Vox populi, vox portmoni. This seems to be the losers’ consensus of Labour’s emphatic electoral win. Labour won the 2013 election fair and square, the narrative goes, but it largely bought the 2017 one, either through outright votes-for-favours deals or by beguiling the electorate with a mirage of personal wealth so as to ignore allegedly vague ideals and claims.
The truth is that no election in Malta has ever been won by a party that did not present, at least as part of an overall package, a credible recipe for economic and personal improvement. The four pivotal elections in my lifetime, those of 1987, 1996, 2003 and 2013, were won by the party that fed both the wallet and the soul.
People wanted to buy into the promise of economic betterment of the winning party, and at the same time aspired to its larger vision. In 1987 this was national reconciliation and a return to the rule of law. In 1996 it was doing away with barunijiet and all they stood for. In 2003 it was membership in the EU. In 2013 it was the promise of a new secular and aspirational republic.
The 2017 win has broken this pattern. It is true that the PN clearly did not convince with its economic proposals and with its response to claims that they were financially unsustainable. The €10,000 jackpot for Gozitan couples returning ‘home’ certainly takes the Looniest Electoral Promise Award.
But Labour this time round did not even bother to present an aspirational message beyond l-aqwa li ndawru lira and flus fil-but. Its attempts to pooh-pooh the corruption allegations, to depict them merely as vile products of the green-eyed monster and to soar over them with rhetorical flights of ‘positivity’ and unity were about as successful as a transatlantic dodo.
Labour’s winning gambit was to put the Muscat government’s ‘mistakes’ at par with the Gonzi government’s ‘mistakes’, with Simon Busuttil still representing a powerful legacy of that discredited past in many voters’ eyes. The ethical criterion for electoral choice was thus invalidated.
People preferred the allure of continued personal prosperity from a government that was demonstrating daily that it would not let silly irritants such as the independence of ‘watchdog’ institutions, employment laws and environmental regulations get in the way of securing electoral victory.
In convincing them to vote Labour, the Joseph Muscat machine has inveigled them in its corruption
However, this lack of a bona fide aspirational message has had an unexpected consequence. This victory has a bitter after-taste. The curious response of the winners has not been joy in victory and looking forward to setting the world to rights, as was the case for the four pivotal elections I mentioned earlier. It has been a mixture of gloating and anger. The gloating is as self-explanatory as it is self-defeating. The anger is more interesting.
Labour voters are angry that the defeated Nationalist Party, instead of cowering in a corner licking its wounds, is still defiantly standing on its moral high ground. They are angry that in voting Labour, they are being perceived as condoning corruption. It is true that most people did not vote Labour because they, the voters, are personally corrupt. But in convincing them to vote Labour, the Joseph Muscat machine has inveigled them in its corruption.
Before the election I wrote that Muscat and his inner circle were using the Labour Party as a human shield to force through an electoral victory and batter down the claims of corruption. Now, in victory, this shield has been reinforced by many thousands of voters, who will be loath to admit later on that their judgement was so venal or so short-sighted. In striving to defend the indefensible, their sense of truth and justice and of what is in the country’s best interest will inevitably be corrupted.
Behind this shield, the Commissioner of Police has confirmed that he intends to carry on as before. Konrad Mizzi is again a minister, handling another state jewel that is ripe for sale. Minister Edward Scicluna is rubbishing the veracity of the FIAU reports, something that government had not dared to do before the elections.
Unless the Prime Minister personally commits to the publication and due process of the four magisterial inquiries that touch on the alleged misdeeds of his family and circle, we may never actually know if and when the inquiries are concluded, what the Attorney General’s decision on them will be, and whether the police will just sit pretty and ignore any recommendations as they did with the FIAU reports.
Meanwhile, the government will divert the crowds with the 21st century equivalent of bread and circuses, funding them through the sale of our national assets and reputation.
Is this the price we will have to pay so that Keith Schembri and the rest never face justice?
The flame has a name
I heard that the government is finally close to deciding on a name for the hulking bronze blob on the Valletta bastion in front of the Central Bank. The final selection is between two options: Tislima lin-Nazzjonalisti Maħruqin, or ‘Traditional Values go up in Flames’. This is going to be a tough choice.