Is the C word back in fashion?

One of the greatest political experiments in recent Maltese history was Joseph Muscat’s transformation of the Labour Party into a “movement of moderates and progressives.” 

Sure, it was contradictory from the start and was held together by the charisma and political intelligence of a leader whose legacy includes corrupt hospital and energy deals and the political assassination of a journalist. But it was a winning formula nonetheless, one which changed the country beyond recognition. 

Malta in 2025 is very different from Malta in 2013. The country has become a global leader on LGBTIQ rights. While still a laggard on reproductive rights, the decriminalisation of abortion is now firmly on the national agenda. A bill on euthanasia is in the offing, IVF is easily accessible to couples and single persons, artists are no longer constrained by blasphemy laws, and people are no longer criminalised for consuming soft drugs but can instead buy weed from licensed clubs. 

And while the economic model sustaining these changes is replete with inequalities and the exploitation of an underclass of imported foreigners, Malta feels more cosmopolitan and less insular. Sure, ultra conservatives recoil and dream of turning back the clock while, moderate conservatives think it is time to apply the brakes. Progressives would argue that on many fronts, particularly on women’s rights and inclusion policies, a lot more still needs to be done.   

Labour’s identity crisis and the PN’s opportunity 

Malta is at a crossroads, not just because the problems created by the current economic model are catching up with us in terms of liveability, but also because of signs that the attrition of power is eating away at Labour’s reformist drive. 

The PN faces an even deeper crisis but a new leader has the advantage of starting afresh. And even though Abela’s Labour is still on top, there is a chance that under a new leader who plays his cards well, the Nationalist Party may reclaim its position as a government-in-waiting. 

One major question is: Will the PN accept the realities of a new Malta while addressing the various challenges it faces, or will it seek to turn the clock back? 

Unfortunately, the current leadership contest offers little indication of which direction the party will take. Both contenders hail from the party’s more socially conservative wing, having voted together against pre-implantation genetic testing on embryos for IVF couples. Both oppose euthanasia, though they would give MPs a free vote.  

But their discourse on abortion would come across as extremist in most European contexts—no exceptions, no nuance, and a complete disregard for women’s bodily autonomy.  

Clues on the PN’s future direction 

So, the contest only offers us vague clues on the PN’s direction and no clear pattern emerges on who is most conservative in a choice between Delia and Borg. 

Delia comes across as a politician of stronger convictions, more forceful in rejecting Labour’s economic model and environmental track record, yet struggling to present a credible alternative. He also keeps harping on foreigners as a threat to the identity of the “ġens Malti” (Maltese ethnicity), raising justified concerns about liveability but doing so through an us-versus-them lens. 

Borg sounds more flexible, less bogged down by the past, and more inclined to preserve aspects of Labour’s economic model. This makes him appear moderate, though his conservative instincts sometimes surface when faced with direct questions. While he downplays his past preference for Trump, the fact that he chose a conservative from outside the centre-right family of parties, namely Giorgia Meloni as his favourite politician in an interview with MaltaToday speaks volumes on his political instincts.  

When MaltaToday asked whether children should be taught about different gender identities in school, Delia replied that “teaching is always a good thing.” Borg, however, qualified his answer: “This depends on their age” and society “needs to give them time to understand the reality out there.” He added that when children “reach the age when they can really understand the realities out there,” he sees no problem with them learning about “all the realities that exist in our society.” 

This stance may sound moderate but evades one fundamental reality—it is very young children in primary schools who face bullying because of their fluid gender identities or who could be ostracised because of their family background.   

On the other hand, Delia came close to suggesting that cannabis reforms should be reversed, telling Newsbook: “At the risk of sounding conservative, I do not agree with the notion of allowing recreational use of drugs… Do we need to be out of our minds to enjoy ourselves?” 

There was no self-awareness that this argument can also be used to ban alcohol. 

In contrast, Borg proposed tinkering with the reform, promising to “close loopholes, stop smoking in public places, and prevent abuse.” It is the kind of statement which leaves everybody guessing. 

Stopping the clock without turning it back 

Borg’s “moderation” may offer conservatives a guarantee that he will stop the clock from moving forward in a progressive direction, without upsetting middle-of-the-road voters.    

Of course, given Malta’s electoral system—where parties must converge towards the centre to win—it is unlikely that the PN under either Borg or Delia will embrace a fully-fledged conservative path. 

For progressives, the fear is that once boundaries stop being pushed and conservatives start occupying key positions in state agencies and authorities, the prospect of slow, incremental cultural regression sets in—particularly in a global climate shifting to the right, especially among younger men. In short, the PN may not turn the clock back immediately, but the clock may start moving back slowly and incrementally, in the absence of a major push from above. 

Abela’s conviction deficit 

The reason for Labour’s vulnerability to a conservative backlash is that it has long abandoned conviction politics while burning bridges with those who passionately fight progressive battles. 

And while it is hard to imagine Malta relapsing to the ‘theocracy’ it was before 2013, Maltese society is not immune to trends across Europe and the USA, where centre-left parties are increasingly vulnerable to a resurgent conservatism that appeals directly to working-class voters—voters who have lost the power to punch up but who feel increasingly empowered to punch down. 

Moreover, Labour’s record on governance and planning, its lax enforcement against bullies, arrogant lobbies and oligarchs, and its lack of will to defend the common good make it difficult for progressives on the political left to support it—even reluctantly. 

Labour is also vulnerable because a segment of its voters supports the party despite—not because of—its progressive social reforms. Social media comments are ample proof that Labour has retained support among the Trump-loving crowd and seems comfortable entertaining them.   

More disturbingly, some of these supporters even defend abuse and exploitation whenever Labour is confronted by its left-wing critics or the media. Others use a discourse which is completely at odds with the party’s progressive ethos, as was the case of the Mqabba deputy mayor who suggested that women enjoy being beaten up, before making a half-hearted apology. 

Crucially, Labour shows more interest in keeping these elements on board than in reaching out to progressives advocating both liberal reforms and good governance based on social justice. 

Sure, Labour still has one progressive card left—euthanasia. It is a relatively safe issue with broad support across the political spectrum even among people who are conservative on other topics like abortion. But apart from this notable exception, Abela seems to have lost his appetite for reform. 

Significantly, he backed down on the decriminalisation of abortion in cases where childbirth could endanger a mother’s health. This is the same Abela who invoked the suffering of cancer patients to justify a planning amnesty but refused to continue the battle to protect women at risk of blindness or severe mental illness if forced to carry a pregnancy to term. The problem is that regression often sets in the moment the political left loses its will to push boundaries. 

Progressives cannot expect major reforms such as the decriminalisation of abortion from the PN, regardless of which contender becomes leader. Still, some may continue to support the PN simply because they prioritise a change in government over their progressive ideals. 

Others may try to push the boundaries within Labour which is more open to their ideas, though this is becoming increasingly difficult as the party grows more inward-looking. 

Third parties may also provide an opening for orphaned progressives although their growth remains constrained by the electoral system.