I am writing this article in the middle of one of the most eventful weeks for the Nationalist Party this year. Initially it was meant to be a reflection on the disappointing survey published last Sunday, however the event of Bernard Grech relinquishing his post as Leader on Tuesday has obviously exacerbated a needed reflection on the future of the party, hence here are a few thoughts.
I start by saying that Bernard Grech was never the problem - not all of it, at least. The man worked hard to bring people together, build bridges between ideologies, and allow the party to function as a well as possible, given the numerous limitations. Under his leadership, the party did become more proactive as it proposed several solutions, and pieces of legislation to counter the government's lack of vision in a number of fields.
Alas, the fortunes of the party didn't change, and while the European Parliament elections provided for a silver lining, the positive vibe did not survive for too long.
Centre-Right parties around the world have been facing an identity crisis for many years, and the Nationalist Party is no exception. While there have been moments of clarity, they have been rare, and since joining the European Union, the PN has lacked an overarching vision behind which an electing majority could rally.
Time and time again, we have seen how the Nationalist Party has been most successful when it stood for something clear and exciting, be it Independence, democracy or the EU. Whenever it did not have this sort of vision, it struggled to motivate the electorate and keep its support.
It is easy to understand that at its best times, the Nationalist Party was an inclusionary force that brought people in, and offered a home to many different ideologies, albeit under one movement. Recently, the party has found it increasingly hard to represent a rapidly shifting Malta and its 21st century aspirations. In too many issues, such as divorce, gay marriage, and several others, the PN has taken the easier road of dwelling in spaces familiar to it, alienating the majority of the electorate. And it looks as though it is about to happen again with the current euthanasia debate.
Personally, I have my opinion about this sensitive subject, however personal convictions cannot get in the way of a healthy debate. We cannot shut the door to what people have to say - that is a sure-fire recipe for ineluctability.
On the contrary, we must listen to what all sides of the coin have to say. There are some compelling, thought-provoking arguments on both sides, and we ought to treat the electorate as a mature individual, capable of rational decision making. The electorate does not need a big brother who tells them what to do. They often need an understanding, caring brand of politics, and a platform where to voice their pain, grief and aspirations.
This is merely one example; however, I believe it is symptomatic of matters on a wider scale. The Nationalist Party must aspire to be a relevant force that inspires people and captures their imagination. It must aspire to be a credible alternative government, offering real-world solutions, preparing the country for the challenges of the future.
Most importantly the Nationalist Party cannot shy away from being a daring force of ideas and thinking outside of the box. It is only a brand of visionary courage that can make the Nationalist Party a real alternative government.
Alexander Mangion is deputy mayor of Attard