Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1490234
9 NEWS ANALYSIS maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 18 JANUARY 2023 made at the detriment of local communi- ties and working-class families? Despite increased pressure, so far Abela has stood his ground, making it clear that while he is open to changes to ensure that the law is not 'abused', he would not ac- cept changes which will dilute the essence of the proposed law, that of protecting the health and life of mothers, a point he made sure of stressing while addressing activists on Sunday. Still, much depends on how far the pro- posed changes will dilute the proposed law by adding new layers of red tape and problematic definitions like the 'viability' or not of the fetus. What is sure is that after having irked conservative elements, Abela cannot afford to disappoint those who stood to be counted in defence of the amendment, even despite their strong reservations on other aspects of Labour's governance. Withdrawal on this issue would be re- membered as a cold shower which would dispel any pretence that Labour is a pro- gressive party. Abela has invested too much political capital on this issue to sound a humiliating retreat. Yet this could be one issue where Abela can seal his political legacy and where his- tory is bound to absolve him. Withdrawal would simply relegate him to the status of an ineffective politician who is only inter- ested in self-preservation. To convince a large segment of his own voters, Abela has to stress that his reform does not in any way introduce abortion on demand as wrongly alleged by the op- position. But while Abela is right in ac- cusing the opposition of scaremongering, he cannot lose sight of the changes in val- ues among younger cohort of voters for whom abortion on demand is no longer taboo. This puts Labour in an uncom- fortable position; that of being squeezed between openly pro-choice elements and more conservative voters who fear that this timid reform is simply a taste of things to come. While Abela is right in saying that as worded the law excludes abortion on de- mand, its approval is bound to raise fur- ther questions on whether other excep- tions should apply, for example in cases of incest and rape, which are not covered by the current amendment. As things stand Abela's best strategy is to turn the tables on the PN's intransigence and indifference to women's health, but he cannot afford to indefinitely shut down the wider debate on abortion within a party where being pro- choice is not an anathema as it is in the PN. The election of openly pro-choice Labour MPs is only a matter of time, and the par- ty has to be ready for a more wide-ranging debate on abortion rights in the coming years. From Peppi to ultra conservatives: The PN's motley crew But will the abortion issue revive the PN from its decline? One key factor is whether this issue can trigger an exodus from Labour's tradi- tional heartlands to the PN, something which has not happened whenever Labour pushed the boundaries on other matters like same-sex adoptions. Yet the PN's in- transigence may well backfire if Labour humanises this issue by giving voice to the personal stories of women who find themselves in difficult situations and whose health may be put in jeopardy by draconian abortion laws. And by turning abortion in to its major battle-cry the PN is taking an enormous risk. This semblance of parliamentary unity does not reflect the deeper divi- sions in the party's own electoral bloc, which always included a small minority of liberal voters previously kept in line by the party's European aspirations. And by opposing this timid and cautious reform, the PN has sent shivers down the spine of continentally-minded voters who are often vociferous on rule of law and envi- ronmental issues, but cannot stomach the PN's ultra-conservatism. The PN may well end up assembling a motley crowd. For example, in his speech on Sunday, Peppi Azzopardi seemed more concerned on distinguishing him- self from fellow anti-abortionists known for their illiberal positions on LGBTIQ and immigrant rights, than on convincing middle-of-the-road voters why the re- form currently on the table is wrong. In fact there has been little discussion on what the PN is actually proposing: that of limiting the amendment to protecting the life and not the health of mothers, which would simply mean that doctors will be forced to wait until a women faces a threat to her life before they can inter- vene. To press his point home, Peppi Azzo- pardi ended up raising issues – consist- ently raised and defended by pro-choice activists – in an event organised by a par- ty which is at best ambivalent on minor- ity rights. In such a scenario the PN may well end up being outflanked by more coherent conservative elements excluded from Sunday's debate. But who can better represent the concerns of conservative voters than Peppi Azzopardi, whose con- voluted logic and shenanigans will hardly impress liberals fed up with Labour but who resent the PN's ultra- conservatism even more? In this sense Peppi's pro-minority stance on other unrelated, albeit impor- tant issues, risks coming across as lipstick on a pig's face. And while the nascent pro-choice lobby is still dwarfed by the anti-abortion lobby, it may wield more influence on strategic categories of younger and more mobile voters, who are more likely to vote on the basis of single issues related to civil liber- ties and women's rights. It is unlikely for a single issue to move a significant amount of voters permanently in the absence of other factors, as was the case of divorce which coincided with an identity crisis in a party which had been in power for 25 long years. While polls in the next weeks may well register a dip in Labour's support and even a small revival for an opposition which has found a semblance of unity, any such gains may well be Pyrrhic, as the party becomes more toxic for younger ed- ucated and female voters. Labour's super-majority? Peppi Azzopardi PN leader Bernard Grech