All Over Bar the Counting

9^th March 2008

The Malta Independent on Sunday

 

And the result is... this is what readers wish to know at this time when votes are still in the sealed boxes awaiting counting. So it is appropriate to revisit my recent writings about the much-awaited election outcome and then express an opinion whether with the election campaign and actual voting behind us I confirm or adjust earlier expressed opinions.

On 16 March 2007, a little less than a year ago, I wrote as follows when analysing the 2007 local elections result:

“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.

Yes, the next general election is again Labour’s to lose”

On 28 December 2007 I predicted:

“After 21 years of nearly uninterrupted tenure by a PN government I predict that by a hair or by a mile this time it will be Labour. There are innumerable satellite reasons why the majority can be expected to switch its political preference in 2008 but the core reason is the electorate’s fatigue with a PN government.”

On 1 February 2008 I wrote:

“The desire for change among the electorate is so acute that Labour can do nothing to foul it up. Basically Labour cannot lose the election even if they want to. The margin of manoeuvrability for a new government, following EU membership and euro adoption and after privatising practically all that could be privatised, is so limited that whoever is elected cannot do much harm. So the risk of electing a new government, even if perceived as an unproven experiment, is so small that the desire for change can easily justify voting for Labour irrespectively.”

With the benefit of a five-week election campaign behind us and with the actual voting concluded should I confirm or adjust these opinions expressed over the last year?

This campaign wasn’t a straight line. Half way through the campaign, indeed until Tuesday 26 February, I started to form the opinion that the PN had enough momentum behind them to carry the final prize. Until then they had conducted an impeccable two-pronged campaign; on the one hand depicting Labour as a dangerous change and on the other building up their leader’s reputation as the one to deliver the aspired change without throwing away the baby with the bathwater.

The positive prong was a mono-pillar based on the likeability of Lawrence Gonzi, presenting him as hands-on leader who does not accept nonsense and ready to rejuvenate his outgoing tired Cabinet. Everything depended on Gonzi continuing to be perceived as perfectly in control of his team and credible to address in the next legislature the one festering wound that no government seems capable of getting its arms around, ie, MEPA. After having corrected the fiscal deficit Gonzi could hand over the Ministry of Finance to a lesser mortal and take direct responsibility for MEPA - to clean it up and render it more accountable, transparent and efficient. MEPA remains the largest single source of grievances among defectors of the PN.

Just as the PN thought they were home and dry and needed only to support their positive Gonzi strategy by tweaking their negative ‘Sant iffiser inkwiet’ (Sant means trouble) campaign, they slipped into overconfidence and seemed unprepared for Labour’s sudden best-for-last strategy of their campaign.

Suddenly, in the last couple of days of February as Sant was celebrating his 60th birthday, he also launched a Labour counteroffensive, attacking the foundation of the PN’s election strategy. Suddenly the agenda changed from discussing Labour’s educational policy, the surcharge rebate or the removal of tax on overtime. The headlines became Gonzi’s leadership qualities and his ability to keep his team under control. It was not so much whether there was something suspicious about the Mistra project or whether the government had indeed at some stage considered introducing fees for health services, which till now are universally free. It was whether Gonzi’s immediate reaction to these issues and their subsequent handling reinforced or weakened his image of an honest and able leader who does not tolerate corruption even if it meant sacrificing a person like John Dalli until he was formally cleared.

Here Gonzi failed to live up to the strong expectations the campaign had built and the PN’s campaign started to wobble when it mattered most. When it came to taking firm decisions Gonzi was found wanting. When he should have acknowledged having discussed fees for health service when public finances were still weak, but that now that this was overcome he can promise their continued availability without payment, he fumbled through unappreciated niceties that the report was not discussed in Cabinet but in a Cabinet committee. This really cuts little ice with the man in the street who cannot readily perceive the fine difference.

Instead of forcing Pullicino Orlando to resign so as not to put the whole party under a cloud of suspicion, Gonzi zigzagged until finally he had to refer the matter to the Police to investigate. What matters to the public at this stage is not whether there was anything irregular in the Mistra saga but whether Gonzi appeared weak in not using his forcefulness as in the case of John Dalli to show he has zero tolerance for corruption even at the expense of being unfair to one of his own until proper investigations could take place.

So in the eye of the undecided voters who were being tantalised to consider voting PN as Gonzi would bring about

the change they aspired for without having to vote the PN out of power, the story line changed in the last week and half of the campaign.

The last billboards of the campaign summarised it well. The PN had two billboards one for each prong of their campaign. The positive with a re-assuring blue hued Gonzi portrait and the negative one a Sant portrait with a look spelling disaster. Labour also had a two-pronged billboard signoff. The positive one did not feature any Labour personality but a beautiful young lady inviting us to vote for change.

The negative billboard showed capitalised on Gonzi mishandling of the save-best-for last Labour revelations. Could these billboards and the campaign finale they represented impressed the undecided electorate in the day of reflection, or forced them into having second thoughts when they faced the ballot paper?

My best judgement remains that the balance remain inclined towards voting out the PN, which is not quite the same as voting Labour in though this finesse may be lost on many.