no Strauss-Kahn but if there really is a budget surplus of £28.3 m why are government offices being mortgaged? Or answer this, if the budget surplus is ONLY £28.3 m why is more than 1/2 (£17 m) being used to shore up the Mid town development to the benefit of a private developer at a time when the World Trade Centre will ensure that there is more than enough supply of offices for the foreseeable future? Financial advisers are obliged to tell clients that past performance is no guarantee for future performance. If the GSD zombies were regulated by the FSC they would have their licenses suspended for referring to "consistent growth" :)
ReplyDeletewhy are we funding the mid-town development at all!
ReplyDeleteThe question why are we funding the mid-town development at all? is one that the GSD supporters who contribute to this blog must answer. If they do not it would mean that only stupid people support the GSD or that GSD supporters put loyalty to Caruana above loyalty to gibraltar or what they cringeingly call Gibraltar PLC :(
ReplyDeleteEverywhere we look, there is another building going up, blocking the view of the sea, sun and sky. If the mid-town developement goes ahead, the legacy of the GSD will end up being 'trampa y sombra'!
ReplyDeleteI always thought PLC meant Por La Cara! :)
ReplyDeleteAnon@11:59
ReplyDeleteI do not think that it is up to the GSD supporters to justify the mid-town development. If it's not too much effort take a look at the Budget Speech in the Government website.
Just reading this blog has convinced me that it is time to put a stop to the abuse of Gibraltar by politicians and that the only way to do this is to VOTE BLANK. why should we vote for the people who put their names on party slates if we know that they are no good? That is not democracy it is giving in to blackmail.
ReplyDeleteAnon@13:00
ReplyDeleteI do not understand the term "abuse of Gibraltar". Who do you think has put his/her name on a party slate and you consider to be no good. If democracy is what you want, go on, let's discuss.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Parliament or the Star Chamber?":
ReplyDeleteAnon@11:41
I shall make it simple for you. If you earn £30,000 per annum could you not take out a mortgage of £75,000? The monthly payments come out of excess income and the flat becomes an asset to be enjoyed immediately. Alternatively, you could commit/save £30,000 and pay it off in two and a half years. Now that would not be very clever, would it?
Your assumption that the WTC will provide all the office space that we shall need in the foreseeable future is not consistent with the expected demand that should ensure the projected 5% growth of the economy,hence, mid-town.
Otra vez con el stupid suggestion of voting blank. What is that going to achieve? The statistics will show the turnout without anyone having to waste their time casting a blank vote.
ReplyDeleteSomeone IS going to be elected whether you cast a blank vote or not.
If that's the best C Gomez can come up with anda y quedate en tu casa.
CORTA YA
So we have to vote even of we do not like who we are voting for. What a backward mentality some people have! The logical thing to do if you don't like how things are going is not to vote or to vote in blank. Anything else is a farse.
ReplyDeleteLike it or not we have to vote in a Government and an Opposition for Gibraltar to function, and we have to choose from those who put their names forward, so all those who suggest voting blank due to the poor choice available should put their money where their mouths are and present themselves for election, and let the democratic process speak for itself.
ReplyDeleteREVOLUTION NOW: That is what you have been brain washed to believe that if you do not vote civilization as we know it will collapse. What a joke! Have a bit of imagination and cojones and put that to the test. You will see that if the next government is elected on a 30 or 40% showing the arrogance of the politicians will disappear and we will start having proper governance in Gibraltar. Gomez is right.
ReplyDeletebut the government will be voted in, and for 4 years, and whether you or I or 60-70% like it or not, there is nothing we can do about it and the government's coffers full of our income tax contributions are theirs for taking!
ReplyDeletey ustede mucho habla pa na!
"Paul said...
ReplyDeleteAll blogs, shopping sites, social networking sites are blocked on Government department computers." This is not quite correct. There are different levels of access for those are plugged in to the Government's intranet, depending on the level of seniority. Certain senior officials have unrestricted internet - not intranet - access. I suspect blogs can be monitored by senior officials, even if their computers are wired within the intranet, due to their relatively unrestricted level of access.
Tyrone Duarte says:
ReplyDeleteStar Chamber indeed! And a level of vitriol from the CM more associated with Kristalnacht. Deeply embarrasing for a Gibraltarian abroad.
The problem is that a sector of our community does indeed believe that they have the God given right to be prosecution, judge, jury and executioner. Que pena.