What would have happened within the Nationalist Party if it had lost the election? We can only guess.

But it seems fairly safe to say that the immediate discussion would have centred on who should from this point forward should lead the party, irrespective of Lawrence Gonzi's willingness to continue or not. This is likely to have been followed by a detailed analysis of why the party was defeated, with the conclusion being that the majority of people were tired of certain ministers and dissatisfied with particular decisions - not least related to planning and the environment.

It is unlikely that talking points in the PN post-mortem would have included the wisdom of joining the EU, or the euro, or its economic policy, or its attempts at restructuring, or whether Dr Gonzi should have led the party into the election in the first place. Highly unlikely.

Once the Labour Party lost the election, it was inevitable that there would be a great deal of soul-searching, particularly because this was the third defeat in succession. What few people really expected, however, was the eruption of volcanic lava that we learn - only now - has been bubbling fiercely since 2003, and even before, on many issues concerning policy and personality.

As early as last summer, the electorate was told by the Labour leadership that the party was ready for an election at any time. 'Bring it on', was the bravado-laced message of what we now know was Macbethian proportions. Since March 9, every senior figure, with the exception of the former MLP leader and his general secretary, has been going to great pains to reveal that the house in Hamrun has been crumbling for years - even if the shiny reflective glass outside prevented anyone on the outside from seeing it.

In his interview with The Sunday Times today, George Abela is not the first person to ask why all these people are crawling out of the woodwork now. Some may even accuse him of being among them - though that would be to ignore the significant consideration that he publicly left the stage upon which the others continued to act.

However, he is the first person - so openly at least - to provide us with the most damning revelation about the Sant administration yet: that during the MLP's brief stint in government the party realised that freezing the EU application was a mistake and that it was in the country's interests to reverse the decision. Yet when it lost the subsequent election it refused to acknowledge this. On the contrary, it opposed membership with what seemed like genuine passion.

If there truly was such a lack of sincerity, the MLP is in bigger trouble than people had previously thought. This is compounded by the fact, as Dr Abela sees it, that the party's administration has sought to gag, and then ostracise, any dissenting voice. What is worse is that he is saying quite convincingly that even in the run-up to the June 5 leadership election, this is still the case. And he points fingers directly, if not at Dr Sant, at the people who have supported him - whose hands still operate the 'machinery'.

There is, of course, another poignant question that arises from all this: What would have happened if the MLP had been elected to government? We can only guess.