We live in times of change. As each new season grows from the left-overs of the past, there are times when it has to struggle to be born. This notwithstanding, change is the basic law and everything yields its place and goes. The ruling Nationalist government is no exception.

Numbers are far more eloquent than words in conveying the significance and the measure of the veritable political sea change that has been taking place under our noses. Between the general election in 2003 and last year’s Euro-Parliamentary election, almost 50,000 electors turned their back on the PN. It was not a Mediterranean aberration, expressive of a temporary disenchantment. The PN lost the subsequent local government elections some time back and the lost sheep did not return.

Since Dr Gonzi was parachuted into the PN leadership, his party has lost three consecutive elections.

The problem

The problem has to be addressed to find out what happened. The PN has since convened its general council, but it could not be said that a proper, honest-to-goodness inquest was conducted.

Political analysts, media people and academics and, above all, Malta-watchers in Brussels, will be interested in understanding how and why this swing came about, insofar as it reflected the pulse of public opinion and what, precisely, influenced the outlook of the electorate.

Within the Nationalist Party there are many who still want to know what has gone wrong with the management of the party and the quality of its delivery. Within the broader spectrum of the general electorate, there are even more who are beginning to realise that there is a distinct change in wind direction.

With the arrival of Dr Lawrence Gonzi as Prime Minister and PN leader, party insiders are considering that unfolding developments have led to more and more austerity and that this is far from a Little Bo Peep nursery rhyme situation.

Outside observers will, of course, debate the same issue and their input will have a bearing on public opinion in the coming months.

Missed opportunities

There will be many who agree that the ruling party has had the advantage of long years in office, during which it could have recouped from the ravages of a sustained money-no-problem spending spree. It did not.

It had every opportunity to align local conditions with EU requirements in order to achieve a smooth changeover on accession. It did nothing of the sort. When the crash came, it was heavy and was precipitated by other minuses.

Some ministers shot themselves in the foot. Allegations and/or accusations relating to sleaze and worse, coming from the opposition, were not always met with the forcefulness expected by public opinion. Irrespective of whether or not there was substance to these charges, perceptions took shape and these were demonstrably in evidence in first ballot preferences once the ballot boxes were opened. From the revelations about the role of unsavoury criminals in certain activities, from hasty ill-considered decisions to a number of zigzags – all of these presented opportunities for the opposition to gain mileage and for PN support to become tepid.

Bad judgment

The Nationalist Party managers underrated Alfred Sant, who managed to regroup his supporters.

On the part of some PN managers, there was the semblance of an arrogant assumption that Alfred Sant was treading on water by projecting a paper image which was belied by a dark past, suggesting an ominous future. These managers thought they were credible. It has turned out that they were not, notwithstanding the fact that they have since been buttressed by Dr Gonzi.

This does not merely indicate bad judgment. It betrays bad, incorrigible management.

The drip-drip effect of all of this has an unmistakable impact of electoral psychology. The PN change of leadership a year ago provided an opportunity to recoup a good part of the lost ground

But Dr Gonzi fluffed it – some would say spectacularly.

He had an opportunity to bring in new blood – but he retained the same tired team.

He had an opportunity to change course or to trim his sails – but he decided to forge ahead in the Fenech Adami furrow and to press on regardless.

He had an opportunity to mend the PN fences by making some conciliatory gestures to the opposition, but he persisted in demonising Alfred Sant.

Polarisation

Polarisation won him no votes. It agitated the political waters, and the PN boat was not sufficiently sea-worthy It started to take on water as it was tossed by waves of criticism, some of which came from within its ranks.

The Gonzi administration found itself in the eye of the storm after long years of hype and puff and spin that claimed that “the economy was moving in the right direction”. It was forced, willy nilly, to start making amends for the excesses and ineptitude of the capricious Fenech Adami years.

A rush of new tax and other austerity measures took the electorate by storm and this at a time when the economy was suffering from severe fatigue.

The stark reality is that public debt has sky rocketed to a historic level, approximating Lm l.5 billion, and that this situation was driven by escalating public expenditure, outpacing the steep rise in taxation (expressed in total ordinary revenue – from Lm330 million in l990 to Lm824 million in 2004) sank in.

More than anything else, these are the facts of life that have produced the tidal wave which has wrought the prevailing electoral change. Hence the metamorphosis.

No political sleight of hand and no triumphalism will stop the tide.

If it is to be stopped – and it is a big IF – there has to be change at the top and a change of direction.

[email protected]