On April 20 I wrote in this newspaper that if the Malta Labour Party wants to carry out a meaningful post-mortem this should not be done by any of the seasoned or relatively new MPs or else by party functionaries at any level - central, district or local.

I added that a commission composed of persons of trust, who are not involved in the party machine, should be entrusted with the task of carrying out this study as early as possible.

I concluded that it is against this background that discussion within the party can yield the desired results.

I am pleased to note that my suggestion - which might also have been raised internally by others - was recommended by the party administration and adopted by the party's national executive when it met recently for the first time following Labour's defeat at the polls.

With this mechanism in place, I feel reassured that whichever way the leadership issue will be resolved Labour will not be burying its head in the sand and insulating itself from the harsh realities that might emerge from the commission's findings.

We do not only need to experience a culture change but also to reconnect with those segments of society, whose natural place should be within the Labour Party.

Local elections held prior to the EU referendum showed that Labour had been exploiting well the traditional mid-term dissatisfaction with Government. It was primarily the EU issue that led to a change in its fortunes.

I say this because there is no other reason to explain why Labour's failure to attract the necessary support became all the more striking when there was clear evidence of disaffection with the Nationalist government.

I genuinely believe that, were one to put the EU issue apart, one would have found that more than half the electorate was dissatisfied with the Fenech Adami team's performance as well as with the record of his government as a whole.

Putting the EU issue behind us once and for all, I am confident that the political pendulum will start swinging again. Very likely by the next elections.

Nevertheless, it is important for the independent commission to dig as deep as possible. Only this can strategy, tactics, image, language, campaigning methods and policies be analysed with the desired seriousness.

Ultimately, what one expects from this commission, rather than the findings of a commission of inquiry, is a serious focus group analysis to establish the reasons for our unattractiveness to certain voters, as well as what has been perceived by many as being a lack of affinity with modern and contemporary trends.

Come the next election, Labour should be in a healthy position to reverse the trend that had led to a profound narrowing of its electoral and demographic base in recent years.

While Labour must continue to cultivate the hard core of the party, we have to keep in mind Michael Gove's observation about the British Tory party that once the Tories now represent only their hard core, as a consequence that core exercises a distorting influence on the party's priorities.

If we want to become electable again, rather than reassuring the already converted - through our statements and media - we need to reach out to those we need to win over.

Boycott policies might need to be revisited without playing into the hands of media gurus with a not-so-hidden agenda.

The major difference between Labour and other Opposition parties elsewhere is that while in their case there is little chance of reversing this pattern at the next election, in our case I believe that it can happen. And that it is both possible and likely to materialise.

As a result of the EU issue, our standing among younger voters has gone from bad to worse. By reducing the EU issue to a non-issue, this deficiency can be addressed.

Ultimately, if the party decides to participate in the Euro elections - which I strongly feel it should - we should work to establish our place in the fold of the European Socialist Party, among the other mainstream parties that embrace contemporary social democracy without going back on any of their principles.

Without embracing globalisation, warts and all, we need to be more in tune with the changes which the globalisation process is bringing about in society, particularly in the technological sector.

There will no doubt be a temptation to find comfort where one can.

As a born optimist I feel that one can afford to do so because in spite of the electoral defeats that we have suffered the electoral landscape need not remain bleak. Nevertheless, we cannot afford to rely on false comforts.

As a progressive social democratic party, we need to be more courageous in embracing change. In saying so I do not necessarily have change of personalities in mind but change of attitude, approach and mentality.

Labour has many strong local candidates who understand and reflect the priorities of local people. Campaigning really hard, they showed that they can win and they did win on an individual basis. The Labour Party can do the same thing collectively as a party.

I have met party activists who feel that a much more aggressive opposition to the Nationalists would attract people back to the party. If polling had to be conducted I am confident that hardly less than 10 per cent of non-Labourites would agree.

Our main problem is not one man - whatever might have been decided by the time this article appears in print - but our collective image.

By the next mid-term we need to have already started coming across as a government in waiting ready to assume power through democratic means at the very first available opportunity.

A divided, arrogant, selfish and conceited team like the Nationalists do not deserve anything better.

I cannot but censure all those who continue to argue that it was the voters who got it all wrong.

Whether time will prove them right or wrong is another matter altogether.

A UK political analyst recently observed that it often takes two elections, and sometimes three, to teach a party to stop talking about what matters to itself and start talking about what matters to the voters.

I feel that the EU issue apart, the MLP manifesto addressed most of these issues.

Nevertheless, given the permanently changed scenario, even this manifesto will have to be revised and updated, to figure out how it can work in practice within an EU membership framework.

I believe strongly in offering a robust Opposition when circumstances so demand, but on the other hand shrill stridency on its own will never win affection, respect or support from the undecided.

The Nationalists did not help matters through the character assassination and demonisation campaign conducted intensively against Alfred Sant, particularly during the past legislature.

I am quite confident that in the coming months Labour will offer a clear, coherent and consistent idea of what it stands for, while showing more resilience and adaptability to change the modern Malta it helped to build in its own ways.

Attitude and culture can only change if we put nostalgia aside.

I am confident that on the basis of the independent commission's findings the party will reform itself in good time to be trusted to reform Malta anew.