It is often said that politics is all about perception and while some would readily contest the veracity of this concept, the Malta Labour Party seems to have fully embraced it and craftily managed public perceptions to rebuild its credibility as a government in waiting. However, in less than two months the beautiful picture is already experiencing cracks in its texture. Now that it is in the driver’s seat, realty is starting to catch up.

Perception 1: a cabinet of ministers made up of members of the Opposition

One might be forgiven for thinking that Labour is still in Opposition when listening to ministers addressing the press, for in more than 50 days the new Labour government has rolled out no new policies and has ventured no further than testing the water and kite-flying, while remaining largely engaged in the criticism of the preceding Nationalist government’s perceived shortcomings.

These newly-elected ministers were reported to have discovered bare ministerial offices with no computers or pencils to write with; they discovered a hole in the country’s otherwise sound finances and consequently realised they had an increased budget deficit and a shortfall of funds with which to build new schools; they complained that Malta was losing precious EU funds; they visited popular recreational facilities to expose their flaws and one of them outdid her colleagues and chided the CEO of the Housing Authority because of a cracked bathroom basin and a missing soap dish in the shower of a new social housing apartment. As if that were not enough, the same minister complained that the Easter figolli at the St Vincent de Paul Residence were just too sweet.

It just sounds surreal but nonetheless we have been assured by Joseph Muscat himself, as quoted in Thursday’s Malta Independent that “we won’t just sit there but will implement what we pledged”. After all, we were given the impression that, while it was still in Opposition, Labour had already devised a roadmap leading to the Promised Land. Up until now, the much-needed change in mind-set has just not happened.

Perception 2: a cabinet of ministers that does more with less

Labour’s constant criticism and demonising of the former cabinet has had devastating effects of the Nationalist Party, even if it has to be admitted that the honoraria issue was grossly mishandled – particularly from a communications point of view. Labour in Opposition managed to convince almost everybody that it was against an honoraria increase, when it had already indicated that it was in favour. As a matter of fact, a number of members of the Labour parliamentary group resisted Joseph Muscat’s u-turn when he sensed an opportunity to cause irreparable damage to his opponents. Labour also managed to convince everybody that the government had been insensitive over the introduction of the honoraria for ministers at a time of international crisis when everybody was being asked to make sacrifices.

The reality was that the question of an honorarium for ministers was introduced two years before it became a political issue and it was even reported in the newspapers. But Labour waited patiently until the time it could deliver the hardest blows. But to the man in the street, it did not matter that a Member of Parliament who is paid both a salary for a full-time day job and an honorarium for parliamentary duties, lost the honorarium, once promoted to Cabinet, while a backbencher and a member of the Opposition retained both package. Neither did it matter that cabinet was now smaller and thus had to carry a greater burden. Dishonest or not, Labour’s negative campaign was effective and the consequences are now known to one and all.

Contrary to what one would have expected, the new Labour Cabinet of ministers is neither smaller in size nor smaller in cost than the previous Nationalist one. On the contrary, the new Cabinet is costing the public coffers around €6 million more. Full time Ministers dedicated solely to their ministerial duties is the least people will expect. The Prime Minister’s waiver of the Code of Ethics for a minister to continue with his lucrative profession on a part-time basis is simply not on, nor is his closing an eye to other ministers reportedly carrying on with their private practice. People had been led to believe that, with Labour, they were going to have more for less.

Perception 3: an end to the ‘friends of friends’ network – on the basis of merit alone

The previous Nationalist government has been accused of being ruled by an evil clique. As propaganda had it, this oligarchic clique appointed its network of friends and friends of friends to positions of power, thus extending its rule at the expense of meritocracy. This made change – as in change by getting rid of the same old faces – an attractive proposition. Labour’s Malta Taghna Lkoll, in contrast, set to create a society based on merit alone.

It is a well-known fact that, during the previous administration, the President of the Republic, the Commissioner of Police, the CEOs of public entities, permanent secretaries and heads of government departments were not chosen on the basis of their political leanings. Were it not for Labour’s refusal, we would have also had the Speaker of the House nominated by the Opposition, in spite of a slender one-seat majority. No wonder Nationalist party supporters see things a little differently, to say the least.

But it is not only the criticism of the Nationalist administration that is a far cry from the truth but – and more so – the implementation of Labour’s proposition of inclusion. Contrary to the “You might not have voted for us, but you can work with us” election propaganda message, it seems that a New Labour government is set on replacing the perceived clique by a very real new one. Appointments made in the last couple of months are very inclusive of Labour Party die-hards: former ministers, general election candidates, party officials and Labour mayors are becoming automatic choices to fill the available posts. The list also includes those who have inflicted damage on the Nationalist Party and thus well served the cause of Labour’s claim to power. In the meantime, others who have served their country well have been unceremoniously ditched. It seems that, for the founders of this new meritocracy, political leanings, addressing Labour’s mass meetings and voting against budget measures in parliament have become more sought after criteria than the sterling service of some of the previous permanent secretaries and chairpersons.

Perception 4: politically murdered and resurrected

On the road to victory, nothing stood in Dr Muscat’s way. We were told that, during the election campaign, he did not hesitate to commit cold-blooded political murders. The Labour leader ruthlessly eliminated any obstruction to his rise to power. It did not matter whether it was a deputy leader, a secretary-general, a financial administrator, a personal assistant or the mayor of a small town. Some people might have been led to think that he meant business – as he would bring about the needed change while not tolerating any challenge to his authority. Nonetheless, once in power he quickly turned to make amends to these quarrels of a partisan nature by offering the politically dead a share of the spoils – that is, public posts. They have been politically resurrected at the expense of those who believed otherwise.