Is Busuttil the PN’s future?

A week in politics is a long time, and disasters can always strike when they are least expected. But an overwhelming majority of Nationalist Party councillors on Friday night looked into the future of the PN and decided that its name is Simon Busuttil.

During the course of that day the feeling was building that Dr Busuttil would emerge victorious despite a media blitz by Finance Minister Tonio Fenech who was buoyed by a positively-welcomed Budget.

But the scale of the victory took many by surprise: the mild-mannered MEP did not just win the contest; he romped home in a manner which may enable him to take a stranglehold of the PN.

He achieved what he was hoping and, at the same time, what observers were questioning: which is to translate the massive popular support he has garnered in two European Parliament elections and translate that into support among Nationalist Party councillors.

Working out how this happened and its repercussions is more than a mere academic exercise because this analysis is likely to shed light on important questions that the Nationalist Party must pose itself as it looks towards an election next year, and just as importantly beyond that, whether it wins or loses.

The first myth that should be dispelled is that this was a contest between friends. It was anything but. What we saw were two very distinct factions within the party openly launching toxic missiles at one another.

To further complicate matters, these factions were not merely divided by ideological differences, though there was a fair bit of that as Mr Fenech was promoted as the man who would continue to promote traditional Nationalist Party values, whereas Dr Busuttil’s platform was the more liberal reformer.

There was also virtually the entire Cabinet making a statement, presumably to the party leader, that they were upset that the PN machinery had been working to install Dr Busuttil in pole position ever since he was given the somewhat strange title of Special Delegate. Any talk that there was no significance to this label is, of course, hogwash.

But whatever the reasons for their support of Mr Fenech, the fact is that the Nationalist Party councillors rejected it. On the face of it, this is positive for Dr Busuttil since they have clearly positioned him to be the next leader. Yet at the same time how is he going to persuade those Cabinet members that he is there on merit? And more importantly, is he going to manage to get them on his side?

A look at the party’s history does not produce a clear-cut answer, especially after the 2004 leadership contest where the acrimony could not be extinguished.

It therefore depends on two factors: one relates to the reaction of the Cabinet members who opposed Dr Busuttil; and the other – possibly more important – is that he seeks to operate within a truly inclusive party.

There is a feeling within the PN that it has not been this for some time because it has been plagued by a regime-like ‘if you don’t agree with us, you’re against us’ mentality.

Is it healthy for the party to be exploring such soul-searching questions so close to an election and to be entering the campaign with a bruised Cabinet rather than as a truly united force?

Though Dr Busuttil’s very obvious ability to win votes will be seen by a section of the party as the end justifying the means, the answer to the question is most probably No – particularly if it still fails to win the election. And what happens in the event of the PN suffering a crushing defeat at the polls is now anybody’s guess.