The shifting political landscape in Western democracies should be a cause for serious reflection for the Nationalist Party and its allies in Opposition. The march of radical populism in Europe seems unstoppable while Trump’s ‘America First” movement commands widespread support despite the adverse publicity generated by a meandering President.
In Europe we’ve seen the government of Prime Minister May, once regarded as a safe pair of hands, only to almost lose the election to left wing radicalism resulting in what is now a destabilised administration.
French President Macron rapidly lost support post-election. In Italy a populist swing brought on the resignation of Prime Minister Renzi. Then there is Brexit, and Kurz in Austria and One Nation in Australia. Left and Right radical populism is gaining momentum.
In Germany, Merkel’s CDU vote was down significantly and she is now struggling to form a government while the Social Democrats declined by 13 per cent.
The losses of populists Le Pen in France and Wilders in Holland were initially seen as a tidal turn and hailed with relief by EU leaders, but relief was short lived with recent polls now suggesting that was far from the beginning of the end for populist movements but much more the end of the beginning.
Evidently there is an ongoing swing favouring populist parties with generally a common political theme based on action against corruption and cronyism, more direct democracy (less interference from a central external authority), strengthening of the rule of law and increased support of the State by security institutions.
Naturally there are some ideological variations between Left and Right but with a common drift toward populist radicalism. It seems growing populism is the product of a widening gap between rich and poor in Western democracies.
A backlash against massive African migration into Europe, from South to North America and a reaction to the rise of so-called progressive governments with an obsessive predilection for social upheavals designed to accommodate the diversity of ethnicities, arising from uncontrolled migration, by implementing fashionable liberal policies at the expense of traditional native customs and culture.
If we look carefully we can see Malta is an exact microcosm of the circumstances fomenting growth in authoritarian populism except in Malta’s case a newly found almost demented fixation with material gain continues to overshadow issues of corruption, cronyism and other open sores which were either ignored at the last election or readily accepted as the price of economic growth.
In a political environment brimming with opportunity for a historically conservative party, the PN should be flourishing but despite the litany of challenges to the government’s credibility, this hapless Opposition, Malta’s alternative government, is floundering.
The PN has inexorably drifted to the less combative no man’s land, the centre ground of politics, while Labour pragmatically, albeit ironically, made a sharp turn to the right focusing less on its traditional sometimes irrational support for unions and more on support for big business thus fuelling a booming economy.
In short, the two main parties have swapped policies as a result of which two-thirds of Malta’s Parliament is now Labour. Apart from the brutal reality of numbers in Parliament, another issue for the overall Opposition is fragmentation.
Despite the presence of talent and experience there is seemingly a lack of star performers on the shadow benches willing to take on a confident government in full stride.
Last year, the Prime Minister successfully deflected Busuttil’s blistering challenges with cynical claims of negativism and it may well be the case the Opposition is now running a little gun shy of falling into the same trap.
The only significant threat to this government right now is itself. This government continues to generate an immense volume of negative publicity of its own making
Opposition members, particularly the bumbling deputy leader David Agius, are falling over each other to agree with the government instead of critically but constructively evaluating government’s every action.
Opposition disunity translates to a stronger and more stable government against a destabilised PN which is the senior member of the Opposition.
The only significant threat to this government right now is itself. This government continues to generate an immense volume of negative publicity of its own making not only locally, but uncharacteristically for Malta, regularly in media outlets across the EU too.
This is a government so convinced of its own unassailable impregnability it may well in the fullness of time facilitate its own demise. A united and effective Opposition may expedite that process for it.
The reasons behind the scrapping of Forza Nazzjonali and failure to coalesce the PD with the PN thus forming a much tighter more effective opposition force in Malta are not clear and most likely involve personality and ideological clashes but the prospect of another four years and possibly longer with a rampart unaccountable government unbridled by a tightly knit and skilled Opposition is daunting and should give rise to a spirit of constructive compromise on both sides.
Malta is going through an interesting phase in terms of political glass ceilings.
Logically, the next gender target must surely be the prime ministership. In Malta today one of the most effective public performers on the Opposition benches may be, perhaps arguably, Marlene Farrugia. She is clearly more politically savvy than some others sitting opposite the government. She homes in on her targets skilfully and fearlessly.
She is eloquently clear, concise and to the point and very obviously capable of moving public opinion.
In short Farrugia has already demonstrated the intestinal fortitude required to survive and conquer in the fighting pit of politics. As others had discovered before her, abandoning the ministryof a Labour government is not for the faint hearted.
With the backing of a significant party machine, many see in her the makings of a future prime minister.
She’s been called narcistic and arrogant, probably all true, but excellent qualities in the making of a strong and confident leader. “Narcissism is an attribute of many powerful leaders and is synonymous with charisma and grand visions” (apologies to Rosenthal). Muscat would identify with that.
I suspect therein lies the problem for the PN. She is possibly seen as a leadership threat.
The PN chose to acquiesce to factional pressures in lieu of common sense when they chose Delia and Agius to lead them.
The result is a crumbling support base and a badly misfiring political party, but with the party’s movers and shakers like lemmings in denial, and continuing to see a glass half full when their glass is motherless stone dry empty and the government’s cup is runneth over, some serious reflection is badly needed.
Anthony Trevisan is a businessman passionate about environmental issues particularly as they affect Malta.