In his "Ostrich politics" article (The Sunday Times, July 16) Michael Falzon says: "I believe that in the pensions issue there is an emotional input that Dr (Alfred) Sant apparently cannot fathom, just as he obviously did not comprehend the emotional input in the EU membership issue..."

He is absolutely right. Winning the hearts and minds of voters is not done through "cool calculated logic" but by appealing to the voting public's emotions. He is confirming the ploy consistently used by the PN.

Most voters were not really aware of the pros and cons of joining the EU but their emotions said "Vote Yes". Similarly, most voters do not really understand the pensions issue but it is an emotional issue and, given a choice, they would say do something about it now.

Michael Falzon seems to be telling Dr Sant "forget the logical approach and go for the emotional approach if you want to win votes".

The PN has always very successfully adopted the emotional approach with the public, and to hell with logic and long-term implications. They are using this approach with the development zone extension scheme, telling us this scheme will put right past injustices.

Unfortunately, the emotional approach works until the victims (the voters in this case) realises how they were manipulated. It is a fact that when one is cheated "emotionally" it hurts a hundred times more than when one is cheated "logically". We are now witnessing a number of diehard Nationalists who are publicly saying "this is not what I voted for".

We have a good example of logic ultimately winning over emotion in the valuation of Maltacom shares. The minister in charge confirmed the "irrational" pricing of stocks on the Malta Stock Exchange, and assured us that Maltacom shares were worth less than the Maltese public thought. This was further confirmed by foreign experts and the ultimate buyer.

So is the PN capable of injecting more logic and less emotions in its dealing with the public? The public is saying: "We have been burnt by these guys several times, will we ever trust them again?"

Will the public buy the PN's story for the development zone extension when the facts are that there are tens of thousands of empty dwellings and, at the same time, people are suffocated by construction dust and lack of open space?

Dr Sant's obvious preferred style is logic. He speaks of "telling the truth". A case in point is the economy. Dr Sant quotes the business owners he meets who tell him that things are very bad. The PN tells us it has a vision, and it is working. In contrast to Dr Sant's description of the state of the economy, the PN wants us to feel that we are riding the crest of a wave. The truth is that we are riding the crest of a slump.

So can the MLP include the emotional input that Mr Falzon proposes and that has worked so well for the PN? I do not think so. They had their days of displaying and acting out their type of emotions. Thank God those days are over.

Now it seems they have adopted the "cool calculated logic" approach. Will the public buy it? Theory says that our buying decisions (including voting) are driven by our emotions. Practice says that when you buy or vote with emotion you end up like the very nice lady who voted for George and ended up getting a truck!