[ANALYSIS] Labour's safest bet: Simon Busuttil or Tonio Fenech?

Labour has so far respectfully played by the rules. The Opposition has refrained from commenting on the current race for the PN's deputy leadership between Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil and finance minister Tonio Fenech.

It has not singled out any of the candidates contesting for attack, its silence disguising its unease over the impact that Gonzi's latest chess-move could have on undecided voters, and how it can checkmate the PN's latest stratagem. 

The reality of a two-horse race already makes it more difficult for Labour to depict Busuttil's (possible) election as an anointment representing 'GonziPN' continuity, something which would have been easier to harp on had Busuttil remained uncontested.

But the possible scenario of a Tonio Fenech victory could provide Labour the opportunity of pouncing on the baggage of a controversial, albeit capable minister. 

Irrespective of who wins, Labour's main problem lies in how to counter the obvious contrast between the new PN deputy leader (both candidates aged a young 43) with their two deputy leaders, Anglu Farrugia and Toni Abela. For PN councillors today, the 2008 Labour leadership contest is a stark reminder of the damage that inward-looking party delegates can inflict.

While Toni Abela has been unfairly cast by the PN media as a representative of the old guard when he was in fact the first to challenge the blight of violence and corruption when he resigned from Labour party president in 1989, Farrugia - now standing in line as a possible deputy prime minister - is increasingly seen as an albatross around Muscat's neck, simply because his style and delivery does not appeal to undecided voters.

For very different reasons, the two Labour deputy leaders have simply provided ammunition to the PN's propaganda machine. But for the PN, both Fenech and Busuttil can outclass Anglu Farrugia, even if Labour would probably avoid pitting its own deputy leaders in any confrontation with the newly elected PN deputy leader.

Checkmating Simon

For Labour, Simon Busuttil definitely represents a harder nut to crack than Fenech. 

A one-horse race anointing the MEP would have been easy for Labour to ridicule the election as a calculated chess move. Anticipating Busuttil's rise, Labour organs said the MEP would be made deputy leader after the dissolution of parliament, indicating that the MEP was the choice of strategy chief Richard Cachia Caruana and veteran minister Austin Gatt.

Even an advert on One TV lumped Simon Busuttil with unpopular ministers like Gatt, asking: "Do you want another five years of this?" 

Now selling the contest as a real race, the PN has Busuttil waving the banner of 'reconciliation' and change, while Fenech gets support from eight ministers and two parliamentary secretaries and 130 councillors. Busuttil has the support of one minister, and 26 names backing his nomination - hardly the depiction of Busuttil as the anointed one.

On its part, Labour has lent credibility to the contest, reporting on maltastar.com that Busuttil only has health minister Joe Cassar's backing, and that other ministers recent the MEP's conciliatory talk of building bridges with MP Franco Debono and independent MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando.

This makes it harder to attack Busuttil as some agent of continuity, lending credibility to his attempt at coming across as the candidate of change, even if he is in reality very close to the present party leadership.

But how would Busuttil's election impact Labour's chances at winning power?

Probably, the MEP could rally back pale-blue voters who are intending not to vote or still undecided; perhaps even reach out to AD voters he if steers the party towards a more socially liberal direction. Winning these voters would help narrow the gap, even though not enough to upset Labour's cart. 

Busuttil's challenge is to appeal to those former PN voters who switched to Labour or to a lesser extent AD: surveys show that 10% of PN voters in 2008 shifted from the PN to Labour before the 2009 MEP election. And the trend has remained the same for the past four years, an indication that these voters were lured by the appeal of Muscat as a young leader riding on a 'nationalist-lite' platform. The calculation made by party strategists is that these voters may well return back to the fold if enticed by a fresh new looking face who represents their aspirations.

The Gonzi-Busuttil tandem could also thwart Muscat's plan to turn the election into a presidential contest, exposing Labour's problems on the frontbench.

Still, Labour can bank on the fact that it is Gonzi who stands for re-election and not Busuttil. Neither can the PN afford to ditch Gonzi in order to build Simon Busuttil as an alternative PM. As shown in the latest Xarabank debate, despite the 'Brazil gaffe', Gonzi remains a forceful debater and far from a spent force: Busuttil himself may be appealing but is less of a combative debater than Gonzi.

The PN will probably be attentive to the polls, possibly resorting the final bombshell, that of Gonzi indicating his willingness for a power handover if he fails to pick up the pieces in the next weeks.

On the other hand, Labour will bank on the perception that Busuttil is just a cosmetic make-over of a government well past its expiry date. What is sure is that while the PN had years to prepare itself for the Muscat factor in the next election, Labour will only have a few weeks to shift from attacking GonziPN, to a strategy which takes into account a more dynamic leadership tandem.

A Fenech surprise

While Tonio Fenech cannot be dismissed as a lightweight or an outright liability, he also carries his own baggage - ammunition to the PL's propaganda machine if he is elected.

While Labour remains silent on the PN's internal matters, it would pounce upon Fenech's credibility the very moment he is elected.

Internally, while some councillors might identify with Fenech's archaic views on the relationship between personal faith and politics, these could represent an obstacle for the party's efforts to mend bridges with the liberal vote. Prior to the 2011 divorce referendum, Fenech insisted that "the divorce debate could not be divorced from faith" and that God had "a say in the morals of... this country".

Fenech also hit out at people who attended the processions of Our Lady of Sorrows that were irked by anti-divorce statements made during some of the celebrations: "I think the occasion was actually very befitting of such a message: I am sure Our Lady is very sorrowful that Malta is considering divorce," Fenech wrote.

One redeeming factor for Fenech is that unlike Gonzi, he did not vote against the divorce bill approved in the referendum, and ultimately chose to abstain. "People voted for divorce, and it is parliament's duty to have the law the people want. I will not be there to obstruct it," he said.

Fenech's squeaky-clean image was however jeopardised by two episodes which put his political judgement on what is ethically and politically appropriate or not, in doubt. Fenech hit the headlines in 2009 in the wake of revelations of his trip on a private jet owned by businessman George Fenech to watch an Arsenal match in the company of businessman Joe Gasan. 

Fenech again hit the headlines after hiring a construction firm owned by developers Jeffrey and Peter Montebello to renovate his house in Balzan, apparently as a favour to broker a hotel sale to the Gasan-Fenech tandem.

Then he suffered further collateral damage after his former private secretary admitted in court to receiving bribes from contractors Jeffrey and Peter Montebello to reduce or waive fees owed to government departments falling under the jurisdiction of the Finance Ministry. The contractors were later arraigned in connection with the bribery of this official. Fenech has categorically denied any knowledge of or connection with the case involving the contractors.

This is probably enough to make Fenech Labour's preferred adversary but it should still be wary of underestimating Fenech's strong debating skills and his resonance with middle-of-the-road voters who appreciate his role in weathering the economic storm.

The election of Fenech, coupled with the November budget, would shift the debate to the economy where the PN has an edge over Labour. Unlike Busuttil, Fenech will be in a position to ask voters to judge him on the basis of his actions in government. 

And while Simon Busuttil comes across as a politician who likes to be liked, Fenech could be more in tune with the times where politicians are expected to take hard decisions and get their reward in harvest time. Probably Fenech will ensure that harvest time will coincide with the election budget.

Labour would probably checkmate Fenech by focusing on his role as the minister responsible for the unpopular utility bills and the BWSC saga he inherited from his predecessor Austin Gatt.

Game-changer?

Ultimately Busuttil's greatest advantage is the perception that he is in a better position than Fenech to change the dynamics of the next election.

For while a billboard depicting Gonzi with Busuttil may have an impact on undecided voters and boost the party's efforts to project itself as one able to change itself while remaining in government, Fenech appeals to the same constituency as Gonzi.

Moreover Gonzi already carries Fenech's positive economic legacy, but lacks the appeal of someone who can reach out to M.O.R. and younger voters.

But that does not exclude the possibility that another factor can come into play, namely the perception that the party has already lost the election and that real change can only take place if the party goes back to the Opposition benches.

Labour has so far benefited from the lack of enthusiasm felt by PN voters. If Busuttil manages to instil a sense of hope by galvanising pale blue voters, Muscat may well get a run for his money. 

Busuttil himself raised the bar for himself for by telling councillors to vote for him: "if they think I am better for the PN to win the elections, then it is their duty to vote for me."

Probably he did this in the awareness that resignation and hopelessness are at the moment the greatest obstacle to the party's efforts to narrow down Labour's lead. Still, his words could return to haunt him if the party is defeated in the election and he is asked to assume responsibility for failing to accomplish a self-imposed benchmark.