[ANALYSIS] Abela’s tightrope walk between continuity and change

A breakdown of Robert Abela’s speech into elements of continuity and change suggests that the Labour leader is still threading carefully between his pre-election promise of continuity and the readiness to implement change as displayed in some of his first decisions – an approach which reflects his strong standing in the polls, showing him retaining over 90% of Labour voters despite misgivings on the first steps to reach out to Labour critics, while at the same time emerging as a more trusted leader among 23% of PN voters, in recognition of these initial indications of change.

Last Sunday, Robert Abela delivered a solid, sober and forward-looking speech that gives the Labour party a sense of direction; building on the achievements of the past seven years in sectors like civil liberties and equality while hinting at a change in priorities on themes like the environment, housing and good governance.

But while promising zero-tolerance on abuse on his watch, Abela failed to look back at recent events which shook the party to the core.

He made no reference to the Vitals hospitals scandal, Panamagate or Keith Schembri’s possible involvement in an obstruction of justice concerning the investigation into the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

It was deputy leader Chris Fearne, Abela’s own rival in the leadership contest, who in his own speech obscurely referred to projects which “however big may have to be stopped” – in what could have been an allusion to the privatisation of public hospitals.

But even when it comes to style, he still lacks his predecessor’s ability to close in on the one single message he wants relayed in the media sphere – perhaps a humble and appropriate style for the post-Muscat era.

Continuity for the grassroots

In his speech Abela emphasised several aspects making continuity both with Labour history and the Muscat era, ranging from the defence of the national interest to reaffirming the commitment for civil liberties. Despite growing lingering questions on Muscat’s relationship with Keith Schembri – a person of interest in investigations related to Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination – Abela still thanked Joseph Muscat while speaking on his party’s love for the country. Still, even when outlining continuity, Abela also shows signs of change.

‘Malta first and foremost’

Abela included national pride as one of the defining characteristics of his party. He even reiterated Mintoff’s Malta l-ewwel u qabel kollox (Malta first and foremost) battle-cry which he twinned with Muscat’s more inclusive but rarely practised ‘Malta taghna lkoll’ (Malta that belongs to all) mantra. He contrasted this with the negativity of the opposition, particularly of its two MEPs who had refused to meet him in the company of Labour MEPs. But Abela hinted at a change in attitude, affirming his readiness to “engage in dialogue with our greatest critics” on the international stage, and vaguely recognising that he needed to restore the country’s reputation.

Labour as the reformist party

Abela seems keen on retaining his party’s edge as a more socially liberal party, affirming its reformist legacy in matters like equal marriage which turned Malta into a “beacon of hope”.

But except for hinting at further changes to the IVF law to make it easier for parents to have children, he was short on detail. He made no reference to the legalisation of cannabis or decriminalising sex work, a position on which the party is committed to debate in its electoral manifesto.

Abortion, which he has already excluded, obviously remains off the table. But Abela’s condemnation of how former Nationalist governments “used to impose their conservative views on everyone preventing people from making their own choices” could also apply to the abortion debate. Abela also reiterated Muscat’s commitment to increase women’s participation in parliament.

An open party

Abela commended the PL’s transformation under Muscat into a movement that ditched its siege mentality and opened its doors, but acknowledged the anxiety this had caused to long-time activists and supporters. Abela’s greatest shortcoming in this aspect is his failure to distinguish between newcomers who joined Labour to help it change the country for the better, and those who wanted to further their personal or business interests. On the plus side, Abela seems keener on listening to criticism from his own party.

The conference itself was addressed by Desiree Attard, a critical voice on the left of the party who never shied away from voicing her concerns on environmental degradation. Even on Sunday she insisted on the importance of internal criticism, arguing that it was the intolerance to such criticism which led to the PN’s demise. Moreover in the absence of the Nationalist opposition, “we have to be the opposition for ourselves,” Attard said.

While praising Abela for his first steps, she called for greater commitment to ensure a wider redistribution of wealth and promised to remain honest to her socialist principles and ready to voice her concerns. PL president Daniel Jose Micallef also reaffirmed the party’s role as a watchdog on the government and also as a source of new proposals like the one he made on restricting traffic in urban centres.

Infrastructure and road-widening

Abela expressed his full trust in Infrastructure Minister Ian Borg whom he singled out for praise, despite criticism by environmentalists on his way of getting things done, includes the destruction of large tracts of agricultural land for the Central Link project.

While Abela may be in synch with public opinion, which sees road-widening projects positively, he may be losing an opportunity to change the emphasis towards public modes of transport and pedestrianisiation.

On this aspect Daniel Jose Micallef was more innovative by coupling support for road-widening to more pedestrianisation in urban areas. It also remains to be seen whether Abela will push for a mass transit project or whether the idea has been shelved.

Delivering change

While emphasising continuity with the economic model, resulting in economic growth, Abela shows greater awareness of sustainability and governance issues even if he falls short of outlining concrete steps to achieve his goal of increasing wages, beyond his ‘equal pay for equal work’ commitment.

From pro-business to pro-market

Abela has repeated his new “pro-market” instead of “pro-business” mantra to signal a clear change in approach with the Muscat years. Yet he has still to explain what this entails apart from a difference in semantics. Abela here walks on a tight rope between retaining the same rhythm of growth in sectors like construction while at the same time ensuring sustainability and diversification.

Rents and wages

While on housing Abela affirms the government’s goal of ensuring accommodation that is affordable for everyone, even though the new law regulating rents and construction of new social accommodation are steps in the right direction, this may require further government intervention in a sector where being pro-market clearly fails in ensuring social justice.

As regards wages Abela is right in challenging the injustice of workers doing the same job in the same workplace for different pay simply because some work gets sub-contracted. But Abela, who like Muscat before is so keen to emphasise Malta’s A ratings by credit agencies, refrains from mentioning other official statistics showing Maltese workers receiving a smaller share of their country’s GDP than they were at the beginning of the decade.

On this aspect Abela has already excluded a debate on whether a living wage should be introduced. Still to Labour’s credit Abela could also mention a number of measures like free childcare, free SEC exams, free school transport and pension increases, which have spared Maltese families from austerity despite widening inequalities.

Intelligent development

Abela’s answer to the problems created by endless construction is not to slow down the rhythm of work but to encourage “intelligent development” and “urban greening”. But protecting existing urban spaces and skylines in localities and reclaiming pavements encumbered by chairs and tables, also requires changes in policies. The risk is that “intelligent development” may end up being another way of greenwashing the industry, avoiding any serious debate on the impact of gentrification and the commodification of public spaces.

Discipline and normality

Abela insists that his leadership will ensure “discipline” to ensure that “certain lines are never crossed” and “what happened never repeats itself”. The speech was itself replete with references to past mistakes but the failure to mention them and attribute responsibilities for them suggests that Abela is still scared of tackling Muscat’s toxic legacy head-on.

Abela’s reference to the current scandal facing the police force also feel short of recognising a degree of political responsibility for the state of the police force under the previous Labour government.

Abela’s promise that things will change under his watch gives the impression that what happened before him can be overlooked or forgotten. He also frames good governance as a way of restoring “normality, tranquillity and stability” rather than a fundamental shake-up of the way the institutions work.

But the very fact that Abela is recognising this issue as a priority does sends the right message to Maltese society at large, who since panamagate was given the impression that everything goes.