Editorial: The campaign that forgot the future

Surveys are rarely spot on, but the ones carried out in recent years consistently showed Labour maintaining a comfortable lead. Barring a dramatic last-minute shift, Robert Abela appears on course for a record fourth Labour victory next weekend.

There are several reasons for this, and some of it is to Labour’s credit. The country has seen impressive economic growth, a tourism boom, negligible unemployment and better social liberties. Most importantly, the government helped put money in many people’s pockets and, in recent years, also attempted to reconnect with some of its social democratic roots.

Yet, Labour’s electoral strength also reflects a contradiction: economic success has increasingly coexisted with growing protests about governance, overdevelopment and falling standards.

Throughout the electoral campaign, Labour skilfully (and shamelessly) used its power of incumbency to its benefit. State announcements, financial schemes and a constant stream of pledges often blurred the line between governing and campaigning in ways likely to attract scrutiny from international observers.

Patronage and nepotism are nothing new in Malta, but over the past decade they have been refined into an art form, sustained by tens of millions spent on favours, politically motivated jobs and vanity projects.

Meanwhile, the face of Malta has also changed dramatically, often not for the better. Traffic congestion, dust, noise and relentless construction have reshaped the country.

Patronage and nepotism are nothing new in Malta, but over the past decade they have been refined into an art form

At the same time, the government’s economic model remains heavily dependent on low-paid and often exploited foreign labour. While this fuelled growth, it also intensified pressure on infrastructure, housing and healthcare.

The PN, a party that pulled Malta back from democratic decline in the 1980s and later steered the country into the EU and the eurozone, appeared unprepared for an early election. Although its campaign improved as it progressed, critics rightly argue the PN struggled to impose a coherent political narrative and instead largely attempted to outbid Labour with competing promises and financial incentives.

As a result, the campaign became a bidding war, a contest over who could promise more subsidies, tax cuts and financial relief. At times, the campaign resembled one prolonged budget speech rather than a serious national debate about Malta’s medium to long-term direction and aspirations.

Abela justified the early election by citing international uncertainty. Yet, that very uncertainty exposed the campaign’s central contradiction. Labour warned of turbulent global conditions while simultaneously insisting money would never be a problem. The PN decried debt levels while promising unprecedented spending on infrastructure and tax cuts.

Former Malta Chamber president Marisa Xuereb was among the experts who warned voters to treat flashy electoral pledges with caution. Time will likely prove her right.

The real reasons behind the timing of the election may never be fully known. Was it called before inflationary pressures linked to global conflicts and trade wars begin to bite harder? Was it timed to avoid potential political fallout from looming court developments? Or did Abela conclude that his experience gave him a decisive advantage over the younger Alex Borg, who has only led the PN since September?

Despite this, there were positive aspects to the campaign, which remained largely respectful, orderly and free from major incidents.

Borg deserves recognition for reinvigorating his party and softening partisan hostility. Abela led a slick, organised campaign and spoke with confidence across his various briefs. 

Both parties presented moonshot plans to fix traffic woes but no real short-term solutions. On quality of life, proposals were largely vague or technocratic. Broader discussions about principles, a new economic model, foreign policy and long-term planning were largely absent.

Disappointingly and somewhat tellingly, the two parties were closest to each other in their visions for planning, construction and discriminate treatment of foreign workers. In reality, they offered no plausible solutions for all three issues. No wonder many now feel politically orphaned.

Ironically, it was the smaller parties like Momentum and ADPD which proposed more realistic ideas on issues like governance, accountability and transport reform.

Yet, as the small parties are expected to struggle at the polls, Labour insiders will tell you the party is not just aiming to win but targeting another walkover.

Another Labour landslide would not be healthy for democracy. The party has shown time and again that it does not have the courage or will to use its massive parliamentary majorities to push through important but potentially divisive reforms. Instead, it has used its supermajorities to defend, and at times fuel, the bad practices holding the country back.

But is the PN actually ready to become a viable alternative government?

Malta’s deeper challenges will remain long after the pledges are forgotten – whoever forms the next government.