But the bottom line is that he deserved to win. Voters were mature enough, if only just, to recognise that the most fundamental challenge facing them was the answer to the question, who did they wish to see as Malta's prime minister. They voted for Gonzi and got - Gonzi.

The man won because he displayed a moral superiority over his opponents, because the sense of direction he promised the electorate was a natural and logical extension to the road on which he had led the country these past four years, because he held up a vision that his major opponent failed dismally to equal, because he displayed a disarming ability to attract the young vote and became their darling, because he offered the leadership necessary to see us through to 2015.

Gonzi trumpeted a sincere and genuine belief in Malta and expressed his conviction in the potential of our youngsters. These responded by turning the election in his favour. They recognised a man of integrity, somebody in whom they could place their trust in the same way he had placed his in theirs. The chemistry between him and what I called Youth Inc. some weeks ago, was palpable and genuine.

For all this, the victory was narrow. Along with the message of confidence in Gonzi flowed other messages his supporters wished to transmit. All the more reason for the Prime Minister to keep constantly in mind the warning that, 'Driven by hubris, we become blind to our own fallibility and make terrible mistakes.'

Six factors of varying degree militated against him.

Factor One - a ruthless campaign of mud-slinging hurled in his government's direction by his principal opponent.

Factor Two - the appearance a year ago of a fourth crusader, a white knight who, in the event, turned out to be even less than a minor irritant. Azzjoni Nazzjonali may now retire to the Sant'Antnin plant whence it emerged, its leaders to the professions from which they have profited. AN's exit from the political arena was characteristically graceless. Compare and contrast it with the dignity shown by Louis Galea, who, surprisingly, failed to get elected. He deserved far better; as did Michael Frendo.

Factor Three - in addition to Muscat's not quite white, white knight, there was a set of green ones mounted on the tried and tired steed Alternattiva Demokratika, sired by self-importance out of delusion. The danger presented here was a build-up of resentment in a couple of otherwise safe Nationalist Party districts, from which this aging stallion hoped to benefit. This resentment translated itself into abstention or invalidation of votes - there were an amazing 2,500 of the latter - rather than a vote for Alternattiva.

AD may feel it is time to concede that its pretension to be a national political party is over. The electorate was mature enough to deny it a seat. Had it failed this crucial test and sent one of the green boys to Parliament, the outcome of the election would have been altogether different, with a Labour government led by Sant in place and AD's presence in Parliament a grotesque irrelevance. It ought carefully to consider a return to its original vocation as an effective pressure group.

Factor Four was the he-kept-the-same-Cabinet grouse which quite a few self-appointed analysts decided, incorrectly in my opinion, demonstrated a lack of the I'm-the-boss-around-here-and-don't-you-forget-it macho stuff. This was the same stuff they found repulsive when it was strutted by a man called Dom. The simple truth is that when Gonzi was chosen to lead the party he inherited a boat he wisely decided was seaworthy; and so it turned out to be even if, now and again, water got into the engine room when the going got rough. Today he is the undisputed captain of the boat and chief engineer to boot.

Factor Five was the Mepa factor.

Factor Six, and perhaps the most difficult for Gonzi, was the psychological time-for-a-change thriller which ran and ran until nine o'clock last Sunday evening. The decision reached by the electorate that, after all, it was not yet time, was by no means a foregone conclusion.

Moving on

The Dung Factor has not disappeared from the political scene. Gonzi acknowledges that any excremental evacuation needs to undergo detailed examination. Having said that, there are enough libel cases, mainly against the Labour Party, to keep the courts busy for some time to come. There are also a number of investigations by the Police Commissioner that have yet to be concluded, their outcome noted carefully and vigorously acted upon - both if the allegation turns out to be true and equally if it turns out to be false.

In the meantime, Gonzi's decision to deny a Cabinet post to Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, who collected more than 5,000 votes and is currently under investigation, was the indication required by the electorate that the Prime Minister would brook no nonsense from his team, whichever neck of the wood he or she came from. JPO's public acceptance of Gonzi's decision will stand him in good stead should he be exonerated.

Factors Two and Four have been dealt with. Gonzi has done a good job here and I mean no disrespect to those who were not given a ministerial appointment (Tonio Fenech's was surely the most deserved promotion) when I single out my delight that he upgraded Gozo's profile by giving Chris Said a parliamentary secretaryship. His portfolio, however, is far too bland and narrow. It should be broadened. We are looking at a future minister for the ecological isle. Make him an ecology assistant on matters Gozo.

The Prime Minister will no doubt have warned his new team that they have to emulate Caesar's wife if they wish to serve. His new Cabinet, leaner and younger, a good mixture of experience and freshness, will clasp his admonition to its bosom. The new chapter on which it is embarked demands no less. Never more than at this stage in the country's life has the word service, as opposed to self-interest, taken on the significance the electorate attaches to it.

Factor Three is currently neither here nor there. It is clear that a decision by AD as to whether it should carry on as a political force, when the electorate has shown over and over again that AD remains an unattractive choice, remains to be taken. With Vassallo offering to relinquish the leadership, Arnold Cassola's mind now back in Italy and the party's cynical adoption of Carmel Cacopardo before the election equalled only by C's sense of his own importance, the party's irrelevance has been thrown into sharp relief.

Factor six will be factor one at the next election.

Until then, Gonzi will govern with a razor-thin majority and a determination to broaden the good governance of these islands. He will attempt to do this by using talents from within and without the government party. Nowhere will he apply this determination more energetically than in his effort to transform the hydra-headed Mepa into an institution that is above reproach.

The Prime Minister's Iva, flimkien kollox possibili can start with Mepa. It is here that he has a golden opportunity to create an organisation of all the talents. Apart from the government's commitment to bring Malta's finances into surplus with all the ramifications this involves, he recognises the remake of Mepa and, issuing from that, the sensible protection of the environment, as the greatest challenges facing his new government.

And Labour?

This leaves us with the massive problems facing the Labour Party. Cosmetic reforms will not be enough. It is not only a leader they need to find, but their identity as a 21st century political party.

Up to 1992 the country disliked what it saw, could not forget or indeed forgive what Mintoff's brand of socialism had put it through. When his appointee Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, whom Dom plonked into the party's top seat, resigned after losing the 1991 election (and stuck to his resignation) his place was taken by Sant. The method of how this came about continues to be, euphemistically speaking, a talking point within the party. It has cropped up once more in the wake of Sant's resignation after his fourth defeat at the hands of the Nationalist Party.

Loyal adherents of the party are clamouring for a change, for a new beginning that starts with an admission of collective blame. The fault, these are claiming, does not lie with Sant alone; accepting his resignation without probing deeper into why the party failed to dislodge the government is not enough. There must be, they charge, something gravely wrong with a machinery that failed to deliver that which is its sole purpose to supply, victory at the polls after 21years in opposition (26 in 2015) less a 22-month stint which Sant fouled up in 1996; not least in its choice of leader. For Sant did not offer an alternative to Gonzi, and with time on its hands the party failed to come up with an inspiring electoral manifesto.

There is, it is being said and written by Labour stalwarts, a collective responsibility for this failure and there should be a collective resignation. The new leader must emerge as a result of a process that has to be different to the one employed in 1992 and as recently as 2003 when Sant resigned only to be reinstated. The 1992 method should be regarded as anathema. In short, the party is being urged to set up a see-through transparency machinery for the election of the new man. Never again 1992, when jiggery-pokery took place; 1992 never again; never again 2003, either.

And certainly the Labour Party should look to its horses on the matter. The point is that at this moment in time there is something Hobsonian about the choices confronting it. To continue in the footsteps of an unrepentant Sant is clearly a non-starter. To embark upon a journey of rediscovery must beg the question; the rediscovery of what? Any return to some half-baked Mintoffian ideology would be as fatal to its chances of election in four, five years' time as the first alternative. It is the party's Herculean task to find a third way.

Perhaps, some are already saying, the new leader needs to be a Labour man who once was, but is no longer to be found, in the active ranks of the Labour Party, somebody to be plucked from the outside. Perhaps the delegates should be considering somebody of the calibre of George Abela.

This may sound the ultimate sacrilege for those who toiled in Sant's vineyard, but Abela, they may recall, was once a leading player in Sant's Winning Team. Who knows? A "come-back kid" is needed to restore credibility to the party. Some very positive lateral thinking is required. If I may employ yet another maybe, perhaps they should bring in Edward Debono; except, of course, his thinking may be so lateral he may suggest himself for the job.