Azopardi suffering from a Political Identity Crisis

By Leo Olivero

With Christmas just days away... the aftermath of the GSD leadership saga still lingers on especially with some people who continue to approach Panorama on the issue. 

Amidst all the internal conflict surrounding the GSD leadership fiasco, it appears it has now entered a stage of confusion; particularly after Keith Azopardi made attempts last week to publicly define his new party position when speaking to other elements of the local media.

It appears Azopardi is clearly finding it difficult to logically define his political role and position within the context of the local political framework. His attempts so far have led to the present confusion with members of his own party, particularly those who didn’t vote for him and the majority I suspect who did not vote at all!

This is an uncommon situation, and so close to Christmas. A political story which again triggered my interest, but only on one half of the current, negatively unique, GSD leadership structure. In fact on the unofficial - not acknowledged - leader of the party! Who is already doing a very good unconvincing job in not winning over the many despondent and now confused party members!

This is How I See the Situation:

<b>Azopardi Overcome By Political Identity Crisis</b>

Trying to put Keith Azopardi current leadership thoughts into contents is not that difficult. After listening to some of his interviews and other related comments he posted on social media... I really believe he is ‘Suffering or is Overcome By A Political Identity Crisis’

Azopardi does not come across as being too sure what to call himself or his current personal political standing. Certainly he was totally unconvincing last week when he appeared on the TV Viewpoint Programme saying he was the ‘De Facto leader of the Opposition’ and Elliot Philips the GSD Parliamentary Leader. Difficult to understand why Mr Azopardi should now want to describe his role as leader of the opposition using a Latin expression, which in my dictionary is defined as ‘unofficial customs that are widely accepted’ which is not the case at all! A ‘de facto leader of the opposition is neither a standard (formal or informal) that has ever achieved a dominant or recognised political position by tradition, in any political party I have known or heard of?

Using the term ‘de facto’ may sound important, but broken down means little in the context of determining who actually is the leader the opposition. The reality is that the official leader of the opposition is Elliot Philips. His deputy should Philips need one, would be any of the four other GSD MPs in parliament...Azopardi is not even in that pecking order because he is not an elected member of the House!