The third European Parliament election in Malta is now a week behind us. Called to elect six MEPs, the electorate voted to split the numbers equally between the two main political parties, although it did not significantly bridge the gap in votes between these two parties.
The third seat
Increasing its MEP tally by one was the objective of the Nationalist Party’s leader. That has been achieved. No matter how much Labour scoffed at this target, at one point even claiming that the 4:2 result of 2009 was a “statistical fluke” (they did not describe it that way at the time), the unequivocal truth is that there will be one less Labour MEP and one more Nationalist MEP.
It is not simply an issue of numbers. The voters chose a Nationalist delegation to the EP which has the benefits of competence and experience. It is said that, in politics, you campaign in poetry and govern in prose. EU legislation is dense prose and dealing with it requires brains and stamina. I am reassured in the knowledge that the Nationalist MEPs will be up to it as they take their seats in Brussels and Strasbourg.
The underdog
In the first preference vote tally, the Nationalist Party is still trailing Labour. This was hardly unexpected. Labour is still enjoying the honeymoon period after its significant victory just over a year ago after a quarter-of-a-century in Opposition. If there was one ridiculous thing throughout the EP election campaign it was not the sticker album exposing the sheer hypocrisy of “Taghna Lkoll”, but rather the Prime Minister’s solemn statement that Labour was starting the race as the “underdog” – brought to you courtesy of the same political outfit that only a few years back introduced the term “power of incumbency” to the Maltese political lexicon.
It was the Nationalist Party in Opposition that faced an uphill struggle. Still reeling from an electoral result that had sapped its morale and material resources, and having to deal with the consequent change in leadership and administration, it had to struggle hard to put up a fight.
The power of incumbency
And put up a fight it did, but then Labour wasn’t taking any risks. Taking advantage of its position in office, it launched a campaign on the scale of one for a general election – maybe even more. Texts were sent to parents reminding them that children’s allowances would be paid on the day of the election. A salary increase for IPSL employees and a reduction in the price of medicines were announced on the very last day of campaigning.
Despite the advertising blitz about reductions in water and electricity charges, the issue of the actual bills was postponed. Reduced bills are great but no bills are even better. Refund of VAT on vehicles? Check. Electricity refund for residences close to the Sant’ Antnin plant? Check. All in the last days when government policies and measures were no longer dictated by some higher principle or broader strategy but by the aim of widening the gap, come election time.
Bazookas and water pistols
On the other hand, the Nationalist Party entered the EP campaign still severely bruised from the last election. The bottom line was a 36,000-vote deficit, hardly what you’d call a level playing field. The Party was still settling in to its new role as the Opposition, changing its statute, electing its leadership and struggling to take hold of its financial problems.
The situation often meant that Labour could take the initiative and was fully geared to take that initiative. It could tar the Nationalist Party and its leader as “negative” while it was bombarding us with video spots denigrating the Leader of the Opposition at the same time as it fuelled whispering campaigns that could only tarnish his reputation in the most despicable ways. On the other hand, the Opposition did nothing more than an Opposition is be expected to do, that is, hold the government to task over what it does and what it fails to do.
The Nationalist Party was not out of synch with the electorate on matters faced in the past year: from the sale-of-citizenship scheme to the floating tanker in Marsaxlokk Bay to the declining quality of the NHS – the Opposition did no more than express the public’s concerns. Nonetheless, unlike the ‘business-friendly’ Labour Party, that could also make use of government means – including the public broadcaster and illegal billboards – the Nationalist Party badly lacked the basic resources to conduct a modest campaign which could start to get the message through. For the Nationalist Party it was a gargantuan task, too early to face.
The road ahead
As Nationalist leader Simon Busuttil aptly put it, this is a tough moment which draws a defining line between those who give up and those who fight on. The leadership team has not chosen to chicken out but rather has pledged to stay on and work even harder. Their enthusiasm is commendable. Of course they will need an army of determined and committed volunteers if they are to make good for the sheer lack of financial and administrative resources
The road ahead is arduous. Clinching the third seat was a much-needed and deserved success along what is, in effect, the Nationalist Party’s Long March.
Clyde Puli is the Shadow Minister for the Family and Social Solidarity