[ANALYSIS] Party dilemmas: to unite or to divide?

Both parties have already set the pitch for the first phase of the electoral campaign, with the PN seeking to rally its core by affirming its identity - thus risking appearing divisive and stuck in the past - while the PL seeks to consolidate its lead by appearing inclusive at the risk of coming across as nebulous and vague.

The 'Futur li jghaqqadna' ('a future that unites us') billboard slogan stands in marked contrast to the PN's 'Labour Won't Work' and the rather low-key 'PNmychoice' billboards.

Polls seems to be dictating the pace of the campaign with the PN still trailing behind Labour losing 10% of the 2008 voters to the PL.

To counter this persistent trend, the PN has to raise the stakes and go on an offensive to undermine Labour's credibility while trying to rekindle the flame of enthusiasm among its own voters.

On the other hand, Labour has every interest in diluting tribal identity, and projecting the image of a party where former Nationalists can feel at home.

In fact, by holding a mass meeting on September 22 - the day after Independence Day, and two days after Gonzi's address at the Granaries - Muscat could also be sending a message to former PN voters who used to take their political cue from Fenech Adami's address on the historic day: the celebration of which was banned under Mintoff.

But how effective are the two major parties in achieving their aims?

The PN strategy: emphasising difference

Surprisingly, one way through which the PN is seeking to rekindle enthusiasm among supporters is through a politically loaded song festival reminiscent of 'Gensna'- the rock opera which incarnated Mintoffian patriotic values in the 1970s. 

With refrains replete with references to  "the safe pair of hands at the country's helm", "wise leaders" and contrasting Malta's fate to the economic misfortunes of other "bankrupt" European countries, some of the songs convey the same self-congratulatory message typical of central Asian pseudo-democracies like Kazakhstan. 

Some other songs like 'Raymond's Blood' - about Raymond Caruana's murder in 1986 - take the exhuming of the past to a new level... albeit toned down by the song's emphasis on reconciliation.

Traditionally, the party saw the song festival as a way of providing a platform to young singers without attaching it to any political gravitas.

This fitted perfectly with the way Fenech Adami projected the PN, as a party light and slick in its cultural hegemony but heavy in vision and policy.

It was only at strategic moments like the referendum that the party rallied already established singers to the overriding 'national' cause.

The cult of personality feeling will be further amplified in an activity during which Gonzi will face probing questions by children "on anything they fancy, from his favourite meal to his fondest childhood memory".

The strategy behind such an activity is probably of endearing voters to a beleaguered Prime Minister who has been the object of an intensive negative campaign by the opposition over the past years.  But participation in such activities also tends to diminish his gravitas as a statesman.

Furthermore, the risk of this quest for a strong identity and emphasis on tribal loyalty is that it fails to communicate with that category of middle class voters which considers such events as tacky.

It also fails to understand that what is projected to appeal to a narrow tribal audience is also transmitted to a wider audience which includes perceived 'snobs' who cringe at the party's newfound taste for tackiness.

Still probably the party has realised that its major problem is not with the upwardly mobile and tertiary educated middle class which according to surveys still supports the PN by a wide margin,  but with lower middle class Nationalists who whose cultural tastes may tend to be less sophisticated.

Another risk of constant self-congratulatory messages, amplified by song, is that the party appears closed and paranoid. Back in the 1990s even AD and Labour exponents (who used to turn down the invite) were invited to participate in political debates during Independence week. This is clearly no longer the case.

The party hopes to reach out to younger and more apathetic class of voter through its pnmychoice.com internet campaign. But so far,  the campaign has failed to capture the popular imagination.

Ultimately, the PN is banking on middle-of-the-road voters to ultimately reward it for its tried and tested economic and employment policies.

With the economy out of recession and employment figures comparing relatively well with those of many other EU Member States, the PN could bank on turning the next election into a contest between the not-so-bad certainty of the present and the unpredictability of a change in government. 

It is only in this context that the PN's historical narrative can work.  Raking up Labour's stormy past could amplify fears of Labour, which is bending over backwards to appear as a safe refuge for the disgruntled Nationalist.

Moreover, the PN can bank on dedicating the time until the actual election day is formally announced to build up tribal loyalties while switching on to a more national and inclusive pitch in the proper campaign. Unlike Labour the PN can bank on the daily exercise of government to convey a "national" image.

Probably next November's  budget will also serve as the PN's electoral programme which will be contrasted to Labour's vague policies.

The PN will try to present a choice between Muscat's "road map" and a fully baked budget presented by government on the eve of the election.

The PL strategy: inclusive or evasive?

The PL's emphasis on "a future which unites us" comes in the wake of a billboard campaign which specifically targeted Lawrence Gonzi.

In so doing, the PL's preliminary strategy banked on Gonzi's own unpopularity among a category of former PN voters now intent on voting Labour.

Still the PL - which harbours a number of candidates harking back to the Mintoff, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici and Alfred Sant days - still struggles to convey itself as a safe haven for former Nationalist voters.

Joseph Muscat's way out of the quandary has been to try to have the best of both words; by bending party rules and structures to project the PL as a PN-lite party adorned with star candidates with a Nationalist past... while still celebrating the achievements of his predecessor and the candidature and participation of controversial figures like Mintoff's daughter Yana Mintoff Bland, and former general secretary Jason Micallef.

The recent episode involving Joe Grima's outburst against Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith (who wrote a critical obituary on Mintoff in the Catholic Herald) exposed the risks of this strategy even if Muscat managed to turn a potential minefield in to an opportunity episode by "accepting" Grima's resignation.

Muscat also has a way of circumventing traditional party structures by inventing new ones, which end up solidifying his hold on the party.

This strategy was already evident when he removed Jason Micallef from the party's hierarchy by replacing the position of secretary general with the corporate one of chief executive now occupied by loyalist James Piscopo.

He has also presented himself as the leader of a "movement of progressives and moderates" which has no formal structures instead of being simply PL leader.

In this way he can even take "personal" commitments like supporting the introduction of divorce without committing his own party.

Now he has embarked on a new experiment; the first party congress.

In the first initiative of its kind in Malta, the Labour Party will be holding a congress during the next few days for the approval of the guidelines on which their electoral manifesto will be based.

This is being projected as the ultimate demonstration of bottom up direct democracy.

"We are a movement, away from the set up of the traditional political party where the few of the top decide alone," he said, adding that the PL was venturing into uncharted waters with this initiative", Muscat told the press a month ago when launching his latest experiment.

Still, it is highly improbable that any sizeable chunk of the party's 35,000 members will be attending these meetings. Otherwise the process will be ungovernable.  Moreover, it is also extremely likely that the meetings will be channelled in a direction already set by those already working on the party's programme.

Ultimately, Muscat could have greater control of these nebulous structures than over parliamentarians and delegates.

Surely, one big advantage of opening up to members is that the party will be looking outward beyond the limited worldview of elderly party delegates.

But the greatest test for Muscat's experiment is whether any divisions arise and votes are taken in the forthcoming assemblies. In the absence of divisive votes and passionate debate, the congress will be simply a rubber-stamping exercise.

In the absence of debate between rival positions on at least some issues, the exercise would be more akin to Gaddafi's conception of direct democracy than to the workings of a pluralistic democracy.

In fact the risk of Muscat's strategy is that opening up to rank and file members will serve as a way of ensuring fuller control.

Ultimately, Labour's Achilles heel remains its lack of alternative policies.

Muscat has already made it clear that the manifesto will not consist of a wish-list but a roadmap for Malta's economic growth for the coming years.

This is perfectly understandable in a fast-changing world where policies cannot be cast in stone. But at the same time, parties all around the world do give a sense of direction.

French voters knew that Hollande stood for higher taxes and more social spending; voters in the UK knew that David Cameron stood for smaller government and less taxes. 

Even in the USA - where ideology is scorned - voters know that Mitt Romney stands for smaller government and Obama for a Keynesian stimulus.

Where does Joseph Muscat stand in the big debate on spending cuts and taxes, which dominates discussion in the rest of the continent?

The answer cannot be gleaned from any campaign billboard or initiative we have seen so far.