The PN's 'secret' strategy

The Nationalist Party's decision to prevent an election in Marsa and Zejtun by pulling out candidates at the last minute has enraged many Nationalists and sparked off criticism from well-known party exponents. Yet, the party's general secretary, Joe Saliba believes it was the right decision. Massimo Farrugia caught up with him atthe Pietà party headquarters yesterday.

"We like to spring surprises," Mr Saliba had said an hour before nominations for Saturday's local council elections closed on February 5 when replying to a journalist who asked why the PN had not yet held a press conference to present its candidates as Labour had done earlier that day.

Five minutes before the deadline, the PN withdrew four candidates from Labour strongholds Marsa and Zejtun so that no election would be held there.

But what was more surprising than the "strategic decision" itself was the uproar of criticism coming from the likes of Frank Zammit and Michael Mercieca, PN candidates and members of the executive council, former general secretary Victor Ragonesi and former PN candidate Marisa Micallef.

Dr Ragonesi went on record saying he hardly knew of any Nationalist who approved of the decision to pull out of the local election race in Zejtun and Marsa.

Mr Zammit said that in the mentality of "true Nationalists" the decision was "a sacrilege".

Speaking to The Times off the record, others claimed the PN would not have resorted to such a manoeuvre had President Eddie Fenech Adami and Richard Cachia Caruana still been involved in the PN's decision-making.

The inevitable question for Mr Saliba on the eve of the election was whether the PN administration expected such a reaction from executive members when it took the decision. As we sat at table in his Pietà office, Mr Saliba replied with an abrupt "yes".

"I have been involved in the party administration since 1997, when we were not in government, and I can tell you that any electoral strategy has been met with opposition from people within the party. There can be a majority of Nationalists who do not agree with a decision. It is good to hear that there are people who are interested in the party strategy."

People who disapproved of the decision approached Mr Saliba and told him so to his face. "I do not deny that a substantial number of Nationalists disagreed with the decision. It's true. But this does not mean it is a bad strategy. It's not the first time we adopted a strategy that did not work, as our electoral track record shows. We sometimes won elections and we lost them on other occasions."

Mr Saliba attributes the decision to the party strategy group but refuses to disclose the reasons behind it. "We cannot state why we did it. The moment we do, it ceases to be a strategy. Isn't it obvious that if I were to tell you the reasons behind the Marsa and Zejtun pull-out rival parties will work to counter that strategy?"

So people will know the reason behind the strategy after the election. "Absolutely," he said.

But why would the party prevent an election in two Labour strongholds? Writing in The Times yesterday, Mr Zammit said that if the PN stood for elections in the two localities, Labour would have won by about 5,000 votes. He went on to say: "Mr Saliba would not have wanted such a shocking result at a time when he will be seeking re-election as general secretary".

"I wouldn't like to reply to Frank Zammit's comments," Mr Saliba said. "I don't want to give rise to a controversy between the party and people who write in newspapers. Mr Zammit has a right to express himself."

Yet, the explanation for the strategy behind the electoral pull-out that disenfranchised residents of Marsa and Zejtun could be dictated by a logical, well-known fact that the localities are Labour strongholds where the PN could not even dream of getting a majority.

Mr Saliba said local council elections had not taken place in a number of localities in the past, mainly because the MLP did not allow its candidates to contest.

But was the decision a war of numbers? "No. It was not a question of numbers. In Qormi, where the local council election was won by the MLP on several occasions, we managed to overturn the majority so the decision was not based on the usual assumptions of how the electorate votes in the general election."

According to Mr Saliba's own reasoning however, pulling out candidates for fear of losing the majority does not make sense. So what was the point? He insists the reasons cannot be disclosed.

Since it is not in the habit of the PN to wash dirty linen in public, I asked Mr Saliba if the administration saw this outburst of criticism as a crisis? "Not at all. Open discussions shows that the party is an open one".

Mr Saliba said the MLP had axed party members who criticised it in the open. "This does not happen in the PN. The fact that well-known Nationalists are harshly criticising the party administration is a good thing because it strengthens the party," he said, adding that "open discussion" was business as usual in the PN. "That's why we're a popular party."

Labour leader Alfred Sant and MLP general secretary Jason Micallef have assessed local councils and awarded percentages for councils' performances while visiting different localities, giving high marks to councils with a Labour majority and castigating Nationalists.

Labour even went round localities filming bad roads and rundown playing fields. Though this seems like a parochial attitude, good roads, pavements and clean squares are what people often think of when they hear of local council elections.

Why didn't the PN adopt an on-the-ground strategy visiting localities and listening to the people's complaints as Labour had done?

"It would be a mistake if we were to emulate Labour's tactics. The objectives are different and so are the tactics. Neither do we agree that parties should award percentages to a local council. The system does not work like that because once candidates are elected they become councillors of a locality where there is no government or opposition like there is on a national level. The councillors work as a team irrelevant of whether they are Nationalist or Labour councillors."

But political pique hardly stops when elections are over. While some councillors do overcome it and work together for the sake of their locality, others do not. Media reports on local councils' meetings have proven this time and again. So one could argue that the parties themselves have taken the Don Camillo/Peppone-style politics into local councils. Perhaps localities would have been better off without the PN and the MLP.

"I don't agree. There is no place in the world where the parties stay out of local council elections," Mr Saliba said. "A political party is there to prepare politicians, on both a local and a national level. All parties in the world strive to convince people that its policies are the best and there is nothing strange or wrong in giving people the opportunities to vote for those views in local council elections."

Beyond what the political parties claim on the performance of their candidates, Mr Saliba said, an increasing number of people vote for the individuals rather than for the parties.

"Local elections have indeed given the opportunity to people to vote for independent candidates, or even candidates from a different party, because in local elections there is no government at stake".

A survey by The Sunday Times last week showed that 75 per cent of the Maltese were not satisfied with the way the government is running the country. Will the government's performance and the people's perception of it affect the PN's result in the upcoming election? Did the survey worry Mr Saliba?

"I certainly could not shrug it off because it was not in the PN's favour. The sentiment of people at this time is understandable. If you take the road system as an example, people see dug up roads and wonder when there will be an end to it. As in the case of other long-term projects, people will change their opinions when they see the road paved with tarmac and properly embellished."

I asked Mr Saliba about the strategy group. Who sat on the strategy group besides the general secretary and the party leader? "The strategy group is a small group that has always existed within the party," he said avoiding my question to name individuals. "I can't tell you who they are," he said at last.

Back to the Marsa and Zejtun pull-out, Mr Saliba said with a smirk that the media seems to have linked the electoral result with the PN's decision to pull out candidates from Zejtun and Marsa. Does this mean the PN will link the pull-out from Marsa and Zejtun to a possible negative electoral result in other localities? Will the PN blame a disgruntled PN electorate for a possible defeat in these elections?

"This was the main argument put forward by many in the media so far," Mr Saliba said. So? What was he trying to say? "I'm trying to say nothing, I'm just repeating what the media has been saying so far," he said smiling.

I left Mr Saliba's office, a part of me thinking hard on what the reasons behind the strategy Mr Saliba refused to disclose could be. Was the criticism from PN executive members really part of a foreseen strategy? Or had the PN core group thought of an impromptu strategy after Nationalists started criticising their own party? Giving up trying to reach a conclusion, I thought I would better wait for the secret strategy to emerge once elections are over.