If you had to try to interpret the current political landscape you would soon notice that politics has now become more complex and less straight forward.  Previously parties represented an ideology and it was an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ contest.  In a way it was easy to fit, either because of one’s family background or else because ‘you’ assent into the values and the cause represented by that respective party.   The Left, the Right all had economic models and a value system that one can clearly choose to subscribe to.

Now it has all changed. 

This has been coming for some time. 

Fenech Adami knew that this was going to happen and in fact his success amongst other could be attributed to the fact that he created a coalition of social backgrounds.  Joseph Muscat continued to strengthen this model with the ‘moviment tal-progressivi u moderati’. 

This has turned everything topsy-turvy transforming the political scenario into a very complex phenomenon because a political party now represents a spectrum of ideas (or the absence thereof) rather than ideologies.  People are emancipated and know what they want for themselves.  The party has become a gizmo, discretionary but not indispensable   Political parties are consequently trying to attract people in their midst by promising an improved family economy and better jobs.  Give people the reassurance that they can have a holiday every year, enough money for a meal on a Saturday night, enough cash to fix the house or to go on a family vacation and the needs are automatically met - and people are content. 

As a matter of fact, the current Government is generating that reassurance; there are more jobs than we can call for, more work opportunities and additional money to spend.  If the Government keeps reinventing itself, engenders the economy, if money keeps seeping into the family economy than people will more likely keep on voting for this Government. This in itself will soon ‘trash’ the idea that a Government has a ten-year cycle. 

And then there is leadership. 

It is a known fact that elections for Party Leaders have always been a bit scruffy and this time round, when it comes to the election for the Nationalist Party Leader, it’s no exception.  I believe that in more ways than one this is a natural situation especially with a party that is reeling from such a disastrous election result. Enriched party structures and better financial conditions are not enough to iron out the turbulence and uneasiness.  Staunch party supporters want to win and they will push and press on anyone who can lead them to this objective.   

But that is not all. 

A political party needs the gift of the gap, a communicator that can float out the ideas, the initiatives that package the vision of the Party.  If you do not have that you might as well pack up.  I will not go into the merits of how Dr Simon Busuttil fared in this task, nor will I indicate my preference between Delia and Said.  I believe that the Nationalist Party tesserati need to sit serenely and think who is best placed placed to lead the troops knowing well enough that communicating a message is fundamental.

We all agree that having a solid Opposition will counterbalance the Government, it is good for the Opposition, respectable for the Government and above all virtuous for the people. 

So if I had anything to say to the Nationalist Party it would be to have less drama and more discussion, less theatrics and more argumentation.  This Party that brought the term ‘dialogue’ in our political backcloth deserves better conduct from its leaders (MPs and people directly involved in the Party structures).  Putting forward an idea is fine, showing preference to one candidate over another is perfectly legitimate but mudslinging and shit-stirring is ludicrous, uncalled for and distressing.