The most recent Eurobarometer survey, which is run by the European Parliament and tracks the sentiments of citizens all across the European Union, gave off some interesting data points, particularly when it comes to the local context.
The survey seems to indicate that there is a bit of a contradiction in how Maltese people perceive and feel about certain things. This emerged especially when it came to the topic of defence, which has risen to the top of the European agenda as of late.
In the survey, only 14% of respondents in Malta supported the European Parliament making "the EU's defence and security" one of its top priorities, three percentage points less than a year earlier and less than half their European counterparts (31% - the joint-second highest ranked priority).
On the flipside, however, when asked about the future priorities of the union, 82% of Maltese respondents said that the EU's role protecting its citizens against global crises and security risks should become more important.
This is a solid chunk higher than the European average, which stood at 66%, and among the highest in the bloc, level with Ireland and Denmark and just behind Cyprus (83%), the Netherlands and Finland (both 84%) and Sweden (87%).
Yet, Maltese seemed reluctant to supporting the bloc using defence and security to reinforce its position in the world - only 20% of Maltese back this, down from 29% last year and less than the EU average of 36%.
But then, almost all Maltese - an overwhelming 98% - said that EU member states should be more united to face current global challenges, although what those global challenges are was not specified.
It seems that there's a strange paradox in these survey results: the Maltese want Europe to step up to protect its citizens and be more united to face current global challenges; but they don't want the European Parliament to make it a priority or the EU to actually strengthen its position in the world.
It's as if we want the outcome - that is increasing protection for citizens - but we don't seem to want to support the process to reach the outcome - that is, a significantly higher focus and spending on defensive capabilities.
It's a paradox which is perhaps somewhat reflected in Robert Abela's own rhetoric in recent weeks: locally, Abela has spoken against more spending on defence - yet abroad, he backed a European Parliament decision to massively increase investment in defence.
Malta is used to being a neutral country, but perhaps people don't quite understand that neutrality can be a one-way street: Malta may be neutral, but any country can ignore that should it deem fit.
Of course, there is only so much that Malta can have in terms of defensive capabilities, given the country's size - but at the same time it is interesting to understand people's perceptions on the matter.
It is a complex topic, and clearly, there are complex perceptions around it, that both major political parties will actually have a tough task to navigate around should it remain such an important issue as today.