The PN paradox: Renewal under a beaten leader

As things stand, with nobody apart from Grech expressing an interest in the post of party leader, the PN is heading to a one-horse race in which rank and file party members will not even have a say.

This is because party statute stipulates that the party leader only needs a majority among the 1,600 party councilors if nobody else contests. This implies that if re-elected Grech’s new mandate will not carry the legitimacy of a plebiscite amongst members.

But Grech’s position has been strengthened by the election of 17 new MPs who were elected for the first time to parliament. This provides him with a wider talent pool from which to pick a shadow cabinet.

The question is whether after being soundly beaten as party leader, Grech is an enabler of change or a deadweight.

One mission accomplished: generational renewal

After massive electoral defeats in 2013 and 2017 the incumbents resigned and were replaced by new leaders; Simon Busuttil in 2013 and Adrian Delia in 2017.

Yet on both occasions the party had failed to substantially renew its crop of parliamentary representatives, denying the new leader the opportunity of building a credible alternative ‘shadow cabinet’ made up of new faces freed of past baggage. For one of the stumbling blocks for the PN is that, compared to Labour – which kept renewing itself – voters did not see in the PN anything remotely resembling a government in the making.

Ironically, the party now finds itself in a different position. Despite losing with an even greater margin then in 2017, on election day the Nationalist Party elected eight brand new MPs including new district heavyweights like Joe Giglio, Mark Anthony Sammut, Alex Borg and Jerome Caruana Cilia. It also elected five new MPs in casual elections and four brand new female MPs through the corrective gender mechanism.

In this sense while Grech failed in his main mission of reducing the gap, he succeeded in the mission to renew his troops.  Moreover, the new candidates hail from across the party’s factional and ideological divides.

And while by losing big Grech may have denied the party a realistic chance to win in 2027, by enabling this generational renewal he may have set the train in motion for a reduced gap in 2027 and possibly a change in government in 10 years’ time.

This gives the party leader an opportunity to build a team around him with the aim of spending the next five years nurturing an alternative government. Still it remains to be seen what kind of mettle the PN’s new generation is made of and surely they need direction.

The problem is that this largely positive development for the party could not have happened at a worse time.  Apart from the general feeling of demoralisation following an even greater humiliation then in 2013 and 2017, it is increasingly likely that the generational renewal will be presided by a leader whose public image has been tainted by the scale of the defeat and who had failed in his self-declared mission to cut the gap.

And although he came across as a sympathetic person who tried to win the battle of ideas, Grech’s performance in the campaign, particularly when debating Abela, was poor.  Still one can argue that this was part of Grech’s learning curve and that one could not expect miracles from him just two years after being elected.

So the question facing the party is whether Bernard Grech is the ideal person to lead this renewal. But the answer to that question depends on whether there is anybody else willing to drink from the same poisoned well. One major factor is that any new leader is already condemned to defeat in 2027, with his task largely limited to reducing the gap.  So does it not make sense for Grech to assume this task to ensure that the next leader would start from a better position to win in ten years time?   

The answer to that question may also be conditioned by Grech’s repeated declarations that he intends staying on, thus possibly discouraging others from putting their name in the hat. In short had Grech resigned of his own will, necessity would have dictated on the party to elect someone new, with the contest itself triggering the much needed discussion on the party’s future direction.

A general sense of paralysis

This would not have been without its dangers.  For in desperate times, party members may have been easily swayed by another outsider who may not be necessarily fit for purpose or who even exacerbate already existing divisions, not just between rival factions but between social liberals and conservatives.

The Labour Party had experienced something similar after Alfred Sant lost the 2003 general election. Unlike Grech now, Sant immediately resigned.  But faced with the prospect of an election between John Attard Montalto and Anglu Farrugia, Sant was convinced to re-contest.  Sant went on to lose by a whisker in the 2008 election in an election which the party probably lost because of its leader. But by closing the gap in 2008, Sant also paved the way for the renewal under Joseph Muscat.

Still although the alternative to Grech not staying on as leader may be even worse for the PN, the reality is that the electorate may further recoil from the party if it persists in a  ‘business as usual’ attitude.  So with Grech staying on, what signals can he send to show that he means business?

One may argue that Grech only had two years to prepare for the election but that in itself begs another question; would it not have made sense to let Delia complete his term and elect a new leader with a clean slate?  And while Delia would have probably lost by an even greater margin (his trust levels were abysmal) the fact that the gap still increased under Grech also suggests that it was the bitter aftertaste of Delia’s removal that had poisoned Grech’s chalice.

That may also be one of the reasons why party insiders now speak of a general sense of paralysis in the party, with many fearing that the party is too sick to face another internal battle and should therefore focus on nurturing the generational change, which was partly enabled by Grech himself. In short, an internal contest now looks like surgery on a weak patient who may not even survive the ordeal intact.

Waiting for Godot: The Metsola factor

The problem for Grech is that to lead effectively he needs to assert his leadership more then ever before. The election of a new deputy leader and the appointment of a shadow cabinet offer Grech an opportunity to show his resolve. Yet the risk is obvious; how can a leader trounced by 40,000 votes be in a better position to assert his authority in the party?

Also militating against Grech is the widespread perception that he is a caretaker leader serving until Roberta Metsola can take over the party, even if it remains doubtful whether she is even remotely interested in the post.

This is because what the PN needs now is not a caretaker but an assertive leader. What is more probable is that in two years time, after finishing her term as President of the EU parliament, Metsola will probably lead the PN’s list in MEP elections, giving the party a realistic chance of reducing the gap. This may offer the PN a short cut; that of reducing the gap three years before general elections.

If the party does benefit from a vote of appreciation for Metsola this may evaporate by the time of the general election where people will once again choose which party they would like to see in government. That is why Grech’s major task remains that of nurturing a new generation of potential ministers.

But even that would not be enough if he fails to find new battle cries for a party facing an existential crisis. For ultimately, with Labour becoming Malta’s new hegemonic centrist party, the major question for the PN remains: what alternative can it offer to a Labour Party which has moved in its territory?

Some insiders dismiss the question arguing that ultimately it depends on being perceived by the electorate as a better management team of the same system, which people like.

But then again this begs the question; isn’t this perception that nothing will change as both parties are in cahoots with the same lobbies and financial interests, one of the many reasons why 60,000 voters stayed at home or spoiled their vote?   

And this may represent Grech’s major dilemma. For while he must project the PN as an alternative government, which guarantees stability, he has to keep in mind that growing segment which demands a more radical change.