As the entire country waits with bated breath to see who will lead the Nationalist Party, it is currently every local journalist’s duty to dig up every relevant detail they can find about the lead contenders for this role.
The fact is that this is the Nationalist Party’s most important leadership election in its history.
With that in mind, I decided to write a series of articles – hence the working title, the verdict – about whoever puts their name forward for this leadership election. If you want to read about the only other candidate who’s come forward by publication time – Adrian Delia – click here.
The hypothesis that underpinned this analysis is this: does the prospective leader have the necessary qualities to turn the Nationalist Party into a convincing alternative that can address the country’s systemic problems?
In my view, these are the five qualities that the next leader of the Nationalist Party absolutely cannot do without.
Though this list is far from conclusive, I believe that anyone who can score at least a pass mark on all the below criteria would have a real shot at taking the party into a new direction.
While it is impossible to expect a perfect messiah to just turn around the party on their own without the collaboration of a solid parliamentary group, the fact is that extraordinarily desperate times require individuals to step up in an extraordinary manner.
Anything less will lead to the party’s inevitable demise.
The criteria:
– A clean track record. Anything short of a glowing resume and a lack of baggage must be rejected. The Nationalist Party cannot afford to have yet another leader with too many skeletons in their closet.
– Someone who can break the mould and serve as the face of an alternative vision that provably addresses systemic problems. Anyone who even remotely feels like more of the same will never be able to cement the impression that the party’s spirit is being renewed.
– Star power. A total newcomer who would need to slowly build up rapport with the electorate would be dead in the water before the starting gun goes off.
– Someone who is eloquent and creative. The Nationalist Party needs someone who can improvise, adapt, and overcome on the spot while delivering a consistent, nuanced message to the electorate.
– A leader who is willing to go all in against corruption. The new leader would need to start by purging the Nationalist Party of its own grandees, mainly by rooting out old patronage networks and rebuilding from scratch. This can only be done by someone whose commitment to anti-corruption is absolutely unwavering. The slightest indication of uncertainty will prove fatal.
Alex Borg
Alex Borg was the second Nationalist Party MP to put his name forward in the upcoming leadership election.
Based on the criteria outlined above and a thorough analysis of Borg’s career since he was elected to Parliament in 2022, my opinion is that he is not fit for the job at hand.
Here’s why I think so.
Track record
A photo of Alex Borg during a televised appearance on party media. Photo: Facebook
At face value, Alex Borg’s meteoric rise to political prominence cannot be described as anything but impressive. Not everyone can clinch nearly a fourth of Gozo’s first count votes on their first run for Parliament.
Though it would be unreasonable to chip away at the significance of that achievement, one must also acknowledge that Borg’s ascent feels like a ‘made in Gozo’ stitch-up.
Crowned as the Nationalist Party’s “new heavyweight” in Gozo by MaltaToday shortly after being elected, the same newspaper noted how his campaign was supported by former Gozo minister Giovanna Debono. Alex Borg’s father used to be Debono’s personal assistant. Borg’s mother, Mary Debono Borg, also serves as the director-general of Gozo’s courts.
In simpler terms, Borg is both a product of a genuine Gozitan dynasty of politicians and civil servants as well as an injection of fresh blood in the party’s decaying circulatory system.
Always keen to cement the image of an up-and-coming maverick, one of the first things that Borg did as an MP was to break ranks with the Nationalist Party by voting against proposed amendments in an IVF law that allows genetic testing on embryos. The proposed amendment was approved unanimously, with the exception of Borg, Adrian Delia, and Ivan Bartolo.
This drive to set himself apart from other Nationalist MPs remains evident throughout other instances in Borg’s career.
Examples of this include Borg being the first Nationalist MP to publicly endorse Franco Debono’s return to the fold, his subsequent spat with Manuel Delia over the latter’s description of Debono as “a re-emerging tumour”, and by distancing himself from what he described as parliamentary “theatrics” when Speaker of the House Anġlu Farrugia was sustaining heavy criticism from the opposition.
A photo of former Nationalist Party MP Franco Debono (left) and PN leadership hopeful Alex Borg. Photo: Facebook
Though Borg strives to look and sound like a totally new product from the party’s assembly line, the ideological slant of his rhetoric is exactly like any other from the Nationalist Party’s most decrepit conservative circles.
From calling for increased resources for deportation to throwing trans people beneath a bus by falsely claiming that taxpayer money that is spent on gender affirmation surgery should instead be spent on fibromyalgia treatment (shortly after attending Gozo’s pride celebrations, mind you), Borg instantly made it very clear that he has no qualms about pushing already marginalised groups further to the edge to score points with a voter base.
A key part of Borg’s populist PR arsenal is a carefully cultivated image of a young, proud Gozitan who is doing whatever he can to ensure the often neglected sister island gets the kind of investment it deserves.
This posturing can be best encapsulated by this iconic headline penned by LovinMalta’s professional bootlicker, Tim Diacono: ‘Gozitans No Longer Feel Safe Leaving Their Key In The Front Door, PN MP Alex Borg Warns.’
Borg continues to repeat this mantra over and over, riding the xenophobic wave that engulfs Malta whenever there’s a lot of chatter about crimes committed by foreigners. Though Borg strenuously denies accusations of racism, the constant cheap shots are impossible to ignore.
A few screengrabs of Borg’s headline-grabbing declarations about ‘Gozitan safety.’
Throughout last year, Borg’s declarations may have earned him more short-term political capital with the voter base he attracts – but that came at the cost of burning bridges with practically every major NGO in the country.
In June 2024, Borg, fellow PN MP Stanley Zammit, and government representatives on a parliamentary committee unanimously voted in favour of the transfer of the Fort Chambray concession, yet another failed public-private concession dating back to the heyday of the Nationalist Party’s glut of generous handouts of prime public land to major developers.
While Borg generally justified his vote by claiming that he wants Fort Chambray to be developed into a sustainable project that benefits the wider community, NGOs weren’t buying it.
Borg’s arguments wore thin as scrutiny intensified and experts started pointing out the many gaps in his narrative about the concession, which included a debunked argument that Fort Chambray was historically used as a holiday resort and a false claim that developers would be covering restoration costs when that cost was actually passed on to the taxpayer – in spite of the developer’s evident failure to fulfill his end of the bargain.
This heavy, sustained criticism would later be vindicated by the standards commissioner, who concluded that Borg’s misleading statements about Fort Chambray amounted to a breach of parliamentary ethics. Borg refused to issue a public apology.
On the contrary, he further distanced himself from civil society by later telling MaltaToday that NGOs should not be dictating the Nationalist Party’s agenda.
Borg’s clashes with critics, NGOs, and ethics bodies contrast greatly with his treatise about “the way forward for Malta’s politics.”
While Borg correctly describes our times as “the era of undecided voters”, he incorrectly places the blame squarely on “sad parliamentary meltdowns” and “character assassinations”. He also cites “political scandals, government incompetences (sic), and failure to act on key issues.”
“Politics should talk a different language. Politics is a profession of usefulness and necessity. Politics done well should be a positive force for good in a society and a community. Politics done well should inspire hope and trust. It should stimulate a new generation of politicians,” Borg writes.
Borg’s brand of ‘positive’ politics seems to be quite flexible, in the sense that it is all well and good for him to use social media to bludgeon his critics but that it is otherwise unacceptable whenever the same kind of critique is directed towards him.
The main takeaway here is that Borg – much like the rest of the party – pays lip service to these values only when it’s suitable for his own ends, with the obvious implication being that only young mavericks such as himself can drag us out of the squalor.
His inability to handle criticism with grace is startling and unappealing to anyone outside of his party’s shrinking circle.
This was best exemplified in the party’s frankly pathetic response to yet another belter of a column from Kevin Cassar, the “Labour’s Trojan horse” piece, which was more a meandering critique of Borg’s support for Donald Trump than it was anything else.
Rather than setting themselves apart from the Labour Party by respecting Cassar’s right to publish his thoughts in a column – which, at the very worst, can be described as a harsh but legitimate piece of criticism – multiple MPs described the column as “a senseless attack” on one of their own.
The fact that Borg’s relatively brief time in politics involved so much conflict with grassroots organisations, to the point where serious doubts about his integrity have already been raised, certainly does not augur well for someone who is effectively aspiring to be Malta’s youngest prime minister ever.
When considering that the next leader of the Nationalist Party must be someone with a clean track record, it is my view that Borg is not an adequate candidate in this regard.
Breaking the mould
Though one would hope that a young MP would be itching to challenge the party’s most sacred beliefs, Borg presents voters with the same ideological platform that his former mentor and competitor Adrian Delia brings to the table. Both are populist conservatives of the religio et patria persuasion.
Of course, one obvious advantage in Borg’s favour is the fact that he’s young and can therefore present himself as a clean slate, as opposed to Delia’s pitch as a battle-hardened veteran.
Besides the difference in physical attributes such as age and other nominal singularities like being Gozitan, Borg is yet to prove whether he is simply singing from the party’s hymn book for the sake of acquiring power or whether he is doing so because he genuinely thinks the country needs more of the same PN everyone’s rejecting.
Most worryingly of all, Borg’s evident efforts to shore up support with major business interests and his heated battles with environmental groups are no different to the government’s approach to the same issue – to the point where even one of the Labour Party’s biggest fans has repeatedly called for Borg’s ascent to the seat of opposition leader.
In this context, appealing to disenfranchised voters means speeding off in the opposite direction of whatever the Labour Party is doing, not hoping to win over the electorate by offering them a more “respectable” version of the same garbage governance.
When considering that the next leader of the Nationalist Party must be someone who can break the mould, it is my view that Borg is not an adequate candidate in this regard.
Star power
Borg’s popularity among the party’s core voters certainly cloaks him in a seemingly invincible electoral aura, especially when considering that his first preference count was just a couple hundred votes short of current Gozo minister Clint Camilleri.
Though his track record certainly leaves a lot to be desired, the fact is that voters are pinning a lot of hope on this particular Gozitan candidate. His relative lack of baggage when compared to any other prospective candidates also means that people are more likely to give him the benefit of the doubt, even if they may not agree with his provocative rhetoric.
Borg also clearly pays a lot of attention to social media, curating every aspect of his online presence down to the minutiae.
While this is certainly an asset in an electoral climate where complete outsiders with a sizeable online following can trounce someone with an established canvassing operation, Borg’s habit of sparring online with anyone who isn’t singing his praises also puts off voters who expect leaders to handle criticism.
At the same time, it is likely that should he be elected leader, he will also have the additional advantage of squaring off against an incumbent prime minister whose reputation is all but permanent at this stage of the proceedings. In times where the public is dissatisfied with the status quo, the natural advantage of a younger, fresher face can become a deciding factor in people’s minds.
When considering that the next leader of the Nationalist Party must be an electoral heavyweight, it is my view that Alex Borg is an adequate candidate in this regard.
Eloquence, creativity
“Slick” and “polished” are the words that come to mind whenever one thinks of Borg’s presentation.
Besides the immaculate levels of pandering to his voter base, Borg also goes to significant lengths to present himself as a smart, pragmatic would be leader who isn’t too hung up on definitions of political ideology but only seeks to implement “common sense” policy.
While the vague nature of that message could make it easier to build a broader tent, the fact is that the massive chunk of non-voters are seeking more than good marketing: they want solutions, and Borg has presented precious few of these to date.
Deportations don’t resolve refugee crises, nor do they bring down rates of petty crime.
Deliberately implying that people who need gender affirmation surgery are a less necessary ‘burden’ on the taxpayer than other categories of people who need medical assistance does not address the fact that there are dire shortages in the health sector at large.
Haranguing NGOs doesn’t do anything to stop big business from running roughshod over entire localities.
There is absolutely nothing creative about repeating popular but untruthful rhetoric, nor is there any eloquence in the way that Borg responds to legitimate criticism about his flawed stances.
Having said that, Borg is clearly an intelligent, extremely ambitious politician who may yet mature and realise that adopting cheap shot tactics will only lead to more of the same results.
When considering that the next leader of the Nationalist Party must be eloquent and creative, it is my view that there is much room for improvement in this regard but that the candidate possesses enough undeveloped potential to scrape a pass mark.
All in against corruption
In this category above all else, expectations are very high.
The Gozitan MP’s closeness with the construction industry, his aforementioned desire for the Nationalist Party to distance itself from anti-corruption NGOs like Repubblika, and his hesitancy to unreservedly condemn the sale of golden passports indicate that anyone placing those expectations on Alex Borg’s shoulders stands to be disappointed.
At the same time, of the two options that have been presented to date, Borg does not need to worry about the same volume of bad press as Adrian Delia does. To date, the only official condemnation in relation to Borg’s conduct is a slap on the wrist for “misleading” people with his remarks about Fort Chambray.
While one may be tempted to argue that it is unfair to judge any candidate’s position on this subject – or any other, in that case – before they shift to full-on campaigning mode and can answer questions accordingly, the conduct of any individual candidate prior announcing their nomination is arguably more important.
In that sense, Borg has left a lot to be desired. For a politician who clearly wants the limelight, Borg has taken a relative backseat in those fleeting moments in which the party took an active stance about corruption.
Given the relatively short span of time he’s spent in politics when compared with his peers, Borg does not have any trophies to parade – unlike his only present competitor who bet a significant amount of political capital on the hospitals concession case and walked away with one of the party’s few big wins in over a decade.
If Borg wants us to believe in his “way forward” for politics, it’ll have to start with a thorough clean-up of the same kind of major donors that Borg has already broken a lance for. We’ll believe it when we see it.
When considering that the next leader of the Nationalist Party must be a credible figure in the fight against corruption, it is my view that Alex Borg is not a fit candidate in this regard.