As a new, yet keen follower of British politics, Joseph Muscat’s election as Prime Minister, and the circumstances in which all this happened, immediately reminded me of Tony Blair’s similar rise to power over a decade ago. While others were busy comparing Labour’s campaign team to that of U.S. President Barack Obama, I felt that we shouldn’t have to cross the Atlantic to be able to draw up some similarities. In fact, I had already started working on this post when last Sunday I saw an excellent article on the Times of Malta, reaching the same conclusions as mine. Instead of comparing the speeches of newly-elected Prime Minister Blair and Muscat, I would like to discuss some lessons which, in my humble opinion, could be drawn up by the latter from his British counterpart, who incidentally (or not), endorsed him just two days before the 9th March election.

New leaders. New parties.

What first strikes you is the remarkable resemblance between the two leaders, and the magnitude of the changes they made as soon as they rose to power. Both Labour parties in 1996 and 2008 respectively were suffering from a serious case of electoral fatigue and a set of principles which had become more of a shackle than a driving force. What both Tony and Joseph did in their parties is to declare that “this is a modern party living in a world of change.” At the time they rose to power, both leaders had the young age, experience, and backing necessary to perform changes of unprecedented proportions in both size and effect. It is not only modernisation, but a complete revamp of what the Labour party stands for, with Blair’s ditching of Clause 4 reflected in Muscat’s heavy update of the party statute. In doing so, the two understood something very profound about politics; that if one is to change a nation, he must first be willing to change the party. This realisation, right from the very beginning, proved to be an effective, winning formula for both leaders, who had over twenty years of conservative rule to back their arguments for thorough changes.

Huge landslides, huge responsibilities.

It is widely reported that when Tony Blair got briefed about the breathtaking magnitude of the Labour Party’s landslide in the evening of May 1st, he simply muttered “what the hell have we done?” No one knows (yet) what Joseph Muscat had to say at 11.30 a.m. of March 9th, yet the result obtained was of very similar proportions. One could only deduce that the sense of unreality which hit Blair’s campaign team was also felt here in Malta, where not even the party could have ever imagined the type of majority it would get.

However, that sort of feeling could be potentially dangerous when a new government is formed. The Muscat cabinet must make sure that it does not get itself lured in the same trap as the Blair administration: that of thinking that one could manage a country with the same way as one has previously managed a party. The needs of the nation are extremely different from those of a party, yet having a majority of over half of the electorate could lead oneself to believe that what’s good for the party is now good for the country. This is what Tony Blair had to face in his first few weeks or so, before coming to the understanding that both elements must be kept as far away from each other as possible, even if this upsets the party delegates. Muscat must do the same, or he will inevitably have to face an Eckolson scandal of his own, where the affairs of the party get entangled in those of the state. And there is absolutely nothing good which could come out of such an entanglement.

“Campbellian” media management.

For ten out of the twelve years of Blair rule, Alastair Campbell dominated the media, spinning it in ways unprecedented in the history of Number 10. Sometimes getting too much limelight; more than he ever wanted, Campbell was not only Blair’s press secretary, but also his most trusted friend and confidant. When I heard that one of Prime Minister Muscat’s first appointments was of Kurt Farrugia, his party press chief, I couldn’t but draw up a conclusion that he understood something which Tony Blair had realised from the start: that the media has the power to glorify governments, or more commonly, bring them to their feet. A strong press manager has become absolutely essential, and with all due respect to the ones preceding Mr. Farrugia, few are better at understanding the current media landscape than the new man at Castille.

Yet there are some core lessons which Campbell admits to learning during this decade of riding the media wave, among which was the fact that he sometimes became an unwilling protagonist in the sophisticated spinning campaign of the press and Number 10 alike. Though we do not have the sort of sensational media that is present in Great Britain, PM Muscat’s media team must be careful to develop a strong and healthy relation with the press, which however must remain controlled and limited by a strictly-defined boundary, in order to avoid the same problems Blair’s staff had to face. Choosing seasoned journalists to act as press chiefs in various ministries is also a wise decision, which however needs to be contained to just dealing with the media, and not interfering in the day-to-day running of the Government, as Campbell and his staff were accused of doing in the late nineties.

Avoiding a “Brown” revolt:

This last point I would like to draw attention to is one which haunted the Blair administration from the very first moment he set foot inside Number 10: Gordon Brown. Making him arguably the most powerful Chancellor in British history was not enough to quench the latter’s thirst for power which increased as his ‘friend’ Tony progressed on into the second, and finally, third term. One can argue that Blair had to face two ‘Iraqs’: one overseas, and another at home, with his own Chancellor and his arrogant staff.

Despite the enormous Labour majority obtained by Joseph Muscat, which for the time being renders the Government in an extremely comfortable position, the status-quo must not be taken for granted. Actually, the new Prime Minister has quite a challenge ahead, having to balance the desires of veteran MPs to involve themselves in what might be their last chance to govern, and giving a chance to the new blood in the House to revitalise our political arena. Seeing the sort of Cabinet which was chosen proves that PM Muscat has understood the importance of doing this sensitive balancing act, which however must withstand the test of time.

In a Government, the worst thing that can happen is having someone like Gordon Brown and his coalition of backbench dissidents, who kept the Government unsure till the last minute on whether legislation will go ahead or not. While a nine-seat majority is extremely comfortable, it’s not completely safe, and loyalties must be checked at all time, without having to resort to shameful and humiliating acts and offers of appeasement, which end up discrediting the Government as a whole.

Conclusion:

It’s clear that expectations are high for this Government, as they were for Tony Blair’s ‘New Labour’ in 1997. We must indeed wait and see, however one must also be careful not to expect too much. Labour’s manifesto is one of the most ambitious we’ve ever seen, and the mandate is extremely clear, to say the least. If wisdom and good management truly dominate over the division and confusion the Blair government had to endure, we are surely to see a successful experiment led by Prime Minister Muscat, which- who knows, could even last for more than one term.