Labour`s to Lose

16^th March 2007

The Malta Independent - Friday Wisdom

 

The local election results confirmed a trend started in 2002 when the Malta Labour Party beat the Nationalist Party in all electoral contests except in the general and local elections of 2003.

Taking the same districts where the local elections were contested last weekend the MLP’s share of first preference vote has gone up from 49.26 per cent in 2001, to 50.11 per cent in 2004, to 53.20 per cent in 2007. The PN’s share of vote per contra reduced from 48.13 per cent in 2001, to 46.41 per cent in 2004, to 43.89 per cent in 2007.

The trend is unmistakable at least in so far as local elections go and the same trend was again confirmed at the European Parliament elections at a national level in 2004. This hardly leaves any room for interpretation.

What does leave a room for interpretation is why the general elections results of 2003 went so much against this trend and by implication whether the same would happen again in the general election to be held later this year or the first half of 2008.

The Prime Minister was quick to waive away the local election results and repeat his determination that by the next general election we will again witness a purple revolution where the red preferences turn into blue, not least through the participation of the approximately 30 per cent of the electorate who through apathy or fatigue decided to stay away from the polls last Saturday.

The opposition leader stopped short from explicitly stating that Labour’s latest wide victory at the local elections practically wraps up in their favour the outcome of the general election, but he repeated his strong confidence that the trend is clear, unmistakable and irreversible and that the Maltese electorate will vote for change come the next general election.

The following two arguments can be made with conviction. The first argument is that the Maltese electorate, although eager for change as is normal in a living democracy, will continue to show its wishes at the local level and at a national level where in the results equation there is not the issue of Alfred Sant becoming the next Prime Minister. However at a general election, when in the result equation there will be the strong prospect of having Alfred Sant as the next Prime Minister, the electorate will not forget the fiasco of 1998 and will again, as they did in 2003, go against the trend and re-vote the PN in government.

The second argument promoted by the Labour camp is that the 2003 election result was a one-off affair highly influenced by the issue of EU membership which forced many who in normal circumstances would have voted for Labour, through conviction or through fatigue with the Nationalists, to vote PN as the only alternative to seal Malta’s membership in the EU. This higher order issue will not be present in the next general election and therefore there is every reason to assume that the trend will not suddenly reverse as it did in 2003, so that Labour can carry their string of victories since 2004 to the next general election.

Readers may pick either of these arguments as they can both be made with persuasion and, when a week is a long time in politics, nothing can be absolutely guaranteed so much in advance.

Yet I am more inclined to think that the next general elections is Labour’s to lose as indeed they managed to do with the 2003 elections, which I had contested in Labour’s ranks.

I well remember the clear message that started emerging from my visits to the electorate throughout 2002. In that year again Labour beat the PN by a nine-point margin in the March 2002 local elections. The MLP went into euphoria and practically assumed that the next general election result was all but wrapped up in its favour.

The feedback from the electorate was indicating otherwise. The message was unmistakably clear. The majority was keen to vote a change in administration but equally keen in securing Malta’s entry in the EU in 2004 if for nothing, to bring over the country an external source of discipline which leading politicians could not bring upon themselves.

I well remember pointing this out to Alfred Sant and indicating that it was not in Labour’s interest to pursue his thesis that all had to be decided in a general election. On the contrary Labour’s interest would best have been served by a sharp distinction between the general election and a referendum on EU membership which had to be binding on the government and should therefore have been conducted after the general election so the government in office would have the parliamentary term to execute the people’s decision in a referendum.

The 2003 election also was Labour’s to lose and they did manage to lose it and hand it over on a silver platter to the PN by linking the EU membership issue to the general election result forcing many to vote PN against their wish. It is the main reason why I could not accept to stay within Labour where the leader was not prepared to keep himself responsible for the wrong strategy which denied the party a practically assured electoral victory.

Yes, the next general elections are again Labour’s to lose.