Since EU membership a perceptible change can be observed in voter trends; a steady increase in the MLP and AD vote and a steady decline in the PN vote. This phenomenon was evident in the 2004 EP elections. The MLP obtained three out of five seats, and AD’s only candidate obtained nearly 10 per cent of the first count votes. At local level an increase was also observed in the MLP vote, a steady decline of the PN vote, and a fluctuation in the AD vote, with a sizable increase from 2006 in certain localities including Sliema and Swieqi (10 per cent)* and Munxar (Gozo) (12 per cent). Voter trends at local and regional levels do not necessarily reflect performance at national level. In Malta the situation is further complicated by a low turnout in certain localities because AD and PN did not field candidates in all the districts in the local council elections, which resulted in a win of 53 per cent for the MLP in the last local council elections. However, political models developed to estimate party support based on the performance of parties at local level have often proved to be correct. The major parties also recognise this possibility and the 2007 electoral changes cater for a scenario where neither party obtains an absolute majority. This is also borne out by the current electoral polls, which place the MLP ahead, but still trailing an absolute majority.

The sluggish support for the two major parties can be explained by a number of factors. The PN has been in government for 20 years, barring a two-year interlude between 1996 and 1998. Parties of government of long tenure, even the best of them, tend to suffer from inertia and exhaustion. They run out of ideas, and their energy to rule is depleted. At the same time this concentration of power for long periods breeds arrogance and corruption. These parties consequently also lose touch with their grass roots electorate. The MLP on the other hand is plagued by other problems, foremost being the unknown factor. In Opposition for 20 years, its ability to deliver is questioned. This condition is heightened by the short tenure of its previous government, the recent indisposition of its present leader, and the party’s stance on the EU. The MLP has made clear its support for Europe but its constant push to reassess the relationship, however well meaning, creates doubts in the minds of the electorate. Finally, both parties have been plagued by a spurt of defections, and the consequent loss of legitimacy.

Both parties best stand to increase their chances of success at the polls, by forming a pre-election coalition. Indeed, according to Gamsons’s law, “As soon as parties commit to enter government together, each party’s campaigning effort produces not just the private good of seats won for that particular party, but also the public good of an increased probability of a coalitional majority.” Many also argue that coalitions prior to election are more democratic in that the electorate is given the opportunity to vote for the coalition. Rather than voting for a party that may subsequently form a coalition which one may not support. Locally, AD is a party of the centre, with its heart on the left supporting the strengthening of social policy, and its mind on the right supporting a liberal economy and the free market. It is also the pivotal party within the party system. Consequently it can plausibly form a coalition with either the MLP or the PN while retaining its core beliefs. Therefore if one of the major parties forms a pact with AD prior to the election, it ascertains that it will not support the alternative party post election.

For either of the big parties, coalition with AD would mean pulling them towards the centre thus reinforcing their image of catch-all parties, and helping them to throw out a wider net to attract the electorate across the social divide. The coalition parties could also publicly announce a joint platform. This would necessitate greater focus and credibility on core issues that are of central concern to the voter. These include such issues as the right of divorce, generally considered a human rights, and a truly sustainable economy where there is: proper cognisance of environmental policy, the safeguarding of our countryside and historical heritage, other forms of energy outlets that are less harmful to the localities where energy plants are sited, and a proper revamping of MEPA. A coalition would help the big parties gain in terms of ideological content. The war cry of both in the present election campaign has been the maligning of the other. By implication, do not vote for me consequent of what I can offer, but consequent of what the other party cannot offer. A campaign that panders to the lowest common denominator, resurrecting a politics of fear based on the “rubbishing” of one’s opponents. However, a coalition with its emphasis on compromise in issue politics should raise the level of the pre-election campaign. Many of the key issues find resonance in the manifestos of all three parties. Where they differ is in the will, volition and credibility to implement them. In this regard a coalition would also provide the larger party with individuals who, though lacking government experience at national level, are untouched by rumours of corruption, sleaze or ineptitude, individuals who can bring new ideas, enthusiasm and vibrancy to their electoral campaign.

Coalition parties could also run a joint national list, or a series of joint district lists. AD’s focus on creating a grass roots culture through regional networks, so successful in Gozo where their percentage of the vote has increased substantially, may prove useful in reaching the electorate. These networks may be utilised to direct voters to vote for the coalition partner. This would work to the advantage of the bigger party, since AD could also direct their voters to give their second preference votes, in cases where they do not provide more than one candidate in the district. These votes may prove critical in a country where a few hundred votes either way can determine an election. Their membership of the European Greens, a powerful political grouping in the EP, will also prove a useful resource to the coalition. Finally, a coalition would also raise the legitimacy of both major parties. For AD would ultimately provide some form of insurance to disgruntled PN or MLP supporters, as the case may be. As a staunch supporter of the EU it would strengthen the MLP’S EU credentials. As an environmental party with a clean record it would give some substance to the PN’s promise to clean up its act.

Undoubtedly, a coalition would benefit both the major parties. However, in statistical terms this is far more so in the case of the PN. This party is trailing the MLP, and this is a trend they have been unable to reverse. It may only get worse with the presence of Azzjoni Nazzjonali, which attracts voters from the PN periphery. It is also evident that it is AD that has made inroads into their electorate, harming them most in the districts where they used to perform best, the 9th and 10th. The PN is well aware of this, hence the decision for Lawrence Gonzi to come out on the 9th district in an effort to reverse this trend. A coalition however would gain them the indirect support of AD voters, and would indicate to those voters who have deserted the party that the PN acknowledges and understands their concerns and has given fruitful thought to the solution they are suggesting. In fact, in a 2006 poll on coalition politics, over 60 per cent of the participants indicated that they would prefer to see a coalition between PN and AD.

Thus through a politics of coalition, both the PN’s and AD’s chances at the polls are strengthened, increasing their chances of a larger number of seats to govern with. A healthy parliamentary majority will certainly be required in an environment of threatened global recession, rising food prices, and evident inflationary trends. Finally, a coalition would give voters the change they are calling for, all the more urgent in the case of the PN since it is the party of government. The PN would in one fell swoop be transformed, and be seen as the party, with the support of the AD, that is helping to reinvent the wheel, and bring greater transparency, legitimacy, and representation to the Maltese political system. A January 2008 poll indicated that 40 per cent would vote PN, 41 per cent MLP and 14 per cent AD. In a coalition with AD the PN would then stand a very good chance of winning the election!

*Electoral figures have been rounded up or down to the closest decimal point.