As expected, Nationalist MP Franco Debono abstained in last week’s parliamentary vote of no confidence tabled by the opposition, thus weakening the government’s one-seat majority but nevertheless ensuring that the Labour Party motion was not approved.

How will Franco Debono behave now? Will he fall in line and back the government?- Anthony Manduca

The opposition motion was then defeated by the Speaker’s casting vote.

Although the government survived Thursday’s vote, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi himself admitted that the situation could not immediately be “business as usual” and he would have to ensure that his government’s policies had the full support of the Nationalist Party.

There is no doubt at all that the government has been undermined by Debono’s abstention – this was, after all, a vote of no confidence, not a vote on a particular parliamentary Bill.

Debono has been raising eyebrows in his party for the past two years. In 2009 he missed two parliamentary votes, last year he abstained in an opposition vote of no confidence in Transport Minister Austin Gatt and he has recently been openly critical of a number of government policies.

While backbenchers’ criticism can be a positive thing, many Nationalists believe Debono simply went too far and that his criticism was fuelled by the fact that he was never made a minister.

The question everyone wants answered is: How will Debono behave now? Will he fall in line and back the government thus allowing Gonzi to complete his mandate and ensuring much needed political stability?

Will the two sides come to an agreement in the interests of stability and continuity? If this is the case, then we can return to “business as usual”, but many observers believe this will not happen as Debono’s behaviour over the past two years has been unpredictable, to say the least.

Will the rebel MP now vote with the government in Parliament as it tries to enact legislation? If he abstains, will the government be content to depend on the Speaker’s casting vote?

This is hardly the way to run a country.

The possibility of an early election is now very real. At this stage it is probable that no decision has yet been taken on the date of the election, but it is likely that we will have one this year, either in May or perhaps even as late as October.

A March election now seems a remote possibility. Everything, however, will depend on whether some type of deal can be made between Debono and the rest of the PN parliamentary group.

The Labour Party is, not surprisingly, ahead in the polls, which explains Joseph Muscat’s eagerness for an election to he held as soon as possible.

The Nationalists would understandably rather not have an early election, not only because they are trailing in the polls, but because a number of major projects are still in the pipeline.

Furthermore, having an election in the middle of a eurozone crisis, when so much is at stake, is not the ideal situation.

Few will doubt that the next election, whenever it will be held, will be an uphill struggle for the Nationalist Party.

With Malta’s EU membership no longer an issue and with Alfred Sant no longer the leader of the Labour Party, two major obstacles to a Labour victory have been eliminated.

Also, some voters might vote for a change simply for the sake of change – the PN has been in office since 1998, that’s almost 14 years, and before that it was in government from 1987 to 1996.

Furthermore, the PN won the 2008 election by just 1,500 votes and a number of unpopular measures taken during this legislature, such as the increased utility rates, as well as major blunders committed, such as the ministerial salary increase and the initial problems with the public transport reforms, could easily wipe out that majority.

The whole Debono episode certainly doesn’t help matters either.

On the other hand, the Nationalist administration has a good track record in crucial areas of government such as job creation, the economy, foreign policy (especially the Libya crisis), making the best of Malta’s EU membership, health and education.

These issues will no doubt dominate the PN’s electoral campaign, with the Nationalists stressing that these successes will be put at risk should Labour – which it accuses of being vague on policy – win the election.

Should the Nationalists be defeated, however, it would not be a disaster for the party, as the PN has won a majority of votes in six of the last seven general elections.

If, on the other hand, Labour had to lose, it would be really be a disastrous result for them. It would mean Labour would have won only three elections since 1971, only one since 1981 and none since 1998.

Labour leader Joseph Muscat has tried hard to project a moderate image of his party and to stress continuity but nevertheless the need of a new direction for the country.

His praise for Dom Mintoff is aimed at uniting his party and getting the Mintoffion vote – he will probably succeed here, but he might alienate other sectors of the electorate who could be tempted to vote Labour but who are put off by praise for Mintoff.

On the other hand, however, Muscat also praised Eddie Fenech Adami and the many political and economic reforms that he brought about after 1987.

This tactic is aimed at getting the vote of those Nationalists who are disillusioned with the Gonzi administration and is the same strategy adopted by Tony Blair who praised Margaret Thatcher’s reforms while criticising John Major prior to the 1997 UK election. That strategy paid off and Blair got the vote of many traditional Conservative voters.

Will Muscat be as successful?

Fr Peter’s column is not appearing this week.