From the vantage point of the last day of this electoral campaign, one can judge the parties not only on their record in the past and their proposals but also, and perhaps more pertinently, on what they did throughout this campaign.

The Nationalist Party has focused on its best asset, the Prime Minister himself. Lawrence Gonzi has come out as a Prime Minister whose first term was definitely a success but who is not just resting on his laurels but going forward with proposals that address the needs Malta has now and will have in the next few years. In his first term, Dr Gonzi has managed to get the economy moving at a pace that yielded a growth of over four per cent, has reduced the budget deficit to levels so acceptable we are now using the euro and has been generating more than 5,000 new jobs a year that have more than made up for those lost and for new entrants into the labour market to result in a record number of people working. Last year, Malta saw record investment.

We have had a bumper tourist year resulting in a record amount of tourists visiting Malta. With a new hospital, new roads, investment in education, Mcast, embellishment and restoration projects, national parks, Magħtab closed and prospective investment in SmartCity and other industries, the results are there and speak for themselves.

But Dr Gonzi and the PN are not just talking about their record but have also been looking forward to address the country's needs till about 2015. For his second term, Dr Gonzi is proposing a substantial reduction in income tax, further incentives for working women and, very importantly, a reform in Mepa that will be piloted by himself. There are many other initiatives among the PN manifesto's 353 proposals but the PN has very evidently been making its homework and putting its finger where action can actually bear fruit during Dr Gonzi's second term: economic growth brought about by lower income tax, an increase in the workforce to fill the jobs that will be created and a reform in Mepa.

Labour's campaign has been a mud-slinging one throughout with very little effort to present a coherent programme for the next five years.

This was surprising. From a party that issued a collection of its documents running into hundreds of pages, one would have expected something of an explanation not just of the need it sees for change but what that change would actually mean. Nothing that happened in the last five weeks has afforded such an explanation. Rather, the campaign has shown that some of Labour's proposals have not been well thought out at all.

The extra reception year Labour is proposing between kindergarten and primary school has been criticised all round. Then came the confusion with Alfred Sant himself changing policy on the hoof when pressed by journalists. The controversy about Charles Mangion's proposal for overtime to be paid at normal rates took an unexpected twist when it turned out that is what is already happening at Labour's own media.

Dr Sant himself fuelled the European Union controversy with his declarations showing how sceptical he still is about the EU and then attacking the media for pointing out European politicians' misgivings.

But what characterised most Labour's campaign was the attempt to drag politics down to the gutter with allegations of corruption galore and very little substantiation. This went on for four weeks with Labour actually admitting that it had something "up its sleeve", meaning it had knowledge which it should actually have come up with before. This showed Labour was ready to play dirty. When it finally came up with its allegations about Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, it was upstaged by the man himself with Dr Sant avoiding a direct confrontation with the butt of his allegations.

The aftertaste of Labour's campaign is that it has been vintage old Labour with a willingness to play dirty and nasty that is actually worrying.

At the end of it all, the campaign has mostly confirmed what could be seen at the outset. Dr Gonzi is offering a second term of peace of mind with tax cutting proposals and other initiatives built on the results of his first term. Dr Sant has been showing himself as a negative politician, not averse to throwing dirt and showing no regrets about his style of politics and his first term that was characterised by uncertainty.