Following a strong campaign built on buzz words like transparancy and meritocracy, the Labour Party won the 2013 election with a landslide majority. Muscat played music to everyone’s ears and people joined his so-called movement in their masses as traditional PN voters felt comfortable crossing the bridge.
Many thought that the PL had been in opposition for long enough and that a breed of fresh faces, such as Konrad Mizzi, were the obvious choice. Following months of rhetoric, the expectations of a new dawn were high. Many thought that things in government would change for the better. Many spoke of a hegemony to come as Muscat’s team seemed unbeatable. Ten years in government were guaranteed.
Fast forward to today. The situation for the PL looks, to say the least, bleak. In the last two weeks the Prime Minister had to stress a point. The general election is two-and-a-half years away. It seems, that he intends to do what Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici did in 1987 and call the election on the last possible Saturday. But why does the Prime Minister need to make such a statement three years into the legislature? The answer is very clear. Everyone, including Labour supporters feel that Muscat’s government is in a deep crisis despite having a comfortable parliamentary majority.
The Panamagate scandal shocked one and all. Never in recent history have we witnessed the two closest aides of a Maltese Prime Minister being involved in a scandal of such magnitude. Labour supporters, like everyone else, expected their leader to take instant action by removing Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri.
To everyone’s surprise Muscat stuck his neck out for both of them. Such a strategy of defending the indefensible seems incomprehensible.
It hardened speculation that Muscat used two weights two measures with his embattled soldiers. The Farrugias, Mallia and Falzon had to go, Mizzi and Schembri can stay, at all costs.
The talk of an early election was brought about by Joseph Muscat’s failure to take action against his acolytes
That a nine-seat majority government would descend into such chaos was unthinkable. Having the good of the country at heart I strongly advocate against an early election in view of the instability which will ensue. Muscat has a clear mandate to lead this country for five years and that is what is expected of him.The talk of an early election was brought about by his failure to take action against his acolytes.
The PN does not want an election now either. Three years ago the PN leader embarked on a mission to transform the party into a political force to be reckoned with. Simon Busuttil’s project was not designed to be completed in three years. The PN has only just shifted gears to becoming an alternative government and never expected to switch to election-mode so early.
Needless to say the turn of events which unfolded lately left the party with no option but to be ready for any eventuality.
Before the Panamagate scandal broke out, the Prime Minister may have been planning a snap election.
My impression was Muscat would consult the polls and dissolve Parliament before the PN and Busuttil gained further momentum. Several calendar suggestions were on the table keeping in mind the various international commitments Malta has until 2018.
But as they say, one week in politics is a long time. The Prime Minister fails to appreciate that notwithstanding the outcome of the impending tax audit of his newly-appointed deputy leader, Mizzi should have never opened a trust and a company in such jurisdictions.
No matter how emphatic this has been made by many, Muscat is refusing to acknowledge this and persists in defending his henchmen. Recent polls show the PN has edged closer to the PL and a historic margin is being eaten away daily.
Muscat had in 1998 publicly advocated then prime minister Alfred Sant’s strategy to go for an early election. He is likely to have been scarred by that experience when the outcome was entirely contrary to his analysis. It is therefore a Catch 22 situation for Muscat. If he calls an early election he is not sure of winning, on the other hand if he decides to drag on until the summer of 2018 the probability of losing the election will be higher.
The disastrous result of the 2013 election for the PN may be attributed to the calling the election late. Muscat had been in election mode since 2010. The people were in the mood for listening to him and the last two months of that campaign did not change anything.
The tables now seem to have turned. The PN must however continue to keep its feet firmly on the ground and not take anything for granted. It must plan for both a short and a long campaign. The Panamagate scandal is still unfolding. I believe that what we have heard is just the tip of the iceberg and much more will follow.
As for the Prime Minister, calling the election remains his prerogative. He can stay in power for just over two years. One thing for sure is that the Panamagate scandal will dominate the political debate until polling day, whenever that may be.
Hermann Schiavone is a PN candidate and political analyst.