A part of me always assumed that society would come undone at the hands of insecure, narrow-minded men.
I just never imagined they’d be such losers.
I’ve been writing about the dearth of options at the Maltese electorate’s disposal since the early days of this website.
Two years ago, anti-major party sentiment in Malta peaked at previously unseen heights. Both the Labour Party and the Nationalist Party were effectively shunned by a third of the country’s voters.
The latest political surveys indicate that the Labour Party has recovered partial control of its voter base. The Nationalist Party trails behind by around 24,000 votes.
What remains the same between then and now is the abysmal trust rating of both major party leaders.
While prime minister Robert Abela’s rating remained relatively consistent over time, opposition leader Bernard Grech continues to slump. MaltaToday’s survey pegged Abela’s trust rating at 46.5% while Grech hovered around the 20% mark.
33.5% of the recent survey’s respondents said that they didn’t trust either of them – a notable decrease from 38.5% in November 2023, but still a third of the electorate nonetheless.
In April of last year (two months before the MEP and local council elections), I argued that this depressing political deadlock must be broken at all costs.
It’s not just about the fact that both major parties are beholden to Malta’s wealthiest capitalists.
It really does boil down to how the individual voter feels about the party’s figurehead – and, by extension, everyone who falls in line under their command.
This striking snapshot points towards a desperate stalemate between two leaders who lack the grit to credibly call the shots: a prime minister whose predecessor is an albatross around his neck and a leader of the opposition who’s overstayed his welcome.
In spite of the fact that he commands such a significant lead over his main rival, the prime minister’s declarations on national television earlier this week betrayed his insecurity.
As Times of Malta pointed out on Tuesday, Abela’s admission that he would call a snap election if the Nationalist Party changed its leader is diametrically opposed to his own previous claims that he would not do so.
The prime minister vaguely claimed that the intent behind this decision would be to prevent the Nationalist Party’s internal politics from destabilising Parliament.
Everyone knows that, because of Malta’s broken electoral system, whoever commands a majority controls the House.
For all intents and purposes, the Nationalist Party could be setting fire to its own headquarters and executing dissidents – it would still hardly matter in that context.
All this is beside the fact that the government itself regularly holds the House’s rules in contempt, the latest example of which could be seen in the prime minister’s refusal to publicly apologise for ethical shortcomings highlighted by the standards commissioner.
Abela’s vague explanation makes no sense whatsoever.
The only logical conclusion that can be drawn from such a bewildering statement is that Abela is happy with the status quo and wishes to preserve it. He is afraid of a far more popular rival emerging from the Nationalist Party’s ranks and reversing the opposition’s death spiral.
The translation from Labour-speak to plain English becomes: I’ll immediately fire the starting gun as soon as that status quo changes.
Bernard Grech, on the other hand, seems to have become far too attached to the delusion that he will become prime minister in 2027.
I still vividly remember when I first spoke to the then newly minted leader of the opposition five years ago.
During a visit to Times of Malta’s newsroom shortly after becoming leader, Bernard Grech had sat down for a quick round of questions from every journalist who was present.
I remember asking him about how he intends to unite the Nationalist Party after so many years of bitter internal strife – what would be the ideological glue holding the party together this time around?
I found it amusing that he had described himself as “the party’s caretaker” (bidillu) at the time. I later learned it was part of his sales pitch in the leadership race between himself and former leader Adrian Delia.
In simpler terms, Grech was elected leader based on the assumption that he would largely focus on unifying the party before eventually handing over the reins to someone who is better suited for the role.
Grech had also claimed that he would pick up the fight against corruption right where former PN leader Simon Busuttil had left off. The statements he made back then are a far cry from the Nationalist Party’s animosity towards civil society activists who see through its facade now.
Five years later, it is very clear that Bernard Grech refuses to pass on the baton and is reluctant to stand against corruption, even when it is apparent that the knives are out in every corridor at Dar Ċentrali.
On Wednesday morning, the Times of Malta asked Grech for a comment about the prime minister’s bewildering declaration.
In no uncertain terms, Grech confirmed his intent to “lead” the Nationalist Party in the next general elections. Previously, the leader of the opposition has repeatedly refused to acknowledge his extremely low trust ratings, let alone considered them as a reason to step down.
Ironically, the very same unity which Bernard Grech was supposed to nurture within the party is now threatened by his deliberate failure to read the room and call it a day.
Subordinates are at their most impatient precisely when their superiors are clearly unwilling to bend or are otherwise deemed unfit for their roles.
The impasse faced by the electorate couldn’t be any clearer: an insecure prime minister who relishes any opportunity to lash out against critics on the one hand and a caretaker-turned-dictator on the other.
Should the situation remain as is, both the Labour Party and the Nationalist Party will be heading into the general elections with two of the weakest leaders in the history of Maltese politics.
The current scenario we are in will probably lead to another five years of Labour in power.
Should the Nationalist Party decide to replace its leader, it is likely that the government will use any tactics at its disposal – including a snap election – to undermine whoever comes out on top in a leadership contest.
The prime minister doesn’t care about Parliamentary stability. All he cares about is abusing the power of incumbency to rig the race in his party’s favour to secure another five years on the taxpayer gravy train.
This scenario makes the seat of the leader of the opposition one of the most important nodes of power in the next general elections.
Anyone within the Nationalist Party who is not ready to face a desperate, cornered, and irreparably corrupt enemy need not apply.