PN sees repeated calls 'to reflect changes in society, people's aspirations'

The Nationalist Party must understand that society has changed and it had to reflect the people’s aspirations if it wanted citizens to respect it and value its work.

This was the underlying message that emerged during the first session of a convention organised by the PN at its first ever national convetion at the Corinthia Hotel.

Perhaps the most direct speech was that delivered by Professor Joseph Pirotta, who urged the party to avoid treating people with arrogance: “If someone asks for a favour and you can’t give it to them, just explain why. Dialogue with the citizens. It’s not about clientalism and it’s not about slamming doors in their face either.”

Pirotta argued that the PN had for years been the people’s party because it had won their trust based on its policies of work, justice and freedom. But had they become mere slogans?

“Why did the ‘Malta for all’ affect so many people?” Pirotta asked, referring to the Labour’s electoral slogan during the 2013 general elections. “Because a section of society was feeling that it was not benefiting from the common good; others felt they were on the verge of being put aside.”

He said that the PN no longer remained synonymous with the definition of common good and people turned to those inside the party from whom they believed could get them what they need.

“It’s all about believing that a party reflects your aspirations. And the PN was not delivering that message.”

Addressing directly Nationalist politicians and activists, Pirotta underlined the importance of meeting and dialoging with the whole of society.

“We all know that society is not static but you have to follow that change. We are members of the European Union and you cannot express surprise that we now reflect a European life,” Pirotta said.

Solidarity, he added, was another key factor that a party should practise: “Let us not kid ourselves: people in politics tend to be patronizing.”

Pirotta also said that reflecting a modern society was not about abandoning one’s values but about being able to understand reality and identify oneself with the changing times.

Lawyer David Griscti, the chairperson of PN think-tank AZAD, who opened this evening’s debate, argued that the PN’s electoral loss was down to the party’s failure to come up with a fresh vision following Malta’s accession to the EU.

“The party failed to understand that the people wanted to live like true Europeans… or perhaps the party failed to explain how it was reflecting this,” he said. “But the party started hiding behind the Brussels façade while the people detached itself from it. They were now seeing conflicting messages. One doesn’t blame the people for their rebellion.”

According to Griscti, the Labour Party was meanwhile changing, speaking differently and promising everything to everyone. “You can’t disrespect Joseph Muscat and the PL because they saw an opportunity and seized it.”

Saying that the PN “had nothing to be ashamed about”, Griscti said that bullying tactics, mud-slinging and use of multimedia to attack individuals personally was wrong.

“It’s wrong if the PN resorted to these tactics. This is not the way you acquire respect.”

During a concluding session chaired by lawyer Frank Psaila, academic Oliver Friggieri gave a different picture of how he viewed the PN, compared to the previous speakers.

“I am not convinced that the PN lost the election. It didn’t win it. I think the people just said ‘now it’s not your return’, like zapping from one TV station to another. The PN represents enourmous success and it has to calm down,” Friggieri said.

“I wish the PN could forget it lost an election. I’m not seeing a crisis…just a stumbling block.”

Veteran journalist Godfrey Grima advised the PN to start looking at is own leadership and realise how it had let the people down.