The pro-Labour Party media described it as “organised hostility”, while the pro-Nationalist Party media naturally made the most of the overwhelming support Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi received at the University last Monday.

Most of what happened when the four political leaders went on campus to take part in a debate on the forthcoming election was to be expected. It is clear that the young people of today are grateful the opportunities that they have been given, and therefore it was no surprise that Dr Gonzi received the warmest welcome.

After all, it was the Nationalist Party that opened the University doors wide for anyone with the right qualifications to join. The investment that successive Nationalist governments made in education – and this also includes the re-opening of the Malta College for Arts, Science and Technology – is something that the PN can be proud of. Added to this, the PN fought a lone battle for Malta to join the European Union, and again, this is a matter that most young people today appreciate.

Most of the students at University will be voting for the first time, and this is therefore a special election for them. It is the first time that they can play a part in the decision-making process, and they want to make their voices heard. It is to be expected that they are rowdy and show their support, or otherwise, in no uncertain terms.

Labour leader Alfred Sant was the main target of the students’ disruptive behaviour, but then this was not a surprise considering that he was prime minister when the government changed the stipend system into a loans scheme. The students at university today were still in primary school at the time, but they know what their colleagues went through and would not like to see a repeat performance.

Dr Sant should have felt the change in tempo of the debate in his regard, and avoided asking the rhetorical questions he did, which naturally brought about replies that he was not looking for. His failure to answer a question on the 2003 referendum results led to further rowdiness.

Dr Sant wants to win the election with his own weapons, and is likely to dodge questions that will dent his chances. This is natural and all politicians do it. This is more so when politicians know that there is no way they can justify their wrong decisions.

On the other hand, Dr Sant wants to divert the debate to matters that will give him a better chance, for example lack of good governance and corruption, two subjects on which the MLP is building its

campaign. But, of course, the Sir Temi Zammit Hall was not the right place to get his message across.

Dr Gonzi was more at home with the students and spoke their language better. Spurred on by a crowd that was obviously siding with him, he was more comfortable giving his answers and passed a number of comments that earned him more support from the students.

Like Dr Sant, both Alternattiva Demokratika leader Harry Vassallo and Azzjoni Nazzjonali leader Josie Muscat, had a hard time. In all societies, students form part of the generation that is most likely to try something new and go for the less traditional side of politics, but both Dr Vassallo and Dr Muscat – who both say they are aiming at a new way of making politics – did not find sure footing in the University Hall. It is clear that, to the university students, they are not credible enough.

Monday’s debate was an idea that should be followed up. It is good to have situations where the political leaders come in contact with the people together. Maybe next time, another place should be found. Dr Gonzi was playing “at home” at university; it would be interesting to know what will happen if he were to be “away”.