|
James Debono
The PN never wanted this mid-term electoral test. After winning the watershed 2003 general election and ensuring Malta’s place in the European Union, the PN suffered its worst electoral setback since 1953 when it was pushed below the 40 per cent mark in last June’s local elections. It is public knowledge that negotiations were held between the MLP and the PN in which the PN proposed the postponement of these elections. Back in November, MaltaToday revealed that backdoor meetings were held between the two parties in which the PN offered a change in the setup of the Local Councils Association in return for an agreement on extending councils’ terms of office from three to four years. Had Labour accepted the PN’s offer, no elections would have been held this year.
After failing to persuading the MLP to accept the cancellation of elections in all 23 localities, the PN, on its own steam, succeeded in aborting elections in Zejtun and Marsa, two Labour strongholds, by withdrawing its candidates five minutes before the electoral commission’s closing time for nominations.
The PN’s benchmark
The withdrawal of candidates from Zejtun and Marsa and the cancellation of elections in these localities will inevitably complicate the interpretation of the final results. In the last elections the MLP had won an absolute majority of 52 per cent. The PN gained just 44.8 per cent of the vote. Yet if one removes the votes cast in Zejtun and Marsa, the PN would have got a total of 23,697 votes, ie 48.1 per cent of the vote while the MLP would have gained 23,907 votes ie 48.5 per cent of the vote.
Therefore the PN’s most accurate benchmark in these elections will be the 48.1 per cent it had gained in all localities contested in 2002 minus Zejtun and Marsa. Anything less than 48.1 per cent in all localities minus Fontana, where no election were held in 2002, would mean that the PN has decreased its share of the vote. The margin between the PN and the MLP in these localities in 2002 was one of 0.4 per cent. A greater margin than 0.4 per cent would be interpreted as a defeat for the PN.
By recurring to the so-called “intelligent strategy” of its Secretary General and its strategy group, the PN cannot attribute a possible defeat to the fact that this round of elections includes more Labour oriented localities than Nationalist oriented areas. Back in 2002 in an interview with MaltaToday PN General Secretary pre-empted possible defeat by stating “This is an MLP group of councils”. This time, the two major political parties will start the race from a position of complete equivalence.
During the same TV programme in which Saliba described the PN’s tactical withdrawal from Zejtun and Marsa as an “intelligent” one, Saliba insisted there was more to this strategy than simply playing with percentages, raising questions as to the real motive behind the decision of the PN strategy group’s decision. In February 2002 in an interview with MaltaToday Joe Saliba declared that the abstention level “is too high in local elections and the winner will probably be the party which manages to get the most voters out.” Saliba could possibly blame a poor result on a very low turnout. Is the PN doing its best to get voters out in this round of elections? Many Nationalist supporters are asking themselves whether they should bother voting if the party is not even contesting in Zejtun and Marsa. In 2002 only 69.10 per cent of the electorate bothered to vote. During the past two rounds of local elections, turnout has increased to over 80 per cent but one has to consider that the last two elections coincided with two major electoral appointments, namely the EU referendum and Malta’s first European elections. A really low turnout would be one less than the more typical 65 to 70 per cent. In that case, it would be possible for the PN’s leadership to devalue the importance of this round of elections by attributing the defeat to a very low turn out in Nationalist-leaning areas. The PN would argue that those who abstained did not even dare vote for the MLP or AD in a mid-term local election when the government’s popularity is at its lowest ebb due to unpopular decisions taken in the national interest.
Another benchmark for all three parties is their performance in different localities. In 2002 the PN had won in 10 out of 23 localities. Anything less than would be interpreted as a major setback at local level.
Judging by results in 2002, the closest election this year will be fought in Qrendi, Mqabba, Mellieha and St Paul’s Bay. The positive record of the MLP-led Mellieha local council dampens hopes of a PN recovery in this locality. In St Paul’s Bay the possible election of an AD councillor would result in an evenly split council. From all the localities contested in 2002 AD was closest to electing a councillor in that locality. In Qrendi last year’s controversy on landfills will not help the PN but the emergence of a Labour-oriented independent could decrease the MLP’s share of the vote. In Mqabba, where the difference between the two parties is minimal, the most popular PN candidate in 2002 was Emanuel Buttigieg, who will not be contesting again as he resigned from the council last March. Contacted by MaltaToday, 71-year old Buttigieg declared that he took his decision because of his age.
In Zebbug, where the difference between the two parties is also minimal, the most popular PN candidate at the 2002 local elections will also be absent from the PN’s list. On the other hand ex-mayor and ex-Labour councillor Dominic Zammit will be contesting as an independent. The PN’s intensive campaign in 2002, in particular localities like Zebbug, completely contrasts with the low-key campaign this year.
The MLP’s benchmarks
Anything more than 48.5 per cent will be interpreted as a positive result by the MLP. Yet winning an absolute majority in these circumstances will be the cherry in the cake. If the MLP succeeds in winning a relative or a less plausible absolute majority in these elections it could end up being a victim of its own success. It could become even more over confident and thus more prone to delusions of grandeur. One consequence of the MLP’s victory last June was to kill any debate on the MLP’s leadership. With the exception of Anna Mallia, nobody from a Labour background has dared to call for a leadership change since last June’s success. The PN could be hoping that disgruntled Nationalists are venting their frustrations by abstaining or voting AD in local elections while returning to the fold at the next general elections. The MLP’s victories in local elections in 2001 and 2003 will go down in history as ephemeral ones as the party went on to lose the watershed 2003 elections.
The Green’s benchmark
As regards AD, these elections will serve to confirm whether the party has kept the support it had gained in last June’s European elections. Back in 2002, AD gained a respectable percentage of nearly six per-cent but failed to elect any local councillor in the five localities it had contested. In 2003 and 2004 the Greens managed to elect a total of four local councillors. Failing to elect a councillor this time will demoralise the Greens. This is no easy feat considering that in the past AD failed to elect councillors in localities like Attard, despite gaining 10 per cent of the vote. The size of AD’s vote will also have a significant bearing on the final results especially in the Nationalist leaning localities like Iklin and St Paul’s Bay where AD will be contesting.
But does it make any sense to use local elections as a benchmark for gauging the support of the three political parties at national level? Well all over Europe local council elections are always seen as barometer for the midterm popularity of the party in power. While in the UK the Conservative Party has made inroads at a local level it has so far failed to make the same inroads at a national level. It is still too early to say whether the MLP will suffer the same fate.
|
