Present perfect… past tense?

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi's constant references to the "dark socialist" past of the Labour Party may well rally the Nationalist Party's old guard - but it flies in the face of a younger generation of voters which remembers 25 years of Nationalist governments, but very little - if anything at all - of the Labour days.

First-time voters in particular - a vital category that is central to the PN's strategy to stay in power beyond 2013 - are probably the least affected by the talk of the past.

The only way the PN can counter the shift to Labour is by appealing to the majority of new voters. In fact a major weakness of this strategy is that it fails to address voters whose political baptism of fire was the 2011 divorce referendum campaign: a memory which scars the PN's image among a large number of younger voters.  

In fact fresh memories of the Prime Minister voting against divorce in defiance of the referendum result, and the association of the PN with ultra conservative elements such as the 'Kristu Iva, Divorzju Le' campaign, could have a greater impact on voting intentions than events which took place 30 years ago or more.

The logic of a strategy

Gonzi's evocation of the "dark socialist" days could well be a pre-determined strategy aimed at galvanising the core Nationalist vote in the early phase of the campaign.   This could well be an indication of the PN's deep problems, which are not restricted to its hold on pale blue voters, but also its hold on core voters. Galvanising the enthusiasm of these voters is needed to set the electoral machine in motion. These are the people who attend campaign meetings and spread the word in the towns and villages.

This strategy may also be targeting older Nationalist voters toying with the idea of voting Labour for the first time in their lives but who still value their party's past.

Another intended consequence of the revocation of the past is that of generating interest among younger voters in a historical period which is largely overlooked in secondary school history textbooks.

The more they hear about the past the more likely these voters are to ask older parents and relatives about what  really happened. This is likely to raise questions about Labour's past among voters who do not directly recall these events. Faced with the truth and gravity of some of these events, younger voters are likely to recoil in horror. 

Still, this strategy is limited by the fact that the Maltese are more nuanced than Gonzi in their assessment of the 1970s and 1980s to the extent that a survey published in Illum showed a majority of voters expressing the view that  Dom Mintoff's political career was more positive than negative. The survey also showed that most respondents associated Mintoff with social welfare rather than violence and human rights violations. 

Finally, Gonzi is exploiting Muscat's attempt to reconcile with the Mintoffian element which had been shunned by his predecessor Alfred Sant, but which has been rehabilitated by Joseph Muscat. And when 'New Labour' candidates such as Yana Mintoff allude to  "talking to lawyers" in response to Dear Dom - a documentary on her father - they could well have provided precious fodder for the PN's campaign to associate Labour with Mintoffian antics. 

On the other hand, the concerted attempt to link former old Labour exponents like Karmenu Vella and Leo Brincat have largely backfired due to the perceived moderate nature of these politicians. 

Re-opening a can of worms

One major shortcoming of the evocation of the past campaign is that it risks re-opening a can of worms of unresolved cases which involve people who are still expecting justice after 25 years of PN-led governments. In fact by exhuming the past, Gonzi is inviting criticism from categories like former National Bank of Malta shareholders, who still yearn for justice which was promised to them before 1987, but that was never delivered.

Labour exponents like deputy leader Toni Abela, who have a track record of publicly denouncing Labour's excesses in the 1980s, have also been able to deflect criticism of Labour's past by pointing out that police officials found guilty of breaching human rights were promoted by the PN in government after 1987.

Too divisive?

Another risk of the campaign is that  the constant evocation of the PL's dark past makes Gonzi look divisive and responsible for perpetuating historical schisms. On the other hand Muscat's prosaic rhetoric - projecting his party as an inclusive one, which appeals to Mintoffians and former Nationalists alike - could strike a chord with voters.

In fact it could also alienate his attempts to win sympathy among former Labour voters. Gonzi knows well that he needs to counterbalance the shift from PN to Labour by winning over voters from the other side.

According to the latest MaltaToday survey, while 10% have shifted from the PN to Labour, only 3.4% have shifted from Labour to the PN. 

Ironically, one way of appealing to Labour voters would be that of outflanking Labour from the left, something which the PN proved capable of doing in the past, even by exploiting Sant's rift with Mintoff. 

Curiously, Gonzi's evocation of the dark socialist past and Labour's "extreme socialism" could not be further from Muscat's Labour, which projects itself as business friendly and rarely says anything which can be remotely described to be leftist. So while attacking Labour for its dark socialist past, the PN is stirring doubts on Labour's commitment to uphold the stipend system and free health care - two things excluded by Labour leader Joseph Muscat but questioned by Edward Scicluna before he joined the political fray. 

Stirring doubts

Nor is the PN's revocation of the past limited to the 1970s and 1980s. Closer historical memories, like those of Alfred Sant resorting to austerity after promising the exact opposite, still form part of the repertoire of PN propagandists. So is Muscat's opposition to EU membership in the 2003 referendum.

But while history has a big role in defining identities, it is doubtful whether voters will be influenced by historical considerations when actually voting. Ultimately the historical dimension should be seen as part of a more concerted attempt to stir doubts among voters who might yearn for change, but still fear a leap in the dark. Even examples of other countries, like the economic collapse of Zapatero's Spain - a popular tourist destination with many Maltese - are conjured up by Gonzi in the his attempts to instil doubt on Labour's credentials as an alternative cabinet.  But by the same reasoning should Gonzi be blamed for the economic failures of  fellow members of the European  Popular party like New Democracy in Greece or Silvio Berlusconi in Italy?

Reference to bloodcurdling events in the past only serves to amplify this fear of an epochal change. The success of this strategy also depends on whether Muscat succeeds in filling the gaping holes in his policies: something which is also being exploited by the PN in its bid to depict Labour as untrustworthy.