Why Delia Makes Sense (Yes, Still)

Which brings us to the rumours — because while some might instinctively roll their eyes at the idea of Adrian Delia returning, and point to the chaos that marked his time as leader, I’d argue the opposite: if true, this would be the most strategically sound decision the PN has made in the past decade.

If Delia’s name really is being floated again, it’s unlikely to be out of nostalgia or desperation. It’s because anyone with serious political aspirations wouldn’t want to inherit a party weeks or months before a general election that’s already stacked against them. Delia, by contrast, has already had his turn. He’s unlikely to be chasing the leadership permanently — and in many ways, is doing far better as an MP than he ever did as leader. That makes him the ideal caretaker: someone who can take the party into the next election, absorb the hit if necessary, and step aside without destabilising the party further.

More than that, I’d go one further: he might actually make a dent in Robert Abela’s lead. Delia represents, in many ways, the antithesis of Bernard Grech. And whatever Bernard is doing — the tone, the image, the message — it clearly isn’t working. A Delia 2.0, with five years of parliamentary experience, a thicker skin, and the party fully behind him, could at the very least unsettle Labour’s narrative. He has a certain political rhythm — a gut-level connection with voters — that Grech has never managed to replicate. And if — and it’s a big if — he can command the respect of the same structures that once tried to oust him, he might even mount a credible challenge.

It’s hard not to draw a comparison with what’s happening to Alex Borg today. Like Delia before him, Borg has been smeared, dismissed, and painted as a Labour plant by some of the very voices that otherwise claim to want the PN to succeed. The parallels are obvious: both men challenged the order of things and were promptly undermined. And it begs the question — what kind of leader can the PN produce if the instinct is always to attack anyone who doesn’t come from the approved circle?

But perhaps most importantly, putting Delia in place now gives the PN time — time it desperately needs before making another permanent leadership decision. It would avoid another rushed, faction-driven leadership contest. And it would leave the door open for Roberta Metsola — the only figure with both the stature and the strategic discipline to take the party forward in the long term — to return when the timing is right.

Full Circle

When Adrian Delia became leader, he represented something the PN hadn’t seen in years: a genuine connection with people who had long since stopped seeing themselves in the party. His victory was driven by councillors, activists, and grassroots members who felt that the PN had been taken away from them by a clique of insiders who treated the party as their own personal network.

He was rough around the edges, yes. But he had a strategy — one built around reclaiming ground in areas where the PN had lost its base. He made mistakes. He alienated parts of the party. He lost internal battles. But he spoke a language that many PN voters understood — especially those who had felt condescended to or outright ignored by the party’s old guard.

His downfall was not electoral — it was internal. He was removed before he ever led the party into a general election. His ousting was messy and embittering, and it left a significant portion of the party’s base feeling disenfranchised. Bernard Grech’s greatest achievement has often been described as “healing” those wounds — but let’s be honest: he was the product of the same fundamentally undemocratic process that removed Delia in the first place. The wound wasn’t healed. It was quietly covered up.

Bringing Delia back now, even temporarily, wouldn’t just serve a practical purpose. It would offer closure to those who supported him and who felt betrayed by how he was treated. It would allow the PN to pause, breathe, and avoid yet another bruising internal contest. And, crucially, it might just halt the erosion of support in places where the party still claims to have a presence — if the party actually gets behind him this time.

More than that, it would be an act of collective reconciliation. One of the most damaging legacies of the PN’s last decade is that it has consistently chosen internal control over external success. A unified, public decision to entrust Delia with seeing the party through to the next election — not out of desperation, but as a considered, strategic choice — could genuinely galvanise the base. It would signal that the PN has finally learned to respect the people it claims to represent.

There’s no need to romanticise Delia. But there’s every reason to say that, at this juncture, his return might be the most functional and unifying move the party can make.

And perhaps, it would open the door to something even more meaningful: the return of figures who, like Delia, were once cast out for challenging the status quo. People like Franco Debono — who, for all his flaws, articulated a distinct and thoughtful vision for Maltese politics. He too was labelled a traitor. But what the PN needs now is not bland stability — it needs thinkers and doers who are capable of offering a vision that is different enough from Labour to matter. A party that embraces that kind of plurality might finally begin to feel whole again. Because the truth is, half the PN has spent the last decade refusing to acknowledge the other half.

Despite Everything, It Must Be Metsola

Delia may be the one to stop the haemorrhaging, but I’m not convinced he’s the one to build something new. At best, he buys time. He stabilises. He reminds parts of the country that the PN hasn’t completely lost touch. But that’s not enough — not in the long term. The PN doesn’t just need to survive the next election. It needs to start imagining what comes after.

And like it or not, that conversation ends with Roberta Metsola.

Whether or not she’s serious about a leadership bid, many already believe it’s in the works — and many more see it as the PN’s only real shot at breaking the political deadlock. This is the moment she must step forward, unambiguously. Not as a fallback. Not as a saviour. But as the architect of a new political project that makes the PN relevant again.

I say this as someone who’s been one of her harshest critics — especially since the ethnic cleansing of Gaza began. Her refusal to speak up, even symbolically, remains a moral failure. And I maintain that criticism. She should have said something. She still should.

But despite that, she is the only one with the clout, stamina, and strategic discipline to rebuild the PN into something that matters. She works hard. She knows how to win. She understands power and how to wield it. Most importantly, she has the ability to build a project — not just a party — that the next generation can believe in. That counts for something. In fact, at this point, it counts for everything.

The PN has a narrow window to pull itself together. It has to decide whether it wants to win elections or just win internal arguments. And for that to happen, it must stop hesitating, stop sabotaging itself, and stop pretending everything is fine. The situation may be messy. The options may be imperfect. But the direction is clear. The party must buy time to survive — and then hand it over to someone who can make it thrive.

And the future, despite everything, must be Metsola.