Dynamics of a campaign foretold

Lagging behind in the polls, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi desperately needs to undermine credibility in Joseph Muscat, whose party leads with a nine-point margin thanks to a strong swing from the PN to the PL.

Unlike predecessor Alfred Sant in 2008, Joseph Muscat is starting the race as the more trusted of the two contenders.

His major preoccupation is not to lose those former PN voters now intent on voting Labour, some of them for the first time in their life.

Muscat knows they detest Gonzi's leadership or simply yearn for a change in government, but are largely in agreement with the PN's economic policies. And this explains Muscat's committal to the tax cuts for high earners, which even former Labour minister Lino Spiteri described are "socially obscene".

To some extent, Muscat's position appears vindicated by Fitch's declaration not to downgrade Malta's credit rating despite Gonzi's failed budget - much of it thanks to Muscat's commitment to implement it in 2013 if elected.

Everybody's 'Joseph'

While Labour's commitment to retain the tax cuts fly in the face of its much touted social democratic credentials, Muscat knows he will not lose traditional Labour voters who are keen on seeing the party win the next election.

The risk is that he appears vague and unprincipled to discerning middle-of-the-road voters who might start doubting the sustainability of Muscat's fiscal commitments, coupled with his pledge to reduce utility bills. In a nutshell: it costs money, and the most rich are going to paying less tax to boot.

The credibility of Labour's much-anticipated plan to reduce utility bills is of vital importance now. If it is put in question, the entire edifice of Labour's campaign could be shaken to the ground. If is too detailed and technical to be understood, voters might not understand it, and doubts would linger on throughout the campaign.

The government is already prepared for this eventuality, having already commissioned various reports on the costings of a shift to gas. This is one of the few instances where Muscat has put himself in a corner.

But one major advantage for him is that he can afford to project himself as a leader with an inclusive message of hope, simply because he has no pressing need to be confrontational or divisive.

Clearly, Muscat would only be in serious difficulty if the PN makes an improbable recovery and he would have to show his teeth.

Probably Muscat would try to avoid this and remain calm and positive till the end of the campaign. Probably, some of his voters would be expecting Muscat to hit harder, although he knows well that he has no need to satisfy the primordial instincts of supporters who would vote for him anyway.

Gonzi's desperate drive

Gonzi finds himself in need to undermine trust in Muscat and contain the haemorrhage from his party, while instilling a sense of enthusiasm among his core supporters.

His budget speech in parliament gave a taste of things to come: a direct attack on Muscat highlighting his past error in judgement by way of reference to his relatively recent opposition to EU membership.

Gonzi will also try to paint Muscat as a dangerous populist who could endanger his main accomplishment: the weathering of the worst global crisis since the great depression.

Here's how we took on Muscat in parliament when describing populism as an "immensely dangerous instrument".

"The lesson we have learnt in these past few years is that political leaders should not be scared of making the right decisions for the reforms that a country needs. If our country needs reform, we have not been scared of carrying out such reforms... reforms that have also saved this country. Not taking such bold steps could mean leading our country to the financial ruination that afflicted other European states."

Gonzi may well risk taking on Sant's previous role as a prophet of doom, while Muscat can flaunt his mantle of optimism and change. And although he is far from a spent force, especially in his rhetoric, Gonzi has become more prone to gaffes, which are immediately exploited by a slicker Labour machine.

His attempt to justify the two-month electoral campaign, claiming he avoided spending an extra €1 million by avoiding two elections on two dates for the general and the local councils elections, was immediately exposed as a lie.

Gonzi's attempt to justify going for a two-month campaign arguing that he was avoiding an extra €1 million spend by having two separate dates for local and general election was immediately exposed as a lie, simply because the law clearly states that local elections could be brought forward to coincide with general elections in February. Clearly, Gonzi's puerile attempt to implicate Muscat backfired.

The party also went overboard in exploiting a gaffe by Labour MP Helena Dalli: while her suggesting of "auditing" civil servants was clearly a political mistake, the PN's apparent breach of data protection to send a letter to government employees gave the impression that the PN is clutching at straws.

One interesting feature in Gonzi's electoral discourse now is his constant references to the opposition's "socialism" - a clear attempt to scare centre-right voters attracted by Muscat's inclusive appeal. Gonzi's rediscovery of socialism curiously contrasts Labour's own downplaying of its socialist routes with its constant pandering to business, developers and the "new middle class" Muscat vows to create. 

Gonzi said Labour's socialism was typical of an ideology "of being generous with other taxpayers' money", citing the dockyards as an example. Gonzi may have privatised it in 2010, but in 2003 he also wrote off €700 million in debt it had accumulated from the government.

Still, as Labour stretches out beyond its ideological limits, Michael Briguglio's green party Alternattiva Demokratika is stepping in as a centre-left party with a clear stance on both civil liberties issues like gay marriage and decriminalisation of drugs and on economic issues, by criticising the budget tax cuts. But it remains to be seen whether these issues have an audience in the greens' traditionally middle-class catchments.

Labour's leadership quandary

While a few weeks ago it was the PN facing a leadership quandary with the GonziPN implosion, it looks like Labour has to wrack its brains over how to react to the new Gonzi/Busuttil tandem.

Electing Simon Busuttil has highlighted the contrast between the PN's charismatic sidekick with Labour's Anglu Farrugia, whose popularity with Labour grassroots does not extend beyond the core vote.

While the PN will be expected to promote the leadership duo, Labour will probably opt for a presidential campaign in what is perhaps an admission that it lacks someone of Busuttil's stature to accompany its leader.

Still, Busuttil may well have entered the fray without any time to settle in his new role. His much-ridiculed invitation to supporters not to remain silent when hearing comments against the government at their local grocer, sounded out of character for a politician whose strength is that of rising above divisive politics. It also exposes the risk facing the PN: that of sounding too confrontational in its bid to rally lost voters.

The first days of the campaign have indicated that Busuttil still lacks the gravitas to upstage his leader Lawrence Gonzi.

The message in the medium

One disadvantage for the PN is that the PL leadership under Muscat is less gaffe-prone and certainly more disciplined in the way it conveys its message.

The increase of TV discussion programmes and the greater importance of social networks will still make it very difficult for the PL leadership to prevent any of its speakers or candidates from committing gaffes. Put simply, the greater the number of programmes, the greater the number of speakers who will be required. Some of the acclaimed star candidates are also proving themselves inept in their engagement with PN and AD speakers.

The PN would be banking on the fact that that the increase in the political discussions on public television, most of which conducted by PN-friendly presenters, increases the risks of gaffes by Labour.

Moreover, Labour will not be able to limit the participation in such programmes to the chosen few.

Clearly, while the PN stands to gain by the increase of TV debates, the PL which has a weaker and less experienced front bench stands to lose.   

Another interesting factor would be whether Labour will continue inviting Franco Debono and Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando on One TV.

While this serves to remind voters of internal divisions, it can also bring about a closing of ranks and increase the perception that the rebel backbenchers were simply part of Labour's plot to bring the government down.