In the early 1990s, Pepsi Cola Inc. realised that there was a growing segment of cola drinkers who were becoming increasingly health conscious but who shied away from asking for diet Pepsi. These consumers, mostly male, felt that asking for a diet drink could give the impression that they had some health problem or had feminine tendencies. The result was Pepsi Max. There is little doubt that, these days, marketing is to modern living as oxygen is to life. Marketing has come to permeate most human activities and our behaviour is often conditioned by a complex set of tangible, and not so tangible, considerations. Politics too have fallen prey to the tentacles of marketing.
By 1996, the Malta Labour Party had been in opposition for 10 years. Having gone through a period of deep change it started to softly position itself as "New Labour". It was voted into government and the rest is history. (Even though the ramifications of that unfortunate experience linger on.) "New Labour" was subsequently aborted and the party chose to stick to its conventional appellation.
This year it was the turn of "gonzipn". It was a brave move. Lawrence Gonzi put his own reputation and political career at stake. Possibly, he had little choice. Indeed, those that dare, win. For some all this may seem as playing with words. For others, gonzipn sent clear signals to the electorate.
After practically 20 years in government, and a relatively dismal track record, the odds were against the PN being returned to power. The party decided to underpin its strategy on the personality of its leader (and his wife). The big challenge for the party was to connect again, especially with its grassroots. I had written about this some months back. "The PN needs to ensure that on election day every pro voter gets to the polls. The strategy group must have decided to emulate George W. Bush's 2004 campaign, adopting what is known as a 'community advocacy' strategy; a political variant of 'relationship marketing' (The Times. October 16, 2007). No efforts were spared. Activists were chased and promised all sorts of things. Who of us did not get some sort of customised letter from Dr Gonzi or a personal invitation for a party at Ta' Qali?
Labour expected to win almost by default. Its strategic thrust focused on an extensive "plan for a new beginning". The plan failed to catch the imagination of the public. Just as had happened with the "Switzerland in the Mediterranean". All the hard work in the preparation of the plan was lost; it became mincemeat for the PN's propaganda machine. The product may have been right but its marketing was lousy. Labour tried to emphasise "good governance". It offered more efficient and effective management, with a "zero tolerance" for corruption.
Ultimately, gonzipn won because people found it easier to identify with a face than with a plan. Still, as with "New Labour" in 1996, the real challenges for "gonzipn" are just beginning. We need to continue restructuring our economy if Malta is to make sense of its being part of the eurozone. The social welfare system needs to be reviewed especially with regard to free health services and pensions. Social dialogue needs to be strengthened, with a bigger role being given to civil society.
The new government is just a few weeks old. It is already plagued by grave controversies. The most serious is the case of Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando (JPO). This has evolved into a veritable millstone around gonzipn's neck. Sensing the sensitivity of the situation, the party gave JPO unqualified support during the electoral campaign. He was even given a press card and the party's secretary general stood by him at that infamous showdown with Alfred Sant. JPO netted over 4,000 number one votes, was elected from two districts and proved to be instrumental in gonzipn's marginal victory. This may all be part of "realpolitik". Given such a mindset, it appears perfectly legitimate for JPO to claim that the personal votes he got were as much an expression of confidence in him as the final electoral result was for Dr Gonzi's leadership.
The gonzipn government was born with original sin and is now keen to be seen as if purifying itself. This is why many are asking for JPO's head. There is nothing new in all this. It happened to John Dalli after the 2003 election. I am not trying in any way to justify what JPO has done but purely to point out that all this is rich coming from gonzipn.
Moreover, for the sake of consistency and transparency, the Prime Minister should demand that Mepa reconsiders all the permits issued during the electoral campaign. Indeed, why was the caretaker Dr Gonzi keen to reappoint the Development Control Commission (DCC) only to stop its work immediately after he was voted back into office? Is this just another u-turn? Or is it just another case of the end justifying the means?
Equally disturbing from a democratic point of view is gonzipn's rush to reactivate Malta's membership of the Partnership for Peace. What is of essence here is not whether this membership is beneficial or not for our country but the government's attitude. For 10 long years, Nationalist governments had dragged their feet on this issue. Now all this rush before Parliament has even been convened.
We are told that the Partnership underlines a common commitment to democratic principles. Is this the way that democracy is upheld? Is this the way that gonzipn intends to respect the 147,000 that chose not to vote for it? What makes gonzipn so bullish on such a sensitive issue? Maybe it really felt obliged to pay back for some favour which it received? And to think that many of us continue to hope that things can really change in this country.
I do not share the view that gonzipn will suffer the same fate as New Labour. It is true that a number of party activists feel hurt and offended by the way that Dr Gonzi distanced himself, and eventually dumped, many of his previous Cabinet colleagues. Yet, during times of significant internal turmoil, the PN has almost always managed to close ranks in the understanding that it pays one and all to stick together. Labour would do well to learn at least this from its prime antagonist.
Fms18@onvol.net