It has been just six weeks since Alex Borg assumed the leadership of the Nationalist Party. And since day one, the Labour Party has unleashed a relentless and coordinated campaign to discredit him. Every statement, every comment, every hesitation has been magnified and politicised. While Borg is still finding his footing in national leadership, the sheer frequency and intensity of Labour's attacks say much about the governing party's state of mind - and perhaps about the new Opposition Leader's potential to unsettle it.

No one doubts that Borg must learn quickly. As we have already said before, he must weigh his words more carefully, and think faster when pressed by journalists. The comment about "towers in Gozo" is a case in point. Leadership requires not only conviction but also composure. But the fact remains that Labour's response to his every word and action exposes a government that appears far more anxious about public perception than confident in its own record.

It all began immediately after Borg's narrow victory in the PN leadership election. Labour wasted no time in portraying the Nationalist Party as "deeply divided", citing the mere 44-vote margin between Borg and Adrian Delia as evidence of instability. Yet anyone with a sense of fair play knows that elections produce winners and losers - often by far slimmer margins. The attempt was to delegitimise Borg's leadership from the moment he became PN leader.

Since then, the Labour Party has issued a steady stream of statements, each designed to undermine Borg. Whether he speaks about medicine, environmental reform, or governance, a rebuttal swiftly follows - usually couched in tones of mockery or moral outrage. But the most telling factor behind this pattern is not what Labour says about Borg, but why it feels compelled to say it so often.

Recent surveys suggest the PN has started to close the gap that separated it from Labour in the 2022 general election. One survey places the difference at 25,000 votes, another at 15,000, and another even closer at 8,000. Whichever is accurate, the direction is clear: Labour's once-commanding 39,000-vote advantage is shrinking. Perhaps this is simply the "new leader effect", the short-term enthusiasm that accompanies change. But it is equally plausible that the electorate is growing weary of a government that, after more than a decade in power, now spends more time attacking its opponents than improving people's lives.

One PL attack accused Borg of "failing another test" because he did not publish his campaign finances within a month - a deadline he himself had promised. While accountability is always fair game, the charge rang hollow when it emerged that Robert Abela himself had never published his campaign finances when contesting the PL leadership six years ago.

Labour also accused Borg of spreading conspiracy theories and creating "unnecessary doubts" about public health in relation to his comments about generic medicines. The issue even reached the Standards Commissioner. The reaction was choreographed to paint Borg as reckless.

The PN's proposed constitutional amendment on the environment was also an occasion in which the PL tried to belittle Borg. Labour's narrative that the PN wanted to attack all pastimes is absurd and an insult to the public's intelligence.

Equally opportunistic was Labour's portrayal of Borg's first parliamentary intervention as an act of disruption. He was criticised for asking to discuss a 200-page report related to the Fortina report by the National Audit Office that had just been published minutes before the sitting - a perfectly legitimate demand from any Opposition Leader.

And when it was announced that another debate on justice and the rule of law in Malta will be taking place in the European Parliament next week, Labour accused Borg and his party of waging a "holy war against Malta". Never mind that the discussion about Malta had been decided long before Borg had set foot in Brussels. Once again, patriotism was weaponised in an attempt to silence scrutiny. The government seems to forget that defending rule of law abroad is not an attack on Malta, but a defence of its integrity.

Taken together, these attacks form a clear picture: the Labour Party is determined to crush Borg's leadership before it gathers momentum. It is classic political containment - an effort to define the Opposition Leader before he defines himself. Yet the strategy carries risks. Constant aggression can make even justified criticism sound petty.

If Labour truly believes in its record, it should have the confidence to focus on governance rather than attacking the new Opposition Leader. And if Alex Borg wishes to turn the tide, he must remain calm under pressure, choose his battles wisely, and let Labour's obsession become its own indictment.

Six weeks in, Malta's political scene already feels more dynamic - and more divided - than it has in years. But one truth is becoming clearer with each passing day: the more Labour tries to demean Alex Borg, the more it reveals its fear that he might just be taken seriously.