As I drove into Valletta early on Wednesday morning I was faced with a billboard with a huge mugshot of my old course mate Franco Debono emblazoned across it.
We know what Labour is against, but nobody has the faintest idea of what it’s for- Claire Bonello
Since the phrase ‘B’Gonzi mohhok mistrieh’ (Gonzi gives you peace of mind) featured prominently on it, and it was an exact replica of those 2008 PN billboards showing a heavily Photoshopped Prime Minister, I concluded it was another PN effort.
Perhaps this billboard signified the start of an electoral campaign, I thought, with the PN taking the lead in the forthcoming battle of the billboards. Pasting a giant-sized mug shot of Debono coupled with a positive statement about Lawrence Gonzi may have been an attempt to show us that all was now well within the PN camp, and with the most troublesome backbencher (Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando) out of the way, harmony reigned supreme once again within the blue quarters.
As it turns out, the Debono billboard was not a Nationalist product but Labour’s attempt to show us that the party does have sense of humour. Since the billboard managed to attract a fair amount of attention and discussion, some exponents of the Labour Party consider it to be a marketing coup.
Not exactly one on the same lines of Eva Herzigova’s traffic-stopping ‘Hello Boys’ Wonderbra ads, but a coup nonetheless. The reasoning goes something like this: ‘We managed to attract attention and get people talking about us and smiling at our ads, so we must be on to a good thing and it’s high fives all round.’
Only I’m not so sure that this approach is going to lead to tangible gains for the Labour Party. It seems to be based on the two premises that what Labour needs is repackaging as the party of wit and cool, and pointing out the fracture lines within the Nationalist Party.
Both premises are erroneous. The rebranding bit is misdirected, not because the Labour Party doesn’t need a new and positive brand image. It does. But Labour does not need the image of a party which is hip and cool or the producer of amusing billboards. It needs something far more solid, more substantial.
Most people I talk to know that Labour is in opposition (you could hardly get away from it considering it’s been there for the past 25 years) and that it’s vehemently opposed to the way the Nationalist Party is governing. So we know what Labour is against, but nobody has the faintest idea of what it’s for. Sometimes I think that not even Labour knows. Seeing various Labour spokesmen weave and waffle when asked about Labour policies is turning out to be embarrassing for them and wearying for viewers.
While we may know we can’t have the specifics at this point, a broad indication of policy direction can’t be too much to ask for, can it? And those 51 proposals unveiled with such fanfare during Joseph Muscat’s reply to the Budget, don’t quite cut it as do-able proposals. They’re mostly vague or statements of the obvious.
Now Labour will claim that it’s being unfairly set upon and criticised and that the PN is not the subject of such scrutiny. But it’s not. People can, and do, criticise the Nationalist Party all the time.
There’s no reason why Labour should not be subject to the same treatment, especially if it is to be seriously considered as government-in-waiting. Labour is not a special needs party and should stop acting as if it should always get the soft treatment at the hands of the media.
Going back to Labour’s brand image – the perception that a substantial number of voters (not the ones who will vote for the party come what will) – is of a party which has no core, no clear direction forward. If this is not addressed, how does Labour expect to be considered as a credible option, and to win the next election if not by default? Rather than prancing around with fancy billboards and image makeovers, shouldn’t it coral its creative people into squeezing out a couple of concrete policy initiatives?
There’s another reason why Labour’s insistence on concentrating on the rifts within the PN party, is misguided. These so-called rifts are quite easily patched-up and it is getting rather late in the day for errant MPs to rebel and buck the government. So relying on PN squabbles is no long-term strategy.
Then there’s another point which Labour is ignoring by depicting the Gonzi government as a shaky one, mostly riven by internal divisions. And that is that despite this aspect of the PN administration, there is still a widely held perception that a Nationalist government is a safer, more trusted option during times of economic woe.
Yes, the PN may be viewed as arrogant and uncaring, but it’s broadly seen as economically competent (though there’s no saying if this perception is deserved). This perception is the ultimate trump card for the PN and it will be brought out time and time again as neighbouring countries struggle to survive the financial meltdown.
The internal bickering of the PN will be seen as a trivial consideration when weighed against the more worrying option of having incompetent or clueless politicians at the helm in trying economic times. The Labour Party should focus more on building itself up than on tearing its opponents down, and on hammering out decent policy instead of eye-catching billboards. Perhaps if it was in the business of selling bras, it would be in clover. But the business of politics demands a bit more substance.
cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt