From Mr V.H. Cauchi

Having seen the intensive electoral campaign of both major political parties, it can be very interesting to analyse how the two parties nearly finished on the same level, with only a 0.5 per cent margin between them, when the party in government had more disadvantages than advantages for winning the election, while the party in opposition had more advantages than disadvantages – and yet the former won the 8 March election.

Why?

PN disadvantages/MLP advantages

The last 20 years in

government

Very difficult to win a third election in succession

The functioning of Mepa

Allegations of corruption

The small political parties

The hunters

The Sliema area building development protest

The disgruntled and non-voting

Percentagewise, fewer

voters at the polls than in previous elections

The introduction of the euro currency

MLP disadvantages/PN advantages

The Gonzi factor

The persistent allegations about Mater Dei Hospital

The interpretation of the state of the economy even with reducing unemployment and other indicators

The anti-EU elements

The referendum result and funds coming from the EU

The continuous and excessive attacks on all government projects without distinction

The Electoral Programme with misprints and no

obvious adequate substance

The excessive negativism from all quarters but no solutions.

The above advantages and disadvantages for both parties can be specified as factual and objective and I leave the reader to identify which is which.

Further to the above realities, there was another common factor to both parties and that was “credibility”, which actually swung the balance to the winning side. This is a very sensitive factor when dealing with public opinion and if one party tries, by whatever means and with no limits, to damage the credibility of the other party, it will boomerang and have the opposite effect, especially in cases where the real truth clearly shows otherwise.

The people still remember and condemn what happened during the 1970s and 1980s. It is true that the Labour Party under Dr Sant was cleaned of the “street violence” so common during campaigns in those days, but it can be understood that violence has now shifted to facts. We are witnessing a “facts violence”, demonstrated by the absolute negativism in every interview and by the media creating another scandal that could easily have turned the tide. It is easy to conclude that that was the price that had to be paid when faced with losing three consecutive elections. The old saying still goes: you can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Every good citizen is anxious that the two major political parties will evaluate their position after the 8 March vote and try to better understand what the people said. We as a nation look forward politically to seeing further progress in every sector that affects our everyday life.

V.H. Cauchi

Victoria