The Electoral System - (third and final part)
So, finally, to the question: are there, in fact, any political groups that could break the 'duopoly'?
1. Alternattiva: very unlikely. Alternattiva can't decide on what sort of party it wants to be. In order to force its way into Parliament it will have to establish itself as a local phenomenon in some part of the island. I don't think that a party that's socially liberal, supports a soft line on illegal immigration and leans to the left economically will do the trick in Gozo. It won't do the trick in the tenth district either. They're too far to the left, and with very few exceptions their candidates are not the type of people that either Gozitans or the English-speaking middle class identify with. If they're determined to continue being a political party they will have to acquire a new identity and shift to the right, or at least the centre, and become truly local in the areas they've chosen. The dreams about getting 2000 first preference votes and another 1000 plus net lower preference votes are just another way of saying that they need to get the support of around 14% in a given district. Since most of these electors would presumably have to come from the ranks of the Nationalist Party (which has a very large majority in the 10th and a very significant one in the 13th - and whose voters are considered more independent), it would mean siphoning off 20-25% of the Nationalist vote in that party's heartland.
2. Josie Muscat: a one-man-show. His Grupp Indipendenti Marsaskala did get just over 15% of first preference votes in the last round of Local Elections, and he took one of the PN's three seats. He's obviously also strong in Zabbar. Even if he manages to reclaim his old seat, which is unlikely, this would not amount to a serious challenge to the 'duopoly'. It would just be a personal comeback by a former senior Nationalist politician.
3. The fringe movements (other than Alternattiva): impossible (thank Heavens!). By definition, extreme-left and extreme-right groups are never going to become national parties. Fortunately, they do not have a strong local presence either. They can be pressure groups at best.
4. Big-party splinter groups: unlikely, unless there is a traumatic event in the Labour Party, such as another electoral defeat and another particularly acrimonious leadership battle. A serious split in the MLP might, under certain circumstances, lead to a multi-party system for some years. As in the past, this would probably be a temporary phenomenon, although at the end of the day it might give us a better two-party system than the one we have now.
5. A party of the well-to-do: technically possible, but probably won't happen. As Daphne pointed out in her opinion-piece last week (see also Jacques), there is an increasing split between the English-speaking middle class, with its generally liberal outlook, and the more traditional segments of the population. The English-speaking middle class is also concentrated in a couple of contiguous districts, where it constitutes the vast majority of the population. A party on the lines of Germany's Free Democrats could, under the right circumstances, elect MPs in the 10th district and then cooperate with the Nationalists in Parliament. This becomes less unlikely the more the Nationalist Party alienates this important segment of its electorate. The religious conservatism of the current leadership weakens the Party there, but a poor showing in the next general election would probably force it to rethink its policies in order to win these voters back. If, for some reason, it cannot do so, then a more flexible arrangement might become appropriate. I don't think it will come to this for the simple reason that the Nationalist leadership has not yet lost its mind, although it might have lost its common sense.
16 Comments:
"We relish the Christian values of a democratic and Socialist party" - Dr. Michael Falzon, as quoted by Karl Schembri (Malta Today)
While as Christians we are called to forgive, as human beings we indeed remember that Socialism was not the answer to mankind's ills.
Discuss
Hear, hear. Nice one, Nav!
Excellent post, Piet. But I'm not sure I know what the "English-speaking middle class" is, not sure, it would be ready to vote the way you say they'd vote and, even if they did, if they would be electorally significant.
Thanks Fausto. I could have called it the middle class, except that I was referring mostly to that part of it which lives in Sliema, St. Julians, Kappara, Ta' l-Ibrag and Swieqi (but, in a more extended sense, also in several pockets throughout the island, such as San Pawl tat-Targa,Iklin, parts of Balzan, Lija and Attard etc). They do tend to view themselves as somewhat distinct from the rest of the population in many respects. I would say that columnists like Daphne Caruana Galizia and Marisa Micallef Leyson probably consider themselves (rightly or wrongly) to be among the 'spokespersons' of this particular group.
Of course, these people vote for the Nationalist Party and have done so for a long time. Their numbers are not huge (at most, I'm talking about the top 10% of the population in terms of income and education) but they tend to be concentrated in specific areas.
What they will do in future I cannot tell, but I think that the Nationalist Party will always have to keep them on board, one way or another, if it wants to remain competitive.
Good point guys. Even as Labour PReens itself in the mirror of public opinion, Wenzu Mintoff’s outburst opens another can of worms. So long as the carefully coiffured veneer of Labour remains in place, the rest of the world can go to hell.
Labours' Achilles heel always were middle-of-the-road taxpayers (Maltese and English speakers) these have voice enough to rid Malta of its militant Socialist fringe. It has become increasingly clear in recent months that in their desperation, authority is being handed down to Socialist hardliners, PRetenders, to PRop the Labour party PRetty. What worries me is that an electoral victory in 2008 will be portrayed as a victory of Socialism over common sense. And I don't believe the Greens will wake up in time!
The Nationalists have always been proud of their capacity to read the times/zeitgeist better than Labour. But one wonders whether they've now reached the outer limits of their core philosophy. Gonzi seems to be sticking to his Vaticanesque 'non-negotiable' guns on the 'moral' questions facing the nation. On the one hand I respect his consistency. On the other I can't help feeling that the New Spring can only really come about when an entirely new set of people, based on an entirely new set of values, takes over. But I'm not expecting an intellectual revolution any time soon. There's a certain comfort in plodding on regardless.
ps: and I'd hate to be subjected to NuLabour blowing their trumpet about how they 'changed the face of Malta' when they introduce divorce in 2013...
You state that it is not probable for AD to be successful in the 10th district for example because they are too socially liberal and lean too much to the left. However you think that there is a shift towards a more liberal outlook in the middle-class and that a party could exploit this for electoral benefits. So why not AD in the 10th district?
You're right, I wasn't clear enough about that. I think that AD's package is very different from what is required in Gozo. In the 10th district, I think the problem is not that they're socially liberal (on the contrary, that's a major plus) but that they're too left wing. If they were to shed that part of their package I think they would be much closer to what people in that area can identify with. Heck, I might join them too!
I completely agree with you there Piet. They're way way, too left of centre to be electable.
Strangely enough they're also losing the only thing they had that had any value. AD spokesman Edward Fenech's eulogy to Milton Friedman may as well have been delivered by the Governor of the Central Bank.
Its' actually becoming really funny to watch these guys :-)
I'm not really sure about the issues that AD are extremely "leftist" about.Like PK I was under the impression that they were very soft on immigration but recently, on Doksa, it appeared that they do favour the detention policy after all -their position being identical to the PN (and the MLP?) there. I'm no expert about economic theory but from what I gather, they're in favour of polluter pays sort of taxes (they'd have to be, I suppose) and increased effectiveness in tax xollection etc - which doesn't get up my nose too much. Again - I'm not sure about the economic side of things but as far as I know it is mainly the mlp which is all in favour of doling out more welfare to the small, on-the-dole constituent (or leech)
They're nowhere near as left-wing as the pre-1992 MLP but I would say that they do remain by far the most left-wing of the three parties today. Their positions on foreign affairs and on immigration are more typical of an extreme left movement than of a centre-left political party. On economic affairs, they're more moderate but they do continue to insist on the need to wack the middle class. Their opposition to the middle-class tax cut in the last budget is one example. Harry Vassallo's recent proposal for a punitive tax on those who 'hoard' real estate is another. The proposal to impose a 40% tax on the local banks is a third. These are not things that make the middle class smile.
Excellent point Piet. Its' the extreme views of AD's neo-anarchist core - the Mike Brigulio faction who stir the pot day and night alienating swathes of voters left, right and centre. On one hand the moderates - the Steve Cachia and Edward Fenechs have not come up with realistic solutions given that the country's resources are X+Y+Z. On the other, Harry's "management-by-crisis" approach to decision-making leaves a lot to be desired. Everything is escalated to the point of confrontation which limits his tactical choices and ability to think strategically.
One more point Pietru. When Harry hogs an issue two things happen.
1. Entrenchment - Issues that might easily be solved through consensus become contentious issues that appear to have no solution. E.g. the rental Laws.
2. Escalation. By creating an atmosphere of perpetual crisis he forces Labour to adopt a more moderate position; which is good in a sense but bad in another.
To tell you the truth I thought that AD were left wing especially re immigration, but as stated before apparently their policy is detention (what else can it be?) like the other parties.
The windfall tax on banks would be a once-off thing (as far as I can make out) and its not something the middle class would squeal too much about
The rental laws, I feel that the pn hasn't really done anything anything about it so why not force the issue
They are opposed to the 18-month detention period, and I'm not aware that they have changed their position about that. The other parties support the current policy. In thise sense, they are clearly well to the left of the mainstream parties on this (fundamental) issue.
The higher tax rate for banks would be detrimental to those who have invested significant portions of their savings in the local stock market. Most of these hail from the local middle class. In any case, it's a left-wing measure, last done in Malta by a Labour government (although at least one centre-right government has done it in the past in another country).
I would say that a tax on vacant properties would certainly be a leftist measure. The present government's inertia about the rent laws is certainly a problem, but I don't see how a tax on vacant properties would help with that.
I think government is pre-occupied with ensuring smooth implementation of the euro more than anything else. Understandable that they should adopt a fortify-and-defend position, wait for the mêlée, its coming :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home