Simon says, Tonio does
The contest for Tonio Borg’s seat is giving us another very interesting glimpse into the workings of the nationalist party. Lawrence Gonzi believed that a contest would be healthy for the party, that still remains to be seen. The impression we get is that no matter how united a front the two candidates will show before the media (and the united grilling of Joseph Muscat is an example of that) this is a battle that has inevitably reopened old scars and divides within the decision making bodies of the PN. This kind of battle would have been postponed to after the election. Instead it will be held right on the eve of an election almost contemporaneously with one of the latest budgets in Maltese history. Did you say healthy Lawrence?
Simon Busuttil. The (relatively) young lawyer is supposed to be the breath of fresh air that is much needed by the PN. Like Obama he has invested much of his campaign in the concept of “change”. Unlike Obama he has a habit of hitting obvious bumps as his strategy unfurls – not the best sign for a future leader. He started with the big bump with regards to Franco Debono et al. The doors are always open he said. That made him sound like Joseph Muscat at the start of his leadership – a bit of a contradiction really because it is (Inhobbkom) Joseph’s openness that led to the PN criticism of his new team (cue billboards). It also turns out that Simon had voted against Franco’s interests in the original vote at PN HQ – which makes his appeal for inclusion sound a bit superficial.
Simon’s strong point seems to be media coverage. He is everywhere – and even gets weird boosts such as when (Greek PM) Samaras barged into an interview in order to tell a stunned Times interviewer that Simon is the best MEP. It is not clear whether the “too good” image of babyface Busuttil is sellable as leadership material in the future – I am sure the polls will help in that respect. It is one thing garnering votes on the basis of expertise in a field that has been plugged to kingdom come (viz EU) and another to suddenly become the all round politician – warts and all.
The latest forays by Simon Busuttil make a very interesting read. Judging by some media reports he seems to have been the first PN politician to give a clear indication of a time-frame for both budget and elections. Was this on purpose? Did he pull the carpet from under both the Finance Minister’s legs and the PM’s? It is no small detail that the Finance Minister happens to be his rival in the upcoming deputy leader showdown.
In the same interview on TVAM, Simon Busuttil told viewers that he was writing the new PN manifesto and that he had also written the 2008 manifesto. Where do I begin? Let me start from the end. It is ever so easy to own up for the writing of what ended up to be a winning manifesto. Nothing was mentioned of Simon Busuttil’s role in 2008 so why should we hear of it now? The only reason we can think of is for Simon Busuttil to pin the medal of the 2008 victory firmly to his chest as being his own. Not that the manifesto had much to do with the victory did it?
Which is another interesting point. Does Simon really want to arrogate to himself the ugly baggage of PN2008? Did he form part of that strategy team that called the shots with regards to the JPO lies and the anything goes philosophy that lumped us with this rainbow value government for five years? What does that say about change?
Which brings me to the now. Simon says that he is writing this year’s manifesto. The most obvious reaction has been universal: so it’s not just Aaron Farrugia and Karmenu Vella who are late with their homework? And then a myriad questions more. Such as is this Simon’s manifesto? What about all the dialogue and consultation? What values will Simon’s imprint leave on the manifesto? We’ll need another blog post just to see the implications of this decision. One thing that we hope is that Simon is a little more creative with his slogans – from Obama’s “Change” to Sarkozy’s “Together everything is possible” there seems to be no end to the amount of leeching going on.
Also with regards to this point, the day after Simon had announced his authoring of this election’s manifesto, PM Gonzi sat at his computer for a Q&A session with voters in order to listen to their suggestions. Was this another case of Simon grabbing the limelight?
At this point we can only measure Simon by these “moves”. His novel, clean act might be just what certain disgruntled PN voters will look forward too. The danger is that it is a thinly constructed mask that counts too much on being pleasant and that continues to drag the PN into the field of ambiguity, much in the same way as Joseph Muscat has done with the PL and its non-agenda.
Tonio Fenech on the other hand is fast proving to be the champion of the old guard. His nomination to the contest was a statement in itself – getting 136 endorsements compared to Simon’s 26. The Minister carries a difficult portfolio to sell and is also responsible for the budget – which Simon reminded us that Tonio is writing. He is definitely tied to the conservative wing of the PN and is less of an agent of change than Simon Busuttil in that respect. In many ways, the vote that Tonio Fenech manages to garner within the PN council will be a clear indication of exactly what dose of change the PN wants. This is not only the result of Simon’s pitch for the “change” corner but also because Tonio Fenech has become one of the current government’s representatives of the “nothing’s really wrong” policy.
Therein lies quite a tough nut to crack. While Busuttil’s pitch seems to include an implicit admission that change is needed because not everything is right, Fenech’s pitch includes an element of continuity because “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”. Insofar as leadership qualities are concerned, Fenech too does not cut quite the imposing figure that we have come to expect of the nationalist party. Often in his impromptu interviews (not Q&A’s on a paper) he seems to be unable to keep his calm and manages to lose his nerve and become imprecise. Nothing that a few coaching sessions with the right people might not fix mind you but a telling factor just the same.
Round up
Elsewhere I have described the deputy leader race as an irrelevant distraction. In many ways I still stand by my original assertion. I still believe that the real race for posts within the PN will happen after the election should there be a Labour victory – and so far the polls seem to point in that direction. On the other hand, the gamble that is being made on this race might turn out to be an interesting weapon for the PN. First of all it allows them to gauge the feel of their own electorate. By creating a battle between two possible alternatives (and styles) the PN might be allowing their faithful to do the talking.
The distraction from the real election that is to come is minor, granted, but a distraction it remains. And now we also know that the race involves the two men who are responsible for two very important documents : the PN electoral manifesto and the budget. There is another point that cannot be overlooked: the PN is parading its assets with this race. This hits home hard to the undecided and the garrulous. For you see, while Simon Busuttil writes the PN electoral manifesto, the PL manifesto is written by … Aaron Farrugia and Karmenu Vella. Tonio Fenech is responsible for a financial situation that is winning plaudits from the Commission and the EU – while we still do not know how MuscatEconomy will work.
That simple contrast is more than enough to justify the collateral damage of a bit of resetting within the PN before the big war. Everybody seems to be writing something at this point and soon it will be time to produce the wares. Scripta manent indeed.
