Now is not the time to despair. It is true that those of us who voted for a change in government are reeling and that right now it feels like everything said and done had no effect.
A throbbing river of people has re-elected the government and you find yourself asking whether anybody except us, the minority, cares that senior government figures are being investigated for money laundering. It seems no importance was given to the fact that a government agency, the FIAU, recommended the investigation, and not the journalists who broke the news.
I think there is another reality though, and it is worth keeping in mind.
The 30,000 vote majority the Labour Party enjoys over all the other parties put together is smaller than the majority it enjoyed before the start of the campaign. Chris Fearne knew this when he confidently declared that Labour would win by “at least 40,000 votes”.
Another high-ranking Labour Party member told me “we already have a huge majority, and Joseph has not even started campaigning”.
This suggests that without the corruption allegations that plagued Joseph Muscat’s first government, which emerged most forcefully during the campaign, his majority would have been north of the 50,000 mark. The efforts that Simon Busuttil and his team made, therefore, were not in vain.
The undecided were not indifferent to the admissions of ministers having offshore companies, and several 2013 switchers were not favourably impressed by details of the banking transactions that Keith Schembri allegedly made. These transactions are difficult to understand unless criminal intent is imputed.
Without the corruption allegations that plagued Joseph Muscat’s first government, his majority would have been north of the 50,000 mark
When Muscat says this is a different majority to the 2013 one, he most probably does so on the basis of data he has seen. I have not seen that data but think it may show that new Labour votes rushed in to replace the returning switchers. Why they did so needs to be examined.
The resounding majority may be smaller than it was before the campaign but it is nevertheless huge. We need to take the cue: pouring scorn over all Labour voters and saying they are all corrupt too is not a good place to start. Better to try and understand the mindset of these Labour voters instead. Just because a journalist said that a whistleblower saw a document that suggested Michelle Muscat had a share in an offshore company does not make it automatically true.
It is not surprising that those Labour voters who trust Muscat and mistrust the journalists accusing him asked for more evidence. They felt the country was doing well under his premiership and had no compulsion to change a winning formula on the basis of ‘allegations’. The Egrant affair has more to it, of course. A serious prime minister would have unhesitatingly fired even his closest aides if they were caught with Panama companies. Muscat just looked the other way, as he did in many other scandalous situations. Yet the first-time voter enjoying the benefits of an employment boom, or the PL-supporting pensioner paying less in water and electricity who has deep distrust of the non-Labour media pardoned or even supported Muscat’s inaction. This sends the message that what is proof enough for some will not necessarily be believed by all.
Another clear message is that many voters value having a full pocket more than an honest head of government who is beyond suspicion and reproach. Among these we will find hundreds, maybe thousands, who were given government jobs and promotions at the last minute and gratefully paid their dues with their vote.
A renewed PN must now strongly communicate the message that the anti-corruption battle is just one of the things it stands for. It needs to show that it is also able to author positive ideas that promote growth and development. If this message does not come across compellingly, people may think that the only choice before them is prosperity versus principles.
All of us who unabashedly cherish values which are Christian and democratic will need to support the new PN leader in sending the message that we can have a prosperity based on principles.
Going forward, I think many people wish to welcome a PN that wants to talk about its vision to ensure we flourish financially in a society that’s also rich in good values. A vision imparted on TV and radio, by all means, but in this small polity of ours, a vision taken physically to people’s doorsteps and community centres.
All of us are a bit election weary. Facebook has magnified the ugly animus of the campaign. Wouldn’t it be great if we put that aside now and spoke to each other more respectfully, figuring out ways of exploiting our common national advantages together?
Does any of this mean forgetting anybody’s crimes and misdemeanours? No, we can be constructive while insisting upon good governance and defending our institutions against abusive interference with the might of lions.
The truth will come out soon enough. If the hard evidence manifestly shows Labour’s leadership is unfit to govern, its voter base will continue to contract and a new hope will be born: for clean, creative and compassionate government.