Of girlfriends and red Ferraris

What surprises me most about studies and reports is that they usually get shelved, filed and put aside for eternity.

I am not too sure Ann Fenech's report on the Nationalist Party's defeat will face the same destiny.

The very fact that the PN lost by 36,000 votes cannot possibly allow anyone in their right senses the luxury of ignoring a report of this magnitude, even though it is not as holistic as some would like to think.

Of course, government reports, subcontracted by direct order, invoiced and handsomely remunerated, have always and traditionally been ignored.

In this case it is rather different.

I will not go into the sham that allowed Simon Busuttil not to be mentioned in any part of the report or for Lawrence Gonzi to sort of get all the blame without being personally castigated for his grave mismanagement of his party and country.

Neither will I go into the more important fact absent from the report - that the PN effectively lost the election in 2008, saved by the return of John Dalli and the Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando saga of tears, carefully orchestrated by Richard Cachia Caruana, Joe Saliba and Anton Attard (now and still PBS CEO).

Anyway the thing that worries me most about these reports is that they look at issues from one particular angle and then they suddenly stop in their tracks.

The report emphasises why one needs to tackle certain issues to be able to win the next election.

The question why one wins elections is never asked.

Nonetheless elections and governing a country are not like winning the Champions League in football.

Soccer players win a league and then go off to their girlfriends or spend time driving their red Ferraris as if there is no tomorrow, and then return to train and hopefully win the league again.

Politics I am afraid is rather different, though I get the feeling that it is not to most politicians and the likes of Ann Fenech.

Winning an election leaves the winner with one big headache, not a Ferrari or a girlfriend (though that may be very much possible) - and with the ups and downs of running a country and giving direction to its people.

The Ann Fenech report talks about winning the election but not about governing a country.

The problem with the Gonzi administration was very simple: they did not know how to govern, and the people around Gonzi were simply unsuitable and unfit for the job.

There was another problem. Lawrence Gonzi was not fit for purpose and that made many who had voted for the PN leave it. With Simon Busuttil they may return, but I am not quite sure if the man will succeed in getting them back.

The report makes one salient mistake: it simply does not recognise which of the issues which compromised the PN's popularity were indeed necessary and founded on essentially good policies.

For example, allowing the Queen of Bile and her posse of sycophants to hit out at all those who were critical of the PN had nothing to do with bad policy but with the imperative to dissociate itself from verbal terrorism of the worst kind.

I feel I have to explain further. Let me make reference to three issues which I feel the Nationalist government under Lawrence Gonzi could have positively exploited to its favour, to emphasise its high moral ground.

People respect politicians when they are decisive and clear and determined. Gonzi was none of these.

The first theme was its stand on racism. Fine, it was not great, but yes, it did stand out as being different from the one espoused by the Labour party. 

As ever, everyone knows the Labour Party's voter base is largely more xenophobic than the PN's. It is a pity but it is true. And Muscat simply took advantage of this and played to their hang-ups about migrants.

And yet Ann Fenech's report suggests that the anti-racist stand was a factor that contributed to losing PN support.

So bloody what.

What she should have said was that the PN stand on racism should not have been half-baked. It was ambiguous and unclear.

The other comment which struck me as bizarre was about MEPA being the reason so many voters transferred their votes to Labour.

True, MEPA can be and is a nightmare, but it depends: is Fenech suggesting that MEPA should one-up the likes of Sandro Chetcuti, the perfect example of yet another case of someone who is excessively preoccupied with issues of personal vanity? And someone who is so enamoured with the Labour Party that he makes it a point to parachute into press conferences and public meetings held by the government?

If the PN wish to follow in the steps of the Labour Party and simply change its polices according to the whims of surveys and people's personal complaints, then so be it.

And I guess that is what is going to happen.

But it is not the solution for winning an election and being the good government this country needs. I will explain.

The Labour Party went along with the PN budget last December, wherein the PN had suggested reducing the tax for high-income earners. A shocking proposal that was welcomed by high-income earners but not one that led high-income earners to switch party allegiance.

Their decision to switch was based on matters linked to arrogance and being ignored, sidelined and not treated fairly.

I have this funny feeling that the Nationalist Party is being told that it should go out of its way to realign itself and genuflect before everyone and everything to make it - how shall I put it - a party of no principles, for the sake of winning everyone and everything.

Because according to the report, the final aim is winning and then...

The raison d'être of winning a parliamentary election is not to simply win, but also to implement policies and change things, all the while representing the aspirations of future generations.

If Simon Busuttil and his team meet people, talk to people, give people the impression that they are listening and that they can deliver, they will have rekindled hope for the PN.

The PN which was dismantled and decimated by the politics of a man who will be remembered for his famous SMS:

"Sorry to inform you, but I will not be choosing you as minister, you are free to contact me if you wish."