[ANALYSIS] Joseph Muscat has a 10-year plan...

“I always said that we have – that I have – a 15-year plan; five years in Opposition and 10 years in government,” the Prime Minister said quite significantly on Reporter last Monday. Two self-imposed terms, mirroring the legal stay for US presidents, and signaling a departure from his party’s post, dominated first by Dom Mintoff serving for 35 years, then by Alfred Sant for 16. Only Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici bowed down after eight years and two defeats. Muscat’s plan looks bold and fresh.

But there’s a propaganda effect that boosts his immediate goal: winning the next election. For his voters, it addresses the concern that re-election is needed to consolidate the regime; and it counterbalances his image as overbearing strongman, condescending towards the Opposition, a factor that dents his image. Limiting his stay to two terms gives the impression that Muscat is not attached to power and that unlike his predecessors, he will let go the reins of power without much ado.

So when all is said and done, does this mean Labour gets a new leader in 7 or 8 years’ time? With Muscat’s status as undisputed leader and his highly personalised style of leadership, the transition could be difficult in such a short span of time.

Blessed by fortune

In 2008 Muscat was given a blank cheque by his party to render Labour electable after three consecutive defeats. He refashioned it in his own image, jettisoning the post of secretary-general – which creates a rival power base – and appointed his own CEO and brought in outsiders to fill the ranks of an alternative government.

Bolstered by an unprecedented 36,000-vote majority and a nine-seat majority Muscat retains his trust lead over the PN, which is still reeling from the electoral defeat and the baggage of its recent past. Earlier on Muscat had read the signs of the times, challenging the conservative social mores of Nationalist administrations and setting in motion a social revolution by way of civil unions, gay adoptions, and relaxed drug and censorship laws.

He was helped by a more favourable international economic climate, marked by lower oil prices which back in 2008 crippled the Gonzi administration; Muscat has even cushioned himself from any future mishap through the Individual Investment Programme, which has transformed citizenship into a commodity but earned Muscat the pork barrel he may need to win the next election. In so doing he accepted a humiliating contractual obligation to promote Henley’s IIP programme abroad; the IIP cash will avoid him the painful choice between increasing taxes and cutting spending, while accelerating the pace of economic growth.

His is a short-term approach. Painful reforms like second-pillar pensions don’t trouble him while growth fuelled by construction and the IIP fit in neatly in his 10-year plan. So does the five-year fixed price agreement with ElectroGas, which expires midway in the next legislature. 

A united party

Without the socialist ideology, Muscat’s undisputed and personalised hold over Labour is reminiscent of the caudillo-like Dom Mintoff. Growing concerns on governance, cronyism and loss of open spaces have so far not seriously eroded his hold on power.

Muscat says he leads a ‘movement’ that includes persons more loyal to him than to the party which he has eclipsed without evoking any reaction. Apart from Marlene Farrugia’s principled concern on the environment, there is little dissent in the party. There is no left-wing minority, although that may yet emerge, as happened inside British Labour with Jeremy Corbyn’s surprise election by rank and file members rebelling against the drift to the right.

But at this point in time there is little discussion in the party about a leadership successor. 

His self-imposed limit of a decade in power echoes Eddie Fenech Adami’s declaration that governments should alternate every 10 years. But unlike Fenech Adami, Muscat has imposed a shelf-life on himself rather than on his party, which may outlive him by winning a third consecutive election under a new leader.

In this sense the power networks created by Muscat may well surpass him. But Muscat has created a system of power that militates against an easy transition to a new leader. Like Tony Blair, who dominated his party, he may well end up leaving a poisoned chalice to his successor.

By fashioning the party in his own image and eclipsing it, it has become hard to imagine any successor standing out. With no visible dissent or any real ideological debate, Muscat could opt to anoint a leader who shares his ideology but lacks his gravitas.

To resign before or after 2023?

Muscat’s declaration evokes two possible scenarios. Assuming he wins the next election, Muscat could serve two full terms as PM and immediately resign after the 2023 election, irrespective of the result. But this would mean that Muscat risks his first electoral defeat, a possibility that could worsen if voters do not know who their PM would be if Labour is re-elected for a third time. This would be a serious liability that creates uncertainty, unless there is a designate-leader… but again, this might create resentment inside the party among those who feel excluded.

Muscat may well be aping Tony Blair, who renounced the leadership after three consecutive electoral victories. Blair and Gordon Brown were said to have sealed a pact well before the former became party leader; he later very reluctantly handed over power after securing a third term. It is unclear whether Muscat has a successor in mind, although this allows him to command the loyalty of all potential successors jockeying for his favour in a potential leadership bid.

Another option for Labour would be that of electing its new leader some time before the 2023 election. But any newly elected leader would need time to consolidate his position as leader. This would mean that Labour would be facing a leadership election in four or five years’ time, something which is bound to weaken party unity in the next years as prospective candidates start testing the ground for a leadership bid, and create tension between rival aspirants in the parliamentary group.   

Potential candidates could include young, promising lawmakers like Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, who may steer the party to the left, the popular tourism minister Edward Zammit Lewis, who may be more business friendly, and maybe the highly ambitious parliamentary secretary Ian Borg.  

As members of the Cabinet they would have an advantage over others like the aspiring young new candidate Aaron Farrugia, who is close to Muscat’s ideological vision, but are yet to make their way to parliament.

One important factor is that a wider college of electors, which also includes all party members who have been members for the previous five years, will elect the next Labour leader. Excluding the newer party members due to the five-year-rule will quash the aspirations of outsiders who may be tempted to rock the status quo à la Corbyn.

An early election?

Muscat may well have another scenario in mind. The self-imposed 10-year timetable may well make it unlikely for Muscat to serve two full terms, so he could opt for two shorter, four-year terms, hoping that a third term would give his party a two-year breathing space to elect a new leader.  

Muscat may be more likely to call for an early election in this legislature, seizing  a favourable moment to avoid the prospect of an Opposition invigorated by narrowing the gap in the next election. Muscat knows that another electoral humiliation would throw the Opposition into total disarray, and his out-of-the-box thinking could solve the party’s leadership dilemma by shortening the legislative term.

Stepping down as a winner

What is sure is that Muscat would like to step down as a winner and not as a loser.  Muscat may well be aware that it is extremely unlikely that Labour would win more than two consecutive terms.  

Ultimately his decisions may be dictated by one overriding consideration: his desire to go down in the history books as a winner who was never beaten in an election.  Even his decision to postpone local elections to 2019 can be seen in this light, a way of avoiding bruising mid term set-backs. So his decision to step down depends on the prospects of winning elections, and this all depends on the fortunes of his political adversary, Simon Busuttil.

Busuttil could survive a loss at the next election if he substantially reduces the 36,000-vote gap; a radical frontbench change could give him a bigger chance of winning the 2023 election, especially if Muscat steps down before, for him to face a PL leader less experienced than Muscat

Although a victory at the next election remains unlikely for Busuttil due to the magnitude of the gap between the parties, he may well survive a loss at the next election as PN leader if he substantially reduces the 36,000-vote gap. A radical change in the PN’s front bench could give Busuttil a bigger chance of winning the 2023 election, especially if Muscat steps down before, and he would end facing a PL leader who is less experienced than Muscat. 

But if Busuttil fails to reduce the gap substantively at the next election, Muscat may find himself facing a new PN leader, elected by rank and file party members who may well change the dynamics of the contest in a more unpredictable way. So ultimately Muscat’s decision on whether to lead his party for a third victory will depend squarely on his adversary’s chances of defeating him.

Tony Blair (above), Nursultan Nazarbayev (above, right) and Ilham Aliyev sought his conulstancy

Retiring at 49?

If he stands down in seven years’ time, Muscat would also be the first party leader to quit his political career before reaching retirement age.

If he steps down unbeaten, he could remain an albatross around the next Labour leader’s progress. Anything short of a complete exit from politics would mean that the next Labour leader would remain in his shadow. But if he leaves politics to join the private sector, Muscat would face other dilemmas.

At 49 Muscat would still have 16 years in front of him before reaching retirement age. Any engagements with the private sector after the end of his political career are bound to raise questions on connections he made while serving the country. Political leaders like Gerhard Schröder in Germany courted controversies through his engagement with Russian energy company Gazprom, and Tony Blair with his consultancies to dictatorial central Asian regimes.