The writing had been on the wall for quite some time, but the Nationalist Party leadership missed it completely.
In the March 26 general election, the party won 41.7 per cent of the vote to Labour’s 55.1 per cent. Back in 2017, when the party in power was facing serious allegations of corruption, the rule of law was in retreat and good governance was honoured in the breach, the PN only managed to win 43.7 per cent of the votes cast, with Labour securing 55 per cent. Four years before that, in winning power Labour had won 54.8 per cent to the PN’s 43.3 per cent.
The last time the PN was elected to govern was in 2008, when it was in power and enjoyed the much-maligned ‘power of incumbency’. Even then, it only managed a relative majority – 49.3 per cent, with Labour trailing very closely at 48.8 per cent.
It was different in 2003: 51.8 per cent for the PN and 47.5 per cent for its political rival. That was the year Malta had decided, in a referendum, to join the EU. It was also the last time the PN had a real vision to offer the electorate.
It has spent the last few years in opposition losing precious time trying to manage internal crises before electing a new leader merely a year-and-a-half ahead of the election.
Bernard Grech was faced with the impossible task of turning around a massive electoral deficit in a short time, and failed as predicted. The party’s statute demands he must now step down and submit himself to an internal leadership election.
Those who have suggested Roberta Metsola could be lured back have not been realistic. She has made it amply clear she is just focused on the European Parliament, of which she is now president. In that prestigious and influential position, she will continue to be an asset and an inspiration to the PN.
Grech’s performance was on an upward curve during the electoral campaign and he has potential to help the party grow. At this juncture, the wisest choice for its members would be to confirm Grech as leader and trust him with making the tough decisions now needed. Another leadership contest would simply split the party further and that is something it cannot afford to do at this juncture.
Among them are the selection of top party officials and the hiring of good advisers and strategists who will be more nationalist, with a small ‘n’, than Nationalist, with a big ‘N’, in their line of (critical) thinking.
The former executive chairman of the PN’s communications arm, Pierre Portelli, spoke about the need of “a revitalised parliamentary group, a change in tone and shrewd political insight”. And Antoine Borg, who had served as Nationalist MP, feels the party lacks a “tangible, distinctive raison d’être”.
The one thing the PN needs to do over the next five years is take risks. That is what Joseph Muscat had done and he succeeded in scoring electoral success. The PN is unlikely to score any electoral points by saying that what Labour can do, it can do better.
Instead of helping their election prospects by trying to buy votes – which Labour is so successful at – the PN needs to design and articulate a clear vision for the way it sees the country progressing. That is what it did when it secured independence, EU membership and the adoption of the euro, all momentous developments in Malta’s history.
That must be the PN’s primary reason to exist over the next few years.