It is very disconcerting to hear the Prime Minister speak of a “new middle class”. It is not the first time he has done so, having used this incomprehensible term already when in Opposition. It is an odd term at best, not least because middle class is difficult to define.
The middle class is generally associated with white collar workers but it is more than that. It is related to education, to culture, to lifestyle choices and, yes, to a certain extent, income. But for the Prime Minister, middle class is equal to middle income. The economy is booming, people are earning more, hence, there are more in the middle class bracket.
Traditionally, the middle class was alienated by the Labour Party. The fiery Dom Mintoff and his immediate successor, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, spoke exclusively for the working class.
The Labour Party in the 1980s was even fused with the General Workers’ Union to form a Workers’ Movement. It was also in those years that the Labour government crossed swords with the Maltese middle class when it decided to launch a campaign to make Church schools free of charge.
At the time, Church schools were generally middle class domain and the government’s assault on them was met with obstinate opposition by parents who would do anything for their children’s future. When, in October 1984, the Church schools did not open, parents offered their own homes to host clandestine classes. In the end, Labour had its way but it emerged terribly bruised.
Alfred Sant attempted to do away with Labour’s working class association by introducing the idea of ‘citizen’ instead of ‘worker’. It was a ploy that worked but his government was short-lived.
Labour’s Opposition to European Union membership again brought it conflict with middle class voters that saw a better future for their children within the EU. Its repeated electoral defeats were mainly the result of that wrong policy. It was only after Malta was safely within the EU that Labour finally regained power. But that does not mean the middle class is a Nationalist stronghold.
In its last years, the Nationalist Party got its fingers burnt when it opposed the introduction of divorce. An increasing liberal and European-thinking middle class ignored its conservative stand and voted in droves for divorce. The PN fell apart after that, leading to the 2013 election meltdown.
Joseph Muscat more than wooed the middle class voter and did so very successfully because it was the middle class vote that accounted for his enormous electoral success three years ago. The word “worker” was conspicuously absent from his electoral campaign and even afterwards when in office.
He has discarded much of old Labour’s socialist thinking, embraced the free market economy and big business. He has succeeded in the employment sector, something which, by his own admission, had eluded his socialist predecessors. Incredibly, he has implemented a privatisation policy in sectors like health and energy, anathema for his working class supporters until a few years ago. But does that make his party middle class? Hardly.
The middle class is hard to define, to pin down or claim to represent. The spring hunting referendum was a close call because the middle class flexed its muscles. That should have been an eye opener for Labour. All this talk of glitzy high-rise, the fast pace of development, the dwindling countryside leave a very bad taste of greed.
The middle class is not about money, as Dr Muscat thinks.
It is a noose around his neck.