Kien hemm kaz fejn il-pl iprova jostor fejn kriminal laburista famuz kien ittiehed l-isptar meta waqt il-hdim ta’ bomba kien inharaq. Din l-istorja kienet fin-nazzjon u hadd ma cahadha. Il-persuna kienet issemmiet.

The problem is not the inane comments of people who think they are watching two football clubs battling out an eternal league cup final.

The problem, now, lies with the Nationalist Party’s political marketing machine. It is non-existent. There is no strategy. There is a lack of a unified message that goes beyond apologising and portraying the party as a dying dog.

In the papers, one reads of the fantastic inroads made by Muscat and the glorious government (the “positive”). On the other hand, the papers cast PN utterances negative comments made by “Simon.”

This is not done explicitly by all the papers; the tone in the Times and the Independent is usually implicit.

The Times yesterday carried a story about how the PN was ordered to settle a Euros 500,000 debt. Muscat must’ve rubbed his hands in glee. Divide and conquer. Kick the dying dog. Keep the country highly polarised. Mask this polarisation by a catchy slogan. Muscat, in my opinion, changed the rules of the game.

All I have heard Dr Busuttil and other PN officials say is that they are really upset about the loss, they want to construct a credible party, blah blah blah blah! The PN has fallen into Muscat’s trap.

All those who have an interest in marketing know the famous stories of how brand names (Hoover, Thermos) become synonymous with product classes. Muscat has done that – PN = Partit Negativ.

Dr Busuttil, for goodness sake, get on with it. It is wrong to allow your colleagues to voice their opinions publicly before these opinions are vetted by a central political marketing machine that is answerable only to you (as the head of the party). Policy issues are discussed in private.

The PN is not running an exercise of public dialogue here. It is trying to win an election to set the country back on track when in government.

Muscat does not allow any of his minions a free vote to give the impression of a unified front. They do not wash their dirty linen in public. They do it in Hamrun or wherever. Muscat was clever enough to realise that a change in strategy was needed to ensure that Labour would win the elections. “All” it took was five years.

Running a proactive political campaign means that the PN has to reinvent its brand with a single clear message. The Nationalist Party stands for principles, ethics, and a strong moral position NOT for apologies and talk. As Daphne has suggested, segment and target electoral segments scientifically. Forget your legal training momentarily and wear a business cap.

Muscat is right for the wrong reason. The PN is a partit negativ. The Nationalist message is constantly set with deep negative undertones. If the people want to feel sad, they can read a Russian novel. In psychological terms, people tend to escape or avoid negative messaging and approach that which keeps them uplifted.

From my angle, gaining three EP seats, despite the 30k plus Labour majority and a hefty electoral defeat last year, is a significant achievement. The fact that this achievement got little attention in contrast to the news of PL majority is inherent to this negative messaging. Toni Abela blew that achievement away in a single press conference, as did Muscat.

Now people actually believe that it was easy for the PN to gain the third seat. People compared the majority of votes by Labour but not the majority of seats to the 1981 situation. The reason why they believe so is that someone else did their thinking and was quick enough to emit these messages to play everything down.

For me the achievement was an occasion for a mass meeting to make supporters feel proud and happy (I was thrilled). Niltaqghu fuq il fossos biex niccelebraw mela neqirdu li tlifna u nohorgu apologija okra. For me, I expected the PN to come out with a least of easily assimilated and repeatable reasons why (a) it was difficult to gain the third seat and (b) it was NOT at all like the 1981 elections.

Communication has to be strong, consistent, critical of government action BUT proactive. Communication must be centralised or vetted by a central campaign team. It must exalt the Nationalist Party not denigrate it.

Get a political marketing organisation or ask a marketing professional to help. Do it. Do it fast.

I am answering you on this blog for the very simple reason that this site could be more secure. (Yes, We are back to this “feeling” since the MLP is in government again).

I was one of the bomb victims “when the Nationalist Party was in opposition”. I knew the culprit. I said as much in evidence under oath to the court appointed expert. I was urged not to mention names but I insisted even though the name was that of an MLP cabinet minister.

I was instructed by the police officers present to hold myself available for the DIK (CID) inspector to question me. I did but surprise! surprise! I was never approached by the CID or by anybody else, officially. However some weeks later another serving police officer contacted me, told me I was right, added details to what I knew already but apologized that it was not the time for him to speak out. Everybody knows what he meant.

It was years later that the MLP was obliged, eventually, to bow to the vote of the electoral majority and to move over to the opposition benches. Unfortunately, by that time, the (ir)responsible Labour Party cabinet minister had gone to meet his creator.

Sent you a screenshot.