When Ideas Break Through: Malta’s EuroElection
By: David Briguglio Brown
Twenty-two years ago, Malta joined the European Union following one of the most consequential political contests in history. The importance of the EuroElection is obvious in hindsight. It determined Malta’s place in Europe and the direction the country would take for the following decades. But twenty-two years after accession, the events of 2003 are interesting for another reason.
They provide one of the clearest examples in recent Maltese history of what happens when an idea becomes powerful enough to challenge the normal rules of Maltese politics.
A Country Divided
Malta entered the European debate with one of Europe’s most entrenched two-party systems. Among the ten countries preparing to join the European Union in 2004, Malta was the only one where a major political party actively campaigned against membership. The Nationalist Party strongly supported accession, while the Labour Party opposed membership and instead proposed a looser “partnership” relationship with the EU.
European integration therefore became entangled with the partisan divide. But it never fitted perfectly within it. Labour itself recognised what Dominic Fenech described as the “latent pull” of Europe among younger and more educated voters. Its partnership proposal attempted to reconcile this attraction with opposition to membership: Malta could cooperate closely with Europe without actually joining the Union. But partnership struggled to provide a convincing alternative, particularly as European officials rejected the idea that the proposed relationship was realistically available. More importantly, some Labour voters simply disagreed with their party.
By the time of the general election, both parties knew that traditional Labour voters had voted Yes in the referendum. The Nationalists needed at least some of them to vote PN if membership was to be secured, while Labour attempted to persuade them that supporting Europe did not require abandoning Labour in the general election.
A Coalition Larger Than a Party
The Iva Moviment brought together the PN and Alternattiva Demokratika alongside organisations representing different parts of Maltese society, as towards the end of the referendum campaign, more than 30 organisations joined forces in support of integration. This included organisations representing the self-employed and small businesses; constituencies which had played an important role in Labour’s victory only seven years earlier, in 1996.
Alternattiva Demokratika, meanwhile, stood alongside the PN and the other organisations forming the Yes movement despite remaining an independent political party and competing against the PN weeks later in the general election. The coalition was therefore united by an objective rather than a common partisan identity.
They agreed on Europe, which tells us that political ideas become considerably more powerful when they cease to belong exclusively to the party that first champions them.
When Ideas Become Material
EU membership had been part of Maltese politics since the 1980s. What changed by 2003 was that Europe had ceased to be distant.
The Yes campaign spoke about employment, economic opportunities, the negotiated financial package and concessions secured for Malta. But these material arguments were combined with something larger: the claim that Malta’s future belonged in Europe and that Europe was Malta’s natural political home.
The No campaign similarly combined material and ideological arguments, warning about employment, taxation and particular sectors while offering a different understanding of sovereignty and Malta’s place in the world.
European integration offered a vision of what Malta could become, but voters were also being asked to consider what membership would mean for their jobs, businesses, opportunities and economic future. Hence, values and material interests reinforced one another.
From Incumbent To Catalyst
By 2003, the Nationalist Party had governed Malta since 1987 with only a twenty-two-month interruption between 1996 and 1998. There was an appetite for political change. Normally, that should have benefited the opposition. Instead, PN managed to transform an election after years in government into an election about change.
Fenech observed that although there was a visible desire for change, for the majority the change represented by EU membership compensated for the “sameness of government”.
Indeed, the PN’s economic record had seen less positive perceptions of its economic performance than prior years, and Eddie Fenech Adami would in fact apologise publicly for mistakes his government may have made.
The election nevertheless became dominated by Europe, as the electorate was asked whether dissatisfaction with a government mattered more than the political direction in which that government proposed to take the country. For enough voters, it did not.
What 2003 Can Teach Us
Maltese politics can create the impression that ideas do not matter. Party loyalties remain resilient. Political identities are inherited across generations. Governments distribute enormous economic resources. Personal relationships, local interests and material concerns inevitably influence how people vote.
The EuroElection did not change that. Partisan loyalty remained. Material interests remained. Political calculation remained. Yet it demonstrated something about Maltese democracy itself. In a political system famous for its divisions, a sufficiently powerful idea could still cross them. In a political culture often understood through loyalty and material interest, a vision of Malta’s future could still change political behaviour. And in an electorate where changing one’s party can be exceptionally difficult, changing one’s mind was still possible.
2003 proved that even in Malta, party loyalty has its limits…and a powerful enough idea can find them.
References
Cini, M. (2003). Malta Votes Twice for Europe: The Accession Referendum and General Election, March/April 2003. South European Society and Politics, 8(3), 132–146. https://www-tandfonline-com.ejournals.um.edu.mt/doi/abs/10.1080/13608740808539659
Fenech, D. (2003). The 2003 Maltese EU Referendum and General Election. West European Politics, 26(3), 163–170. https://www-tandfonline-com.ejournals.um.edu.mt/doi/abs/10.1080/01402380312331280638
Times of Malta. (2003). Election 2003.
https://timesofmalta.com/article/election-2003.151849