I have plagiarised the headline to this article from one written in another news-paper by Eddie Aquilina, a dedicated Nationalist Party supporter, a few weeks ago. Like many Nationalist Party supporters of a certain kind – middle class, somebody who was scarred by the traumatic Mintoffian/KMB years of the 1980s, and a successful businessman since then – he is a party apologist of the deepest hue.

I remember at the height of the debate on the ill-judged extension of the planning development zones six years ago, piloted in Cabinet by Minister George Pullicino, which I had called a clear instance of institutionalised vandalism (“Vote George, Get Lorrie”), Eddie Aquilina had labelled me a Labour Party supporter simply because I had disagreed so strenuously with the government on this issue. That I, as an environmentalist, felt deeply offended by the government's crass action (an action which can now be seen in all its harmful effect) would not have entered his head so deeply imbued are the partisan views he holds. 

Nevertheless, despite Eddie Aquilina's tribal loyalties – which I fully respect – the article he wrote recently in The Times under the heading “Results, Courage and Integrity” was probably the best I have read setting out the case for continuing to support the re-election of Lawrence Gonzi to govern this country as Prime Minister. Albeit clearly coming from an apologist for the Nationalist Party, it is well written and highlights well (if sometimes too glowingly) the qualities and achievements of Lawrence Gonzi's premiership of the last four years.

It is worth reading. He lauds Gonzi's first decision immediately after winning the election to restrict the number of government ministers and to appoint the smallest Cabinet since Independence. “It was the right decision to create a leaner, more focused Cabinet and [this] demonstrated Gonzi's courage”.

He then immediately “faced his firmest test, a test about the economy and, of course, about jobs”. Rightly, Eddie Aquilina highlights the government's efforts on the economy and the difficult decisions the Prime Minister confronted: “keep pouring upwards of Euro 50 million a year, every year, into energy subsidies and an unproductive dockyard, or pump those same tens of millions of euros yearly into the factories we need in the future, tourism, small businesses and the education and training needed for jobs that pay well”. He contrasts this with “the many leaders abroad who have not had the courage to reform and restructure their economies and take the hard decisions that are unpopular in the short term but work long term. Gonzi did.”

He says “we know this was right because we can see the results...New factories were attracted to Malta giving well-paying job opportunities to young Maltese...Malta and Germany are the only countries in Europe that have more people working and less [fewer] unemployed now than in 2008....Most important of all , 20,000 new jobs were created, making up for those lost due to restructuring and ending up with a net gain of 10,000 full-time jobs, all in the private sector...These are Gonzi's results...But these are also the results of Gonzi's character....he has shown more than once that he is a man of integrity while still playing his hand shrewdly.”

He ends his piece by saying “His politics are not the politics of patronage to keep everyone happy but principled politics....a Prime Minister of integrity”.

I have provided a fulsome summary of Eddie Aquilina's article because, as I said, it is a fair account of the best attributes of Lawrence Gonzi and of his achievements as Prime Minister and Leader of the Nationalist Party. Even if one makes allowances for a certain amount of glossing over the facts, one still has to accept that in our Prime Minister over the last few years we have had a decent man at the helm. His work-rate and output have been prodigious. Of his commitment to Malta there can be no doubt. I personally like the man.

Despite all the achievements which Eddie Aquilina fairly brings out in his article, why then have things not succeeded with resounding acclamation? Why does the Nationalist Party languish in the polls so disastrously? Why is the party in government so riven by factionalism, controversy and disaffection?

There are two overriding qualities for success in a political leader. These are decisiveness and judgment. Good political judgment is paramount. While Lawrence Gonzi has undoubtedly been decisive – think of  all the decisions set out with approval by Eddie Aquilina above, as well as others not mentioned by him, such as increasing ministerial pay, re-joining Partnership for Peace, handling the Libyan crisis, the divorce referendum, the ministerial reshuffle, the construction of the Parliament building – it still remains the case that if we are to search for a reason for the things that have gone wrong, it is probably in the exercise of judgment. Not so much that the decisions should not have been taken, but in the manner of their execution and the public's perception of them.  

Although the ministerial pay rise and the water and electricity rates have come to haunt the Nationalists as the issues in the public's mind which most offended their sense of fair play, perhaps the decision which was most badly handled was the divorce referendum. It stands as a reprimand to social justice and good governance, the very qualities we had previously come to expect from the Nationalist Party. 

I remember writing in 2010, at the time when Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando had very courageously first announced his intention to present his Private Member's Bill on divorce, that “ in our politics of institutionalised conflict, important social changes get caught up in the political cross-fire. Yet, prevarication here is not the right answer. Leaders of courage and vision should combine across party lines to solve this desperate social issue.”

Nevertheless, I forecast that the Prime Minister was likely to offer a referendum as a sop, as well as a means of postponing a decision on the issue, preferring to follow public opinion than lead it. For reasons of misplaced tactics, the Prime Minister went down this route, ignoring that referendums are alien to our parliamentary tradition, where Parliament is sovereign and Members of Parliament are elected precisely to legislate for what is best for the country as a whole, guided but not bound by the feelings of their constituents. The slap in the face administered by the electorate, including a substantial number of Nationalists, to the government (and the Church), epitomises all that has gone wrong with Prime Minister Gonzi's Administration for the last four years.

At its heart was a lack of moral courage and leadership, influenced by misplaced concepts of sectarian Catholic values, instead of the determination in a secular, liberal, pluralistic democracy always to act on behalf of the well-being of all the members of society, including those who only form a minority within it. Whether or not he was hijacked in his decision by the ultra-conservative elements in his Cabinet, he and his Party have paid a heavy price. 

The issue now is: would the alternative leader be any better?