There may not be an issue per se that will really dominate the five-week electoral campaign, which officially started on Monday when Parliament was dissolved and the Prime Minister set March 8 as polling day. However, let nobody think that the campaigning will be any milder than before.
The 1987 general election was hotly contested, especially in the wake of a perverse electoral result in 1981 that gave the Nationalist Party more popular votes but fewer seats in Parliament than the Labour Party. It was, to a certain extent, a make or break event in the country's recent political history. Had good sense not prevailed, Malta could have easily experienced civil strife.
That was a time when thugs and/or hotheads still ran amok after the announcement of the election result and left hurt - often psychological but, at times, even physical - and destruction in their wake. The worse had been feared when there was a change in government in 1996 but, to his credit, Alfred Sant handled the situation impeccably and, bar a few hiccups, things proceeded well.
Alas, Dr Sant could only hold on to his one-seat majority in Parliament for 22 months and, thus, the 1998 election was again a crucial contest, though very different to that of 1987. The rule of law and democracy itself were not at stake here.
The last general election to be dominated by a single critical issue was that of 2003 when the electorate had to decide whether or not to confirm its choice in a national referendum for Malta to join the European Union.
The issue, if one can call it so, this time round is the way in which the country will be steered in the future. Dr Sant argues there is an issue: Change.
What is, however, becoming increasingly clear is the fact that the battle is more between two leaders than between two big political parties. Nothing new, some may argue. The main difference is that whereas in past elections it was a matter of which of the two leaders best handled the issues at stake, this time the choice that has to be made is whether the country is best led by Lawrence Gonzi or by Dr Sant, issues or no issues.
The PN harps on Dr Gonzi's successes throughout his four years at the helm which included the gargantuan task of meeting the Maastricht criteria that allowed Malta to adopt the euro.
On the other hand, the Labour Party presents Dr Sant as the man who is able to put forth the fresh ideas the country needs to move ahead in the future.
The substantial chunk of still undecided voters will determine who will win. Some of these may not be undecided at all but only refusing to say who they will vote for. The parties know this and they will thus target that segment that is still floating and they will do that in every way possible.
Being a presidential style campaign there is likely to be - indeed, there already have been - personal attacks, some tolerated, others verging on the unacceptable and a few outright condemnable.
This is where the paradox lies. On the one hand, there have been and will be instances where exponents of the media of the two parties are allowed to cross the demarcation line between inquistive journalism and mud slinging. Then, as happened on Monday, both parties issue a joint statement calling on supporters to behave sensibly, prudently, tolerantly and with complete respect to the public.
Good conduct begins at home and the parties must lead by example. It is commendable that the general secretaries should take a common stand to ensure that activities held during the electoral campaign are carried out in the most orderly fashion as befitting a civil society and that supporters are urged not to let their enthusiasm lead to any form of incident. But the parties have to be judged by what they do and how they behave rather than by what they say.
This is a testing time for them.