As was to be expected, the electoral districts of the South ended up in the forefront of the local political debate in this electoral campaign. The signs were already there before, not only because of the great support that some of these districts had given Labour in the 2013 election, but also since they had a role to play in the results of both the Hunting Referendum and the last Local Council elections.

On Sunday, 7^th May, Dr. Simon Busuttil was in Birgu and, once again, ignited the issue, perceived or real, of the existence of the South. The ensuing debate on Social Media has confirmed that the South is still alive and kicking. It is a serious mistake for any party to ignore this. In my opinion, the most interesting electoral battle is going to be fought over the voting preferences of those living in the South.

In this analysis, I am not interested in the comments made by Dr. Busuttil and whether they are correct or not. Nor am I interested in Labour spin and I will not focus on the controversy that ensued on social media. What I am interested in is the voting patterns of the people of the South.

The electorate, in so-called Nationalist districts, has already made the transition, and voters there have a tendency today to vote according to reason rather than according to their traditional preferences. This explains why voters in these districts swung. But the present ongoing stories about corruption, are destined to effect these districts in their voting preference. These serious allegations, and the bungled manner they were dealt with by the Prime Minister, are going to have their say on their voting preferences. In these circumstances, this is not a good sign for Labour.

One may think that the voters in the predominant Labour Districts of the South are still attached to their traditional voting patterns meaning that they are more likely to vote as a result of their emotion rather than their reasoning. I think that this is not going to be the case anymore. These individuals too are shedding their historical ties. But their voting patterns will vary from those districts where the Nationalists are traditionally stronger.

In the past four years, the Nationalists were more focused on getting back the Nationalist ‘switchers’ than in attracting the Labour voters to their fold. Perhaps, one may state that it is reaping its fruits, as some of the lost voters have returned back. But are these enough to win the election?

The surveys are showing that they may dent the Labour victory but still, they are not enough to give the Nationalist Party an electoral victory. In my opinion, this is partly due to the fact that this party ignored the southern districts or the traditional Labour voters, thinking that they are too much attached to their party to ever think of voting for the Nationalist Party. The Nationalist Party has somewhat realized this shortcoming a bit late in the day. The fact that the Nationalist Party is now presenting a number of proposals to entice the traditional Labour voters confirms my analysis. But is this enough to revert the trend and guarantee a Nationalist victory?

One of the reasons, and not the only one, for the overwhelming electoral victory of Labour in 2013 was the support that it received from the South. For this reason, I am convinced that the South is once again going to be protagonist in this election and will hold the key to whether Labour will be the winning force or not. The issue here is not whether Labour voters will swing towards the Nationalists. I think that many traditional Labour voters are not yet ready for this move. I don’t think that this is an issue of emotion. Many in the Labour camp agree that corruption has become a serious problem for this government, but this is not enough for them to vote Nationalist.

A number of surveys have already been conducted and one in particular, can give an indication of the voting patterns of the Southern districts. This particular survey showed that the number of Nationalists who think that Joseph Muscat is good, was higher than the number of Labourites who think that Simon Busuttil is good. Even though in both cases, the percentage was relatively small, still the Nationalists have a tendency to recognize the good points of the opponent more than the Labour voter. This survey was not conducted according to districts, but considering that Labour voters are more predominant in the South, this can be indicative of how, those dissenting with their party will be voting.

In other words, these particular voters will be more than ready to express a dissenting voice by abstaining or by voting for none of the traditional big parties. In an electoral system, their vote will have a mathematical effect of one rather than two, as when one swings from one big party to another. But the effect can still be devastating. What counts in election is not the difference of votes between the big parties but the extra votes that a party obtains over the 50% margin. In the last election, the Labour margin was less then 15,000 votes. Thus, the PN only needs half that amount and not half the 36,000 to win an election.

The trend of abstaining started to increase after the 2013 elections. When the Local Councils elections were last held, there was a high level of absenteeism among the Labour voters of the South. While Labour has high hopes that it will be the winning force in this election, Labour itself is predicting that it will not be faring as well in comparison to 2013. This explains why Labour is worried with Marlene Farrugia’s candidature for she has potential appeal to the Labour voters. Now, this worry has become a nightmare as her partner, Dr. Godfrey Farrugia, has joined her movement.

On the other hand, this explains why, after the last Local Elections, despite the persistent rumours that a high profile PN candidate - possibly one of the two-deputy leaders - was going to be a candidate for the Second District, failed to materialize.

Instead, the PN sought to ensure a political alliance with Marlene Farrugia who will be facing single-handedly Joseph Muscat on the Fifth District. One needs to remember that Joseph Muscat had faced Lawrence Gonzi on the Second District in the last election. Joseph Muscat’s move can only enhance the political profile of this female candidate.

Then, the PN is preferring to field Josie Muscat as the super candidate of the Second District. Over all, this is not a bad political move, but given the age of the candidate, his candidature definitely has no impact on those Labour voters on this district who are thinking of abstaining in this election.

Fear of a possible political inertia from the Labour electorate explains why Joseph Muscat has opted to keep his candidature on the Second District and selected the Fifth District, for the chances here are that some of the Labour voters will go for Marlene Farrugia. Thus, Muscat is working to avoid that the electorate of this district give Labour a cold shower. Now, he needs to think of a political strategy how Labour will face the other supercandidate of Marlene’s party, her partner Godfrey Farrugia on the sixth and seventh electoral districts.

Finally, in 2013, the Second District was the only district that did not have the highest percentages of lost votes to the Nationalist party and the number of swingers was extremely low when compared to other districts. The Nationalists succeeded then in preserving their core voters. Will they still be able to do so in this election?

Many voters, from the South, expected a lot from Muscat but are now realizing that he has failed to deliver. What has been delivered, such as the gas power station, is a travesty. It is far worse than what was Marsaxlokk before this new station. But many are still not convinced of the Nationalist Party. This is why, the next electoral result, will be, in my opinion, decided by the absentee voters and those who will vote for one of the small parties, in particular Marlene’s party, rather than for the performance of the Nationalist Party in this election.