[ANALYSIS] Separated in the same house

Lawrence Gonzi: bogged down in instability?

Joseph Muscat: a gamble which paid off?

Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici: from Minister to sacrificial lamb?

Franco Debono: the albatross around Gonzi's neck

Richard Cachia Caruana: Gonzi's waterloo?

Edwin Vassallo's fatwa

Lawrence Gonzi: bogged down in instability?

For Lawrence Gonzi, the loss of a key cabinet member is a devastating blow, which once again raises questions on whether he can actually govern the country for another year. For although Gonzi may well win the vote of confidence, the spectre of Franco Debono striking again to trip the government in the next days, weeks or months will not be exorcised. 

Had the motion not passed, Gonzi would now be in a position of political strength, fully able to dedicate his energies in winning back disillusioned voters after taming Debono and restoring stability to his government.

But it is now beyond doubt that instability still haunts the government.

So far, Gonzi has behaved correctly by calling a confidence vote after accepting Mifsud Bonnici's immediate resignation. Technically, unless Gonzi loses next Monday's vote of confidence, he can remain in power right up to the very end.

Gonzi may still bank on Debono's unwillingness to take the blame for bringing the government down, surviving from one crisis to the next, but never suffering a fatal final blow. 

Gonzi's position will be further weakened if Debono abstains on Monday. In that case although technically the government will remain in place, it will once again be deprived of its majority in parliament.

Such a prospect of endemic instability is bound to raise concern on whether the country has the strong and stable government it needs to continue weathering the international economic crisis, which may reach new levels if Greece is forced to leave the eurozone.

Moreover, banking on Debono's crucial support in decisive confidence votes entails an uneasy cohabitation with Debono. Debono will remain an albatross around Gonzi's neck even if he does not pull the trigger. Such cohabitation is now rendered problematic by the party's increased hostility towards Debono after he crossed the Rubicon by voting with the opposition.

The scenario is further complicated by speeches made in parliament by various MPs who raised the stakes, by insisting that the motion was not simply one on the individual responsibility of one minister but one on the collective responsibility of the whole government. 

Still, it does not necessarily follow that Gonzi emerges electorally weakened by the latest crisis. The vote may well reinforce tribal allegiances among core voters who feel threatened by a perceived collusion between Debono and Labour. This perceived collusion between Debono and the PL to trip the government, could also serve to galvanise the dormant pale blue vote.

By sounding uncompromising towards Debono in his final speech, Gonzi may well have appeared more decisive than before. For every attempt to appease Debono in the past has only served to aggravate the crisis and increase the backbencher's appetite.  In fact, Debono's first direct challenge to Gonzi took place after a government reshuffle prompted by Debono's insistence on the separation of the home affairs and justice ministries. Still, Gonzi's own admission that the government was engaged in negotiations with Debono on Wednesday shows that he is still not sure about how to deal with him. 

The  orchestrated attempt by Nationalist speakers to associate Labour's present antics with the violence of the 1980s may also have gone down well with the grass roots. But this divisive approach may well have turned off middle-of-the-road voters who cannot see any comparison between violence and holding a minister to account in parliament.

On the other hand, Gonzi's attempt to portray Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici as the victim of a ruthless opposition, may pay dividends with pale blue and floating voters who may have questioned Mifsud Bonnici's administrative qualities, while still respecting  him for his integrity.

But support based on sympathy for a Prime Minister under siege and a dethroned minister may well be ephemeral and mostly restricted to voters who would have voted for the Nationalist Party any way. It might have little or no impact on the category of Nationalist voters who now intend voting for Labour. 

Therefore, although tempted to ride the crest of the wave of renewed tribal loyalties, Gonzi may still heed the advice of those who believe that the party would have a better fighting chance if he plods on till the very end. For if he goes for an election in October, government would have lost the opportunity of presenting a budget. Since any budget vote is tantamount to a confidence vote, Gonzi can bank on Debono's loyalty. 

Surely, last Wednesday's vote gives Gonzi an alibi to skip the budget, especially if the government is off-track from the targets set in the previous budget. But if the government is on track on reaching these targets, Gonzi could be tempted to present a pre-electoral budget aimed at capitalising on renewed economic confidence. This feel-good factor will relegate endemic instability to the background. It may well be the case that the date of the election will be determined by fiscal considerations, rather than by Debono's antics.

Joseph Muscat: a gamble which paid off?

For Joseph Muscat, the opposition's victory in parliament serves two important purposes: it confirms his oft-repeated claim that the government is paralysed by endemic political instability and it has justified his parliamentary strategy of colluding with Debono to trip the government.

Joseph Muscat must have been relieved that the motion passed. Had it not passed, he would have had emerged from parliament with egg on his face, being seen by his own supporters as being driven into a brick wall by Debono.

It seems that Muscat was initially given a clear indication that Debono would vote against Mifsud Bonnici. This moment was immortalised in the popular imagination by Muscat crossing the floor for a chat with Debono before the opposition teamed with Debono to force the government's hand in demanding a date for its motion.

But as the days went on, this certainty started to evaporate, especially on the final day when Debono made contradictory statements on the media. Ultimately, Muscat took a big gamble which paid off. He has been successful in tripping the government on an important vote.

Yet, while the passage of the opposition's motion has once again galvanised Labour voters, the impact on middle-of-the-road voters remains to be seen. 

For while the outcome strengthens the perception of a weak, unstable government - thus reinforcing Labour's criticism that the country lacks a functional government - it also confirms the perception that the opposition has only one thing in its mind: tripping the government in a delicate moment when the country is weathering the eurozone crisis. 

This could be the reason why, immediately after the vote, Labour immediately commenced debate on its proposal for a "fair society".

With surveys showing the PL set to win by a huge margin if elections are held now, Labour seems dead set to seize a favourable moment. The sense of urgency shown by the opposition in exploiting Debono's pet hates betrays a fear that this advantage could evaporate if the government clings to power till the very end.

This perception of a one-track-minded opposition, was amplified by the government's decision to allocate weeks of debate to two parliamentary motions presented by the opposition. This degenerated in the opposition nitpicking on an endless list of petty shortcomings like stolen generators and delays in court apart, from more serious issues like mysterious surrounding the death of Nicholas Azzopardi. 

Moreover, while the opposition is perfectly justified in exposing the administrative shortcomings of Mifsud Bonnici's ministry, some voters will be asking: are these shortcomings tantamount to justify the resignation of a minister whose integrity was never put in question?

Ultimately it is no mystery that the only reason why the opposition picked on Mifsud Bonnici and not on other ministers accused of more serious shortcomings was that Labour smelled blood, correctly anticipating that Debono could go all the way on this one.

But in so doing, the opposition risks being perceived as being manipulated by Debono to help him in his personal vendettas without ultimately succeeding in its bid to force an early election.  

The outcome of the vote has solidified the perception that Debono is colluding with the opposition, something which does not necessarily enhance the credentials of the opposition among middle-of-the-road voters, some of which are deeply suspicious of Debono's ultimate motives.

Another risk for Muscat is that the vote has once again raised expectations of an early election among Labour voters.

Surely, Muscat has been very careful not to appear to be gloating after Debono voted with the opposition. The risk is that these voters will be frustrated again as the government manages to limp on towards the natural expiry date of the legislature.

Perversely, after presenting the motion asking for Mifsud Bonnici to resign, speaking in Gudja on Thursday Muscat accused the prime minister for not sticking up for his home affairs minister in the same way as he stood up for Austin Gatt in a similar motion presented by the opposition in November.

This could betray a sense of unease about the wave of sympathy for Mifsud Bonnici among a segment of voters in the aftermath of the motion. 

Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici: from Minister to sacrificial lamb?

Mifsud Bonnici goes down in history as the first minister in post-independence history to be forced to vacate his position after the approval of a motion in parliament calling for his resignation. What is surprising is that Mifsud Bonnici did not go down for behaving unethically, but for administrative failures.

Although Mifsud Bonnici leaves his ministry with his integrity intact, he faced a motion listing all sorts of systematic failures in the administration of correctional services and the Police Force. Still, the question remains whether these failures were tantamount to justify a vote asking for his resignation. 

Neither was Mifsud Bonnici particularly unpopular. In 2010, he emerged as the most positively judged minister in MaltaToday's "rate the minister" survey.

A similar  MaltaToday survey published in October 2011 (just two months before Labour presented its motion) showed that only 13% of respondents judged his performance as minister negatively, while 38% judged his performance positively. 

Significantly, Mifsud Bonnici also emerged as the most popular minister among Labour voters.   

Overall, Mifsud Bonnici emerged as the third-most favourably judged minister and the least negatively judged minister. Clearly, the PN's strategy is to portray Mifsud Bonnici as the victim of the opposition's ruthless tactics. This banks on a certain amount of sympathy for Mifsud Bonnici, who is neither abrasive nor arrogant.

The government side is also exploiting Mifsud Bonnici's medical problems in its bid to demonise the opposition. But this tactic backfired after Alfred Sant exposed the double standards of such a strategy, reminding how details on his cancer operation were leaked to the press a few months before the 2008 election. In the end, it could well be the case of pot calling the kettle black.

Franco Debono: the albatross around Gonzi's neck

Franco Debono has shed the perception that barking dogs never bite. He has shown that his support cannot be taken for granted and that he has no qualms in teaming up with the Labour Opposition to get what he wants. He has also shown diabolical acumen by out manoeuvring the Prime Minister by getting a date for the Mifsud Bonnici motion in return for his support for the money implementation bill.

Yet, by voting with Labour, Debono has burned any chance of a political comeback. 

Debono knows that he will only be in a position to dictate terms and dominate the news headlines as long as the Gonzi government survives. Once the government falls, Debono will become history.

To his credit, Debono has shown remarkable consistency in his argument that a vote in individual Ministerial responsibility is not one on the collective responsibility of the government. While voting with the government on the Budget Implementation Bill last month, he had no qualms voting for the opposition motion asking for Mifsud Bonnici's resignation. 

Debono had previously abstained on a motion censuring Transport Minister Austin Gatt in November, only to vote for the government in a subsequent confidence vote demanded by the prime minister. 

It may well be the case that Debono will once again fall in line, giving Gonzi his vital support tomorrow and thus underline the fact that his support is indispensable for government. In so doing, Debono would also be following a logical pattern; voting for government in crucial votes while retaining his liberty on other matters. 

Still, unlike previous occasions where he abstained, this time round Debono has crossed the lines by voting for a motion proposed by the opposition.

This could have irremediably soured the relationship with both the Nationalist Party and Lawrence Gonzi, resulting in an uneasy cohabitation where any harsh word directed against the MP by anyone in the PN's orbit may well tip the balance. 

In fact, Debono has now attributed his vote against Mifsud Bonnici on the prime minister's failure to condemn Daphne Caruana Galizia for  attacking his mother in one of her blogs.

Debono's willingness to negotiate the terms of abstention in return for concessions unrelated to the performance of Mifsud Bonnici as minister, is in itself mind boggling.

Debono may still complicate matters further by abstaining tomorrow.

This will take the country back to last January's stalemate, when the government was emasculated by Debono's abstention and forced to rely on the Speaker's casting vote following an opposition motion of no confidence in the entire government.

While Debono would not be directly responsible for taking the country to an election, his abstention will legitimise calls by the opposition for an immediate election.

What is certain is that last Wednesday's vote shows how Debono is becoming more and more unpredictable. While in the morning he strongly hinted at an abstention - telling MaltaToday that he would not vote with Labour and The Times that he would not vote with government - Debono changed his mind to vote against the government in the evening. 

This unpredictability makes it even more difficult for Gonzi to anticipate his moves.  It could also exasperate the patience of fellow Nationalist MPs and the risk of the conflict escalating and getting out of hand.

Still, while Debono keeps dominating the headlines, his antics do not necessarily endear him to middle-of-the-road voters. While his "ballsy" vote on Wednesday might have restored his credentials among die-hard Labourites, for Nationalist voters last Wednesday's vote may well be the straw which broke the camel's back. Such a sentiment may even be shared by floating voters nauseated by the MP's constant shifting of goal posts, and his relentless protagonism.

Richard Cachia Caruana: Gonzi's waterloo?

Hinging on the Prime Minister's decision on whether to go for an early election is the risk of another defeat in parliament on the opposition's motion censuring permanent ambassador Richard Cachia Caruana. Although the opposition's argument that the government's 'eminence grise' had secretly colluded with a foreign power has proven to be flimsy and tenuous, a second consecutive defeat could make the government's position untenable, even if Gonzi wins tomorrow's vote.

Moreover, although Debono has gone on record stating that he would not vote for this motion, doubts linger on how Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando - who has repeatedly clashed with Cachia Caruana - will be voting.

If both Debono and Pullicino Orlando abstain, the government will still lose the vote.

If he loses again, Gonzi would once again be forced to ask for a vote of confidence.

This would be the second vote of confidence in the space of a few weeks. Such a vote would certify the endemic instability.

One way of avoiding this would be to dissolve parliament now, but this could probably mean a certain defeat in the polls. A more  probable outcome of a second consecutive defeat would be the government plodding on to the summer recess and calling a snap election in October.

On the other hand, if Gonzi wins this vote after winning tomorrow's confidence vote, a spring election will be more likely.

Edwin Vassallo's fatwa

It was Nationalist MP Edwin Vasallo who raised the stakes before the vote by insisting that this motion was not simply one on the individual responsibilities of a Minister but one on the collective responsibility of the entire government.

Speaking in parliament during the debate on the Opposition's censure motion, Vassallo added that the attack on Mifsud Bonnici is an "attack on the government" and said the minister should not give up his post because he still enjoys the confidence of the government.

He also provided fodder for the opposition by saying that Mifsud Bonnici "should not resign even if the motion is approved". Clearly, this advice was not followed by Mifsud Bonnici himself, who immediately presented his resignation.

What was inexplicable was the Prime Minister's reaction to the incendiary speech. Instead of disassociating himself from a speech which advised him to ignore parliament, Gonzi stood up and shook Vassallo's hand in a clear indication that he was endorsing this speech. Still, Vassallo's speech could reflect popular sentiment within the PN's grass roots. Ultimately, this could translate in Vassallo winning more votes in the forthcoming election.