After defeat: The birth of PN lite?

Trounced in the elections for the European Parliament by a 13-point margin after persisting on a hard-line no-holds-barred opposition for the past year, the PN seems to be going soft in order to appeal to a critical mass of the 80,000 voters who did not even bother to vote in the elections.

Presenting a private member’s bill on a non-controversial topic like obesity and unilaterally opting out of the Sunday ‘sermon’ tradition represents Busuttil’s new way of doing politics – a clear signal that the PN leader intends to lower the political temperature while seeking new inroads among the less politicised segments of the electorate.

The PN’s internal analysis hinges on the party’s inability to mobilise its own cohort of 2013 voters, especially in Nationalist-leaning districts which saw the lowest turnout in an election which was largely to be determined by the ability of both major parties to bring out their supporters to cast their vote.

It also comes with a realisation that tribal appeals and confrontational tactics do not sway a large segment of Nationalist-leaning voters.

One may well say the same about a growing segment of Labour’s voting base. But for historical and sociological reasons, Labour harbours a larger segment of voters who are more dedicated to their party. This came out very clearly in the MEP election campaign during which PN activities were poorly attended while PL activities were always attended by a sizeable number of supporters.

Moreover while to the outsider Muscat’s appeals to ‘soldiers of steel’ sounded pretty anachronistic, the result proves that these references even when taken out of any historical context, still resonate among a category Labour voters. This may be far less the case with PN voters.

The PN’s present reading of the situation is that a vast category of potential PN voters, floating voters and even switchers who were drawn by Muscat’s inclusive pre-2013 message, are alienated by confrontational tit-for-tat politics.

Moreover Malta seems to be following European patterns which see a growing segment of the electorate, especially those who live an affluent auto sufficient life, becoming increasingly apolitical and more interested in issues related to health and the well being of their children.

The PN leadership seems keen on softening its image after failing to galvanise voters by fighting tooth and nail against the government.  Moreover the PN may have smelled an opportunity to capitalise on voters’ disenchantment. One such opportunity, which may also help solve the party’s financial problems is that of unilateral disengagement from tribal politics.

No more Sunday ‘sermons’?

Opting out of the Sunday ‘sermons’ tradition, in which the party leaders address party audiences at party clubs every Sunday, does send a strong message to this category of voters who recoil at the intrusion of politicians on a day which they associate with rest and leisure.

The PN stands to lose little from making this move. Not only is the party simply preaching to the converted, these activities are also poorly attended and thus a liability for the image of the party.  

Sunday addresses are reminiscent of the highly polarised 80s when politics stifled every aspect of life.

In fact the tradition goes back to the early 1980s when then PL deputy leader and deputy prime minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici used to address the party faithful in political clubs at the height of tensions generated by the church schools issue.

Moreover by breaking this tradition the PN is more in synch with the category of voters who deserted the polls on May 24 and who do not regard politics as the alpha and omega of life.

This move also represents a rare instance where the opposition is taking the lead over the government.  For it is now up to Joseph Muscat to decide whether or not to give up this tradition.

This may be problematic for Muscat for three reasons. The first is that Labour supporters seem to be keener on attending these events. Secondly, as the leader of a party which may have over-reached itself in its bid to appeal to pale blue voters, Muscat needs these occasions where he can reassure his party faithful of his Labourite credentials. For despite his lurch to the political centre, Muscat has been very careful to respect old Labour’s folklore.

And thirdly, would Muscat want to be seen copying the PN leader, whom he has been belittling so relentlessly?

It remains unclear on whether the PN will be substituting the Sunday addresses with less intrusive forms of propaganda. The real test for the PN will be whether it will resist the temptation to reignite tensions after the summer lull.  

On the other hand the PN may also be tempted to go all the way and close down party political clubs and its own TV station in what can be presented as a direct challenge to partisan and tribal politics. Such steps will not only stop the drain on the party’s coffers but will represent a veritable political earthquake which would associate Busuttil’s name with a landmark change in Maltese politics. 

It will also undo some of the damage Busuttil inflicted on himself when he referred to Deborah Schembri as a ‘Nationalist face’ during a TV debate before the general elections.

The anti-obesity law

Presenting a private bill aimed at combating obesity in the aftermath of a colossal defeat which left the party anorexic in terms of votes, may invite ridicule.

But such a step is very much in synch with parents’ concerns on the topic following news reports that Malta has one of the highest obesity rates in Europe.   It also shows that the opposition is willing to give its contribution on a national issue where Malta lags behind.

By presenting a private member’s bill whose most drastic proposal is the creation of a consultative council on a healthy lifestyle, the PN may be attempting to counter the perception of a negative opposition and an agenda-setting government.

But even in its latest legislative agenda the PN avoids any controversial policy changes. The proposed law fails to confront the fast food industry - which many compare to big tobacco - through limits on advertising and merchandising directed at children.

Moreover while presenting a common front on non-controversial issues like obesity may be easy, the party will still have to follow Muscat’s lead on more controversial issues like the partial decriminalisation of drugs, which forms part of the government’s bold agenda. 

It remains to be seen whether the opposition will take a stand on these issues or whether it will abstain as it did on civil unions. One welcome sign from the opposition was its refusal to yield to the hunters’ blackmail by presenting a petition aimed at stopping hunting in spring. It remains to be seen whether the PN will allow prominent members to campaign for the abolition of spring hunting or whether Busuttil will insist on unity at all costs.

So far the opposition has failed to outflank the government from the left by taking any bold initiative, which appeals to liberal voters.  One area where the party may expose Labour’s contradictions is citizenship. 

After opposing the sale of citizenship tooth and nail, the opposition may constructively address the discrimination between rich citizens and children of immigrants who have lived their whole life in Malta and who have no automatic right to citizenship.  Such a step also makes demographic sense as the immigrant component of the population is bound to grow in the next years.

The party has also been largely absent on topics like workers’ rights and precarious employment. But to do so the PN needs to settle questions on whether it wants to remain a centre right conservative party or become a more left of centre party.

Ignoring the writing on the wall?

Although the PN’s analysis is partly correct in recognising the growing segment of politically apathetic voters, it seems to miss an important lesson from the last four electoral appointments: the fact that Labour won the European elections in 2009 and 2014, local elections in 2012 and the  general election in 2013 by the same margin. This means that the PN lost with the same margin both in local and European elections where the core vote matters, and also in general elections where practically everyone voted. 

This may indicate that non-voters do not defy trends established in general elections.  Moreover MaltaToday surveys already showed 10% of PN voters in 2008 defecting to Labour a year later. 

On the other hand other MaltaToday surveys showed little movement of voters before last May’s election.  The only question before the MEP elections was whether Labour would be able to mobilise its voters despite the first signs of disillusionment among some of its supporters.  On the other hand surveys consistently showed the PN restricted to its 43% cohort.  In the end the PN did not even manage to get them all out to vote and ended up with 40% of the ballot.

The major problem for the PN is that it is not making any significant gains from the other side.  On the other hand the PL now has the power of incumbency to capitalise on a growing perception that it is becoming Malta’s natural party of government as the PN was for the best part of the last three decades. This will turn the PL into a magnet for those who want to take a ride on the winning cart.

Secondly the PN is also ignoring the fact that all surveys seem to indicate that Joseph Muscat is far more trusted than PN leader Simon Busuttil, not just among the restricted electorate in MEP elections but also among the electorate at large.  By keeping the same leader despite its trouncing the PN seems to be ignoring the writing on the wall: that elections in Malta are always won by the most trusted leader. 

Some voters may also interpret the PN’s ‘business as usual’ reaction to a terrible result as a sign that the PN lives in a make believe world where reality can be constantly ignored.  This is why Busuttil needs to send a strong message of change.

What is sure is that Busuttil, who re-entered Maltese politics as Gonzi’s sidekick on the eve of the 2013 election, never had a chance of building his own rapport with the electorate.  The PN hopes that he might get that chance in the next months during which Muscat will face more internal contradictions, while Busuttil can work without facing any immediate electoral deadlines.

Banking on a pyrrhic victory?

The PN may be banking that the MEP elections will turn out to be a pyrrhic victory for Labour. For Labour may well have over-reached itself in its bid to deal the PN a fatal blow.

One indication that the PL has over-reached itself is news of more concessions to hunters and trappers, something that does not go down well with a majority of voters who resent bullying tactics and backroom deals. 

But so far the PN has not managed to capitalise on any resentment, largely thanks to the baggage of having been in power for the best part of the past quarter of a century.

Ultimately the PN needs to find a balance between understanding the electorate’s electoral fatigue and the need of scrutiny in parliament, which may become even more necessary following the MEP elections, which may have given Labour a sense of omnipotence.

Yet banking on Labour’s difficulties would be the PN’s fatal mistake.  This is because Joseph Muscat has so far shown an ability to think outside the box and to be one step ahead of his adversaries.  In fact disengaging from direct confrontation with Muscat and his party may well be the PN’s most effective strategy in the circumstances.