1. Stability vs change: Abela and Grech challenge each other’s credentials

Abela and Grech presented very different visions when it comes to Malta’s economic future. The Prime Minister focused on stability, presenting the government as a pair of safe hands to guide the country through the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian government’s invasion of Ukraine.

He was quick to reference the government’s many incentives and measures that helped soften the blow of the recent economic downturn, stressing that his government worked tirelessly with key stakeholders to find workable solutions that benefitted all parties.

“You know where you stand with us,” Abela said pointing towards proposals in the manifesto designed towards economic growth, which includes tax cuts, simplifying due diligence, creating specialised schemes, establishing a one-stop shop for investment, and promoting green standards and green jobs.

Grech, on the other hand, was clear that a change in direction is vital for the future.

“Abela did not even mention greylisting in his opening address. This is an absolute priority for the government as currently the burden is being shouldered by the population. We had respect a few years ago on the international stage that we do not have anymore,” he said.

The PN leader rubbished the Prime Minister’s pledges, insisting that these commitments are quickly forgotten once someone close to the party comes into the picture.

“That’s why we are proposing an Environmental, Social and Governance system (ESG), those are real commitments to change,” he said.

2. Both parties are acting like “father Christmas”, but how are they going to fund proposals?

Moderator Rachel Attard was quick to question the financial viability of each party’s manifesto, particularly amid concerns over the rising cost of living and millions being spent to soften negative economic impact. Neither party have proposed increasing taxes, leading to serious questions as to how either plans to pay for their plans.

Abela said the funds would come from economic growth, insisting that the PL had an ambitious target of generating €20 billion for the economy with their measures.

He said the proposals would see almost 50,000 jobs created and therefore increase taxes. Meanwhile, the country will also benefit from €2.7 billion in EU funds.

He also took the opportunity to back hedging agreements on energy, stressing that it has kept prices stable during this unstable period. Still, Grech was quick to point out that the agreement expires in April and that the government is yet to reveal plans for beyond that date.

Grech insisted that his party’s manifesto has been costed and the money will be generated from the creation of 10 new economic sectors.

“This is our track record. We brought gaming, financial services, pharmaceuticals, aviation and maritime industries to Malta. We will do it again,” he said.

“The Labour Party’s manifesto already costs over €3 billion and that’s not even including the €6 billion metro system.”

3. Tram vs Metro: How do the parties plan to solve the traffic crisis

A key focus of the campaign is how each party plans to address Malta’s never-ending traffic issues, which have continued despite significant investment into the road network.

Grech was quick to say that the government’s proposed solutions have not been delivered and more needed to be done to address the traffic problem beyond “just widening roads”.

However, he was challenged quite extensively by Attard over the trackless tram proposal, noting that renders showed entire lanes, including cycling lanes, being taken up by the trackless tram.

Grech conceded that some difficult decisions will need to be made to ensure the trackless tram’s viability, insisting that “everyone must shoulder some burden to come with long term solutions”.

Abela rubbished the trackless tram proposal, insisting that studies into the metro showed that this kind of proposal is simply not feasible in Malta. However, he was soft on committing to the metro proposal, which remains locked in discussions despite it being a key pledge in 2017.

In fact, Abela said that even just part of the system could be implemented.

He said that the problems to the road network require more than one solution, stressing that more work needs to be done to create a holistic system. Abela also pointed to work being done to decarbonise the road network, insisting that the gas pipeline is essential to sustain the energy needs.

4. Will good governance become a priority?

Abela faced serious questions on the government’s good governance credentials, particularly after his claims that there had been no such issues under his tenure, despite damning allegations continuing to emerge against key Cabinet members.

He started off by referencing reforms under his tenure. However, in truth, a lot of these reforms were imposed by international bodies in the wake of a never before seen political crisis in 2019.

“I can understand that people are disillusioned after all of that. Mistakes will happen, but what’s important is the reaction to it,” he said.

Abela did admit that clientelism is a problem in Malta’s political system but said addressing the “parochial” issues can only be done through electoral reform, something which the PL is proposing.

Grech laid into Abela for his comments, saying that the Prime Minister is always ready to pass the fault onto someone else, without even admitting that mistakes happen.

“When you look at the situation you realise that nothing has been learned,” he said.

In a questionable reply, Abela said that the government’s decision to hand out cheques to people was an example of the government’s good governance credentials.

5. Gozo and the Planning Authority

Towards the end of the debate, Attard issued a challenging question to the two leaders. Using current development issues in Gozo as evidence, Attard asked whether the Planning Authority had become a permit authority.

Abela first referenced a recent controversial decision to approve Joseph Portelli’s mega-development in Sannat, saying that it had a lot more procedure to follow until officially being approved.

He insisted that the PA remains an autonomous institution that follows planning policies, issuing a dig at the infamous 2006 local plans. Abela then referenced works being done for open spaces, but none of them included Gozo.

Grech immediately attacked Abela’s claims, referencing a dinner Abela had with Portelli in the lead up to the permit being approved. He agreed that the PA did anything but plan.

“Even on this it’s the PN’s fault, even though the PL has been in government since 2013. Green areas are not the answer to the planning mess,” he said, stressing that attention needs to be put on aesthetics and sustainability.

In response, Abela said that the rationalising of 2006 granted rights to people that were very hard to now take away.

In a quickfire comeback, Grech said “the environment was meant to be the PL’s priority in 2013 and it has not delivered”

6. Who came out on top?

All eyes remain on Grech and Abela during debates as the pair continue to try and prove their credentials as leaders to voters and party loyalists. Abela, on his part, delivered the party’s message clearly, but often stumbled when challenged by Grech, choosing to deflect to another topic before addressing actual concerns.

However, Grech did fail to provide a real contrast with Abela – and failed to land a killer blow, which could be crucial with so little time left in the campaign. Grech’s PN does not feel lightyears away from the PL when it comes to actual policy, making it hard for voters to distinguish between the two.

Abela and Grech meet next week for their final debate on TVM ahead of the election on 26th March.

Who do you think won the debate?