With the available data, it is difficult to distinguish which class of voter voted for which candidate – and it is completely plausible that while the elected candidates got votes based on their harsh/”negative” criticism it is also possible that the more mellow/constructive candidates sourced their votes from people who vote either way depending on the times.

That is probably a better indication of what the electorate as a whole will vote for, given it is the only bit which changes.

Whether they want what is good for them or not is an entirely different issue, but hopefully it is the vote the PN will target if it wants any chance of getting elected going forward.

Is your reference to “happy EU” in the same vein of “Positive Energy”?

Alfred Sant may be a very intelligent man and also one who does his research but this doesn’t qualify one to be a good MEP.

An MEP should not be a yes man but should neither be a no man. He/She must be one who truly believes in the EU and what it stands for.

The fact that you stated that the EU is failing means that you have no flippant idea what EU is and what it stands for. The EU does not fail. It is the people who are selected to make the EU function who are failing.

If you have an organisation which is not functioning, you send people who can mend and make it function and not people whose aim is to destroy, dismantle and break up things. In a country where there is civil unrest you send Peace Keepers and not trigger happy Commandos.

All over the world (including European) there are people who want or don’t want the EU to function. The reasons are varied and can be economical or political. Even a party from an EU member state may not want to belong to the EU because the EU will not let the said party abuse of it’s positions: the reason can be varied.

If the EU members stay united and work together for a common goal, the EU will prevail for the benefit for it’s members. If voters send people whose aim is not the common good of all but have at heart their own or some partisan interest, therefore it stands to reason that EU will fail: but remember it is not the EU which fail but the people who are elect to the EU who fail us.

1. Transparency. The PN promises to make all government contracts and winning tenders public, including existing ones such as H&P, Electrogas, PBS etc.

2. Meritocracy. The PN promises to make all government posts, including authorities, to be chosen in a fair and independent process.

These are promises that are easy to fulfill, unlike Jo’s grand promise to lower electricity tariffs, a promise that had to be fulfilled at great cost even though the new power station has not materialized yet (and won’t be for a long time). But it was that promise which won him two elections.

I am fed up reading such things as changing of tactics and strategies.

One has to consider that after 22 years Labour won with a big majority as normally happens in many countries.

The latest is India where the Congress Party which had been in office for a long time has been crushed.

Those who expected voters to make a turn-around in just 14 months are out of their minds when this government is still reaping from the good work of the previous administration.

Things take their time and persons with heads on their shoulders expect government policy to take its toll before things will turn for the better. Ex ministers and parliamentary secretaries should know this.

I did vote for Alfred Sant because in order to have a position on the EU, be it positive or negative, he had to do some form of research – something which can’t be said for many candidates on both sides.

Secondly, we don’t elect MEPs to be yes-men, and Alfred Sant certainly won’t be one since he was against the EU in the first place.

The EU is failing presently because it forgot that for a happy EU you first have to have happy member states not the other way round, something clearly reflected by the far-right votes in other countries (not a very great thing).

At least we went about expressing our disillusionment in a more civilised manner.

So the public transport reform is dismissed as bendy buses, the Piano project/roofless theatre, Smart City/unkept promises, power station/fabbrika tal-kancer, Mater Dei Hospital/kurriduri, Tonio Fenech- who kept the economy ticking in very difficult times/arlogg tal-lira… and so on and so forth.

Battles are not won by people who take the soft approach but by people who take a position and fight for it till death.

So it’s for the PN to raise its voice and not to offer any handshakes to the goverment.

Like this the PN would only seem weaker than it is already looking.

I also think it is time for the PN to slick their propoganda machine. We used to be the envy of the MLP with our marketing and efficiency by introducing new standards.

Now we are only trailing or copying what others are doing. The PN should turn to graduates in different fields to come out with creative ideas how to reach different sectors effectively.

Also I believe that all is not is not lost but the electoral campaign should start from today as tomorrow may be too late.