The term “princeps” usually translates as “first citizen”. It was an official title of a Roman Emperor. The word was derived from Princeps Senatus (the “primus inter pares” of the senate). This title was given to Emperor Augustus in 23 BC, who wisely enough saw that the use of the title “rex” (King) or dictator would surely create resentment amongst senators and other influential men, who had earlier demonstrated their disapproval by supporting the assassination of Julius Caesar.
The Latin phrase “primus inter pares” (first among equals) is usually used when referring to a certain group of people from a specific profession on which one of whom is above the others for some reason or another. The Prime Minister is considered “primus inter pares”. Though he is considered the most important amongst his ministers, it all boils down to the fact that his position started out as a simple minister. The idea has a political influence, because it is often seen as “one of us”, rather than some detached super being. The Prime Minister may be the leader of the government, but he is still just a minister who shares the same collective responsibilities as stipulated in our Constitution, and I quote Article 79 (2): “The Cabinet shall have the general direction and control of the Government of Malta and shall be collectively responsible to Parliament.”
We have just began our short election campaign, and it stands to reason that the Maltese electorate and the media should expect to be informed and addressed collectively and not solely by the outgoing Prime Minister. It is sheer evidence, that Dr Gonzi is playing a one-man band for various reasons, not to mention the deficiencies of bad governance, the arrogance of his fellow ministers and the rampant mud deep corruption. Gonzi’s sole appearance reminds our veterans of the Jones Party in the early 1950s.
The increased personalisation of the leadership in a number of European countries has led to Prime Ministers becoming themselves “semi-presidential” figures, due in part to media coverage of politics that focuses on the leader. Dr Gonzi is no exception, but at the same time we cannot blame him. With the recent sweep of corruption revealed so far by the Labour Party and ex PN activist, Gonzi seems to be more comfortable on his own rather in the faded shadows of his fellow colleagues.

Manuel Rizzo
Mosta

On the 28 January, you sent me a letter to tell us about the Social Services initiatives which government has taken for the advantage of pensioners (like myself and my wife). Honestly, when we consider all the pros and cons, we do not feel we have much to celebrate. But we accept the situation. 
These matters pale into insignificance beside other issues. I will refer just to one - which is seriously affecting the peace of mind (and the pockets) of thousands of citizens, especially the most vulnerable. You (and all politicians) know that innocent third parties have died as a result of building works gone wrong; that serious near-fatalities continue to happen; that people are abandoned to their worries and woes; but this crucially important issue has remained unaddressed by successive administrations, including your own. I refer to the worries and dangers that people have to face as a result of imminent or ongoing nearby building works. 
No regulatory body (distinct from the OHSA) exists locally to whom concerned third parties (neighbours) may address their serious preoccupations regarding building applications or actual works. Consequently the most vulnerable continue to suffer.
One of the reasons for the setting up of the Ministry of the Infrastructure’s Building Construction Industry Department was to cooperate with the BICC to upgrade building techniques and regulations to meet the technical and safety standards required for modern projects. This much was announced by then Minister of the Environment, Francis Zammit Dimech way back in 2000.
What have Minister Ninu Zammit and Robert Musumeci done about this in the ensuing eight years? Nothing! This inaction suits developers while building site workers and residents are left with the only remedy: to take the issue to Court, which, apart from being time-consuming and worrisome, is not within the financial reach of everybody - certainly not of the most vulnerable. 
The European Parliament and the European Commission have both expressed sympathy but wrote that the problem had to be tackled by the Maltese authorities – or by the European Court of Justice. Meanwhile the problem goes on with hard-hit people forced to turn to the courts to try to safeguard life and limb, their homes. 
Why does this administration, and particularly Ministers Ninu Zammit and Tonio Borg, refuse to address this dangerous and unjust problem? Many people believe that by abdicating its responsibilities towards the vulnerable, government hopes to avoid invoking the wrath of mighty developers. A workable solution for concerned neighbours needs to be thought out and implemented.   
Recently somebody – perhaps from Castille itself – forced the Occupational Health & Safety Authority to intervene on behalf of the old Sliema lady who risked being entombed in her own flat as a result of gross building malpractice.  The OHSA’s involvement was a good thing, but will this regulatory body be ready to get involved again in safety issues as affecting third parties if people so request? Can you at least inform the public accordingly?  This being election year it is as good a time as any to put the record straight.
As for some of Malta’s archaic and outdated Civil Laws, the situation remains much the same. And, perhaps worse still, there is no correlation between Building Regulations and Civil Laws. Altogether a situation which is contributing to cause people so much worry – and MEPA, so much unnecessary embarrassment?
I am hoping, Hon. Prime Minister, that you will appreciate that as far as citizens (including pensioners) are concerned there still remain crucially important issues and injustices which need to be seriously addressed. It is such a pity that these issues kept being shelved for so long. Hopefully the next administration (whichever that may be) will seriously do what needs to be done.  Thank you for your personal interest.

Joseph V. Grech
Via email

Does Alternattiva Demokratika know that the party with even the relative majority of votes, gets an absolute majority of seats in Parliament, as guaranteed by the constitution? Who will want a coalition when they already have a majority?

Claude M. Calleja
Via email

If I had a say in AD matters, I would support the party with the biggest national support but not as a coalition partner. I would only support and vote for those measures which are not of a serious political divide, and on other matters decide as the case may be or negotiate with the party in minority government.
However I am confident this will not be the case next March.
JC Azzopardi
Birgu

The PN is making a big song and dance about the fact that some of the MLP election candidates are not new faces.
However, whether the “faces” in the MLP are old or new, the fact remains that the MLP is showing them up front. With Labour, what you see is what you get.
The PN, on the other hand, is trying to keep all its ministers out of sight, hoping the electorate will forget they are there. All we get is Lawrence Gonzi surrounded by children.
But beware, for they are all still there, desperate to cling to their seats.
Vote Gonzi, get Jesmond.

Victor Laiviera
Naxxar

Any sober-minded person has to make a deep and sincere analysis of the fiscal and legal measures implemented by the Nationalist Government that affected positively or negatively his life during the last legislature before deciding who to trust with his vote.
Dr Gonzi told us to judge him on his deeds not on his words. Lately he was quoted as saying that if he is given again the opportunity to govern he would restructure Mepa and relinquish the Finance Ministry. The Prime Minister has the overall responsibility of the Cabinet and hence he was duty bound to rectify any of the inconsistencies that occurred at Mepa during his last tenure of office.
In the last election he was elected to Parliament on his party’s slogan “finanzi fis-sod”. How is it then that through his capable hands we managed to bring our financial house in order when he was elected to govern an already financially sound country?
Was it sound or nearly bankrupt? Who is lying: Dr Gonzi, the PN or Gonzipn?
Dr Gonzi has made the economy partially viable through different forms of taxes that the Maltese had to pay through their noses. Not only that, but unfortunately for all of us, most of our taxes went down the drain due to sheer incompetence, mismanagement, fraud and flagrant corrupt practices due to a heavy dose of discrimination in the top echelons of the public service to accommodate friends of friends and close relatives. This Government has appointed its acolytes to almost all the sensitive positions to ensure that the administration remains under its indirect hold even if it loses the elections.
Now behold, he is going to build an offshore wind farm to generate 20% of our electricity needs. Well done, Dr Gonzi, about time. What action have you taken to cut on CO2 emissions during your stay in power? What kinds of alternative clean sources of energy have you introduced in our country?
As regards education, we have the highest percentage of early school leavers in Europe. I sincerely ask Dr Gonzi to state what has he done to rectify this alarming situation of our youngsters who have to start earning a living in the not so distant future. Adding these to the 25,000 persons who are employed only on a part time basis we have a recipe for disaster if we do not tackle this problem at its roots, that is, at pre- primary level.
Adding to the foregoing, the time of almost 20 years in Government, the Nationalist Party has everything to gain if it spends some time in Opposition so that it can really become innovative, less arrogant, more prudent, socially just and more tolerant. On the other hand, the Labour Party has to be given the chance to govern for a full term in a serious, accountable and transparent manner or else the Maltese would be opting to live in a one party state. We would really be unique in Europe!

Carmel Attard
Iklin

Writers expressing their opinion in your newspaper attack both major political parties. They think, that being above party politics, is something intellectual. It is fashionable to say, I am neither blue nor red. It gives them a sense of independence/impartiality. Armchair critics simply sit down to blab. They do not realize that, they only exist because, Gonzi or Sant have the guts to be under scrutiny for their actions.
The truth is one: either the Labour party or the Nationalist party is going to be in Government. Convincing people to vote for the minor parties is tantamount to abstaining. I think, it is difficult for the minor parties to obtain 3,000 number one votes, in one electoral district. The system is such that a vote for the minor parties equals abstention.
Even if, one accepts the fact that, Josie Muscat may obtain more No 1 votes than Michael Falzon, or Harry Vassallo masters more preferences than Giovanna Debono, there is nothing more dangerous than a minority or national government. The Italian experience is too close to ignore.
Although I accept that abstention is part of the democratic process, it only helps the party who obtains more votes than the other. If the Nationalist party obtains more votes than the Labour Party, a non-vote is a vote for the Nationalist party. On the other hand, if the Labour party obtains more votes than the Nationalist Party, a non-vote is a vote for the Labour party. The decision is left in the hands of third parties.
Rather than being intellectual, these critics show that they are not even capable of taking a decision. When they decide to do something, it would be the turn of others to criticise their actions.

Joseph Tabone
Ibrag

During my home visits last week, I remained impressed with a phrase pointed out by a pale blue voter concerning his voting intentions – “During the past elections I have always voted for the Nationalist Party, but after receiving a series of coloured electoral campaign material, I was wondering about one important fact: for whom shall I vote as Dr Gonzi is not contesting on my district and all the propaganda is focused on him?”
Such comments from a Nationalist voter reflects the fact that Dr Lawrence Gonzi is projecting himself as a one man party, and eventually as a one man government, with the slogan GonziPN. Using billboards copied from those used by French president Nicolas Sarkozy, it is clear that the Nationalist Party is trying to embark on a personal campaign and not on a party one.
The only card that they have left rests solely upon a confrontation between the two party leaders, trying to project Dr Gonzi as a new and fresh leader and the ideal Prime Minister for our country. Evidently the party is embarrassed to expose its government ministers for the reasons everybody knows.
In the general election people are asked to vote for a government made up of a number of parliamentary members amongst who will occupy the various ministerial posts. And this is exactly what the Labour party boasts of – a selection of candidates including new faces and experienced ones with one thing in common: they do not have any track record of corruption! Therefore the choice is clear – choose Labour!

Etienne Grech
Fgura

Here in Malta we were always taught that we live in a free society. “Freedom” is guaranteed by the parliamentary system: i.e., we the citizens are allowed to vote to elect representatives who will rule the country in our name, who therefore must be accountable and answerable to us. That, at least, is the theory; but in reality it’s a tragic comedy.
Our new generation of youths have lived these last 20 years under five governments, of which four of were formed by the Nationalist Party. No one can deny that the GonziPN government still embraces the expired 1980s Neo Liberal ideology of Thatcherism days. And one can also clearly see that a segment of the richest capitalists on the island got really fatter because they were allowed to grab the biggest slices of the cake while the lower class people where left to starve.
And remember that around 3,000 youths are still jobless, when it’s the duty of the government to provide or create work. Taxes still choke those who are self employed. The country is taking the final breath before drowning in debt. Pensions are not guaranteed for the future, when most of us pay loads in social security. Most of the projects carried out by GonziPN have been mismanaged. Hints of corruption surface every now and than. Money wasted down the drain when it should have been used to invest more in social problems.
STOP AND REFLECT. Cabinet ministers, their consultants and MPs always get a good incrase in their wages. Most of them are driven in luxurious cars, have bills and insurances paid for them by the taxes from our pockets and to top it all it’s frequently a fact that the parliament ends without a quorum. And still they get paid while we continue to shoulder the weight of the national debt.
This tragic comedy is kept going thanks to you who voted for them to represent you.... but instead they are representing themselves, their families and their higher circle of friends.
The only way to stop them is by boycotting the ballots.

Ray Schembri (il-Bahri)
Anarchist

It’s 2008 and a new Labour Government has just been formed the Labour supporters are over the moon honking and singing praises to their leader Dr Alfred Sant! The Nationalists have egg all over their faces and are sulking in a dark lonely corner, trying to understand what went wrong.
Alternattiva are also very happy, not because they elected an MP, but because they got nearly 20,000 votes mainly from the ninth and tenth district! At last they can say that the third party makes a difference and they were the agents of change! Not of a coalition, mind you, but of change!
The prices of oil are going up and up while the American economy is going down and down, reflecting itself on the rest of the world! But the Maltese will have none of this, they are happy, especially the “Woods” and the “Saids” of this world. At last they have paid the PN back and they’ve sent the rotten Nationalists to the rotten Opposition benches! Ho ho ho, what’s Christmas next to this? The price of oil keep reaching new heights but our new “intelligent”, “capable”, more super than Super One Prime Minister doesn’t care, so he slashes the surcharge by half... did anyone ask where the money would come from? Did anyone ask how can this be done in the light of ever increasing oil prices? Did anyone ask what plans Dr Sant has to decrease Malta’s dependency on oil? Oh for heaven’s sake who cares? What’s important is that Dr Sant kept his word and now everyone can say how honest and serious our Prime Minister is. In fact he calls an extraordinary conference in the Kazin Laburista of “Hal Muxa” full of flag waving supporters to declare that “...what we promised, we have done...!”
Then all of a sudden like a hurricane after a breeze, like a thunderstorm in August out of the blue, we hear that bloody word again, the word we all thought was buried in history, the word we all thought was dead for good: the Hofra!
Yes dear readers, the hofra again: the wailing and screaming and oceans of tears in the Kazini on each and every Sunday morning telling us what a mess the ruthless Nationalists left behind them, how they cannot actuate their promises because of an irresponsible Party led by irresponsible Gonzi! In one fell swoop we start seeing cliches like “niggielidu l-gholi tal hajja”, “Il-haddiem mkisser bit-taxxi” and “sena gdida bidu gdid” flushing themselves down the drain with such velocity that one would be forgiven for thinking that they were just part of a National collective hallucination.
Then PBS would be revamped: we’ll have the future MLP general secretary selling plants and a newcomer telling us how great the Labour project in Cottonera is and Where’s Everybody can pack and leave, instead of Xarabank we’ll be having documentaries on the glorious years of Labour! Then Dr Sant tells us he’s going to build a golf course in exactly the same place as Gonzi had proposed, and a yacht marina in the same place they had shed litres of crocodile tears a year before with some environmentalist. Astrid starts seeing red but the government has no time for this BS and says that that’s what’s needed. Anyway, the first budget is characterised by austerity, taxes on this and taxes on that, and if anyone (like the UHM) starts giving trouble then off to court we’ll go! The hospital is not free anymore because the Nationalists spent too much money on it, and agencies such as Appogg get less money… the excuse? The Nationalists! They left the Hofra! Photosessions for the Prime Minister on Maghtab and close to the Smart City become everyday occurrences and also venues for Labour coffee mornings where the Labour chattering class says how good it was of Sant to get Smart city (.... “Alla jbierek kemm igib xoghol il-Lejber!”) The hunters are left with nothing except a promise to “....renegotiate the EU package”, which obviously cannot happen; or maybe the hope of some “tbazwir”, but again they get nothing!
Whose fault is it again? Those cruel Nationalists, “enemies of the working class”, those “blue eyed fat cats” ! And then the projects start but they all start taking longer than planned and their costs start spiralling out of control! When asked why by some Keith Demicoli who would have just been demoted to Net News again, the minister says that even the Nationalists did that and anyway it’s not Labour’s fault, its that stupid drainage pipe which needed to be changed! And the sounds of “bidu gdid” become like a relic of the nostalgic 2008 victory, bandied out every now and then with the tune “The only way is up” – there must be a way to distract the Labourites and the “Woods” and the “Saids”! And the tragic-comedy of new beginnings keeps unfolding! Am I a fortune teller? No, I don’t think they exist anymore after Peppi’s Xarabank about the subject! I am just a normal citizen who follows politics quite closely; who knows that the MLP under Dr Sant have become so predictable, so lost for innovation, so full of finely threaded propaganda that I think it doesn’t take a mg of grey matter to predict the situation of this country if led again ( weren’t 22 months enough?) by Dr Sant and the Labour Party he has created over these 16 long years!

Albert Gauci,
St Paul’s Bay

Taking cue from the US Presidential candidate Barack Obama’s electoral slogan and in reply to a certain Mr J. Schembri’s (Zurrieq) letter in the MaltaToday of Sunday 3 February, I would like to share some thoughts with your many readers.
We are finally on the doorstep of an important decision to make. The Prime Minister, at long last, has made up his mind to call it a day and ask the President to dissolve Parliament and call fresh General Elections. We 300,000 electors have only to await the day to cast our votes. I come across people who claim to be still undecided and need the 11th hour push. They state that MLP and PN have become a carbon copy of each other in many ways and means.
The change they yearn for is not a change of guards or change of guardians of the political and administrative power. The change that we yearn is a change in political practice. We wish for more transparency and more accountability. We wish for more meritocracy and no nepotism. No political appointees and no yes-men can guarantee that we are making best use of our human resources. We are wasting talent and resources in appointing the same people from a restricted circle of diehard flag waivers.
This country does not need a mere change of faces in a musical chair fanfare. For decades we have witnessed our country being defaced, our countryside being systematically eroded. Overdevelopment has resulted in the sound of 53,000 vacant dwellings lying yawningly idle. Development permits keep on being issued like pastizzi encroaching on green areas, building regulations being changed and revised overnightly, and we have, for the umpteenth time been regaled with pathetic and dishonest excuses. In reality it all adds up to the mightier you are, the more you expect to get accommodated notwithstanding infringements of local plans.
We have witnessed our politicians making a mockery of the electoral system by keeping a system which excludes third parties, notwithstanding their boasting of their adherence to a much harped on EU policy of inclusiveness. I yearn for a change where the winner does not take all and rule in a bulldozing manner over the rest of us. I yearn for a change where the party in government takes a less boastful attitude towards anything that the government accomplishes out of public funds; where there is an evident segregation between the party and the government it forms part of. Unfortunately, from past experience, both MLP and PN do not seem able to guarantee any form of this correct practice.
I yearn for a country where projects are done and finished with on the projected day and at the projected price with no overruns which have drained our public coffers over and over again. I yearn for a country which views renewable energy sourcing with more importance and interest.
Is this too much to ask of our politicians? Will our children and future generations be proud of us for the legacy we shall be passing on to them or shall they curse us for having had the chance to show this with our vote and we repeatedly wasted it by simply choosing between the lesser evil between two when we were presented with a wider choice than that?
This can only be achieved if we give our first preference to Alternattiva Demokratika, The Green Party which has consistently and bravely spoken on many issues without being opportunistically meandering in calculator politics practice. I invite Mr Schembri to militate within his pet party to see that these changes occur so that we may have a truly Maltese government for all the Maltese people unlike what we have had up till now.

Saviour Sammut
Hal Safi

I have read that the Malta Union of Teachers does not agree with the MLP’s proposal of introducing a reception class in the early years of primary school. One of Mr John Bencini’s concerns was that there will not be enough teachers and hence supply teachers with an ‘O’ and ‘A’ level standard of education will have to be employed.
He continued: “Are these the people we want to teach our children especially during those formative years?” (The Malta Independent, Jan 31).
It is very difficult for me to decipher how Mr Bencini’s grave concern was not a priority when he signed the last collective agreement in July 2007. Amongst other initiatives, this agreement upgrades instructors (i.e. educators who do not hold a degree but a 300 hour course leading to a certificate in education) to teachers. Moreover, his statement is putting in doubt the ability of those teachers with an ‘O’ and ‘A’ level standard of education.
I am looking forward to hear what Mr John Bencini has to say about this contradiction. It gives the impression that he is taking advantage of the present issue in order to pursue his own agenda.

Louise Chircop
Via email

Some people actually think that if Labour is elected, their electricity bill will be cut by half. This is a misconception. It is a scam similar to the VAT/CET con dreamed up by Labour, this time to make the people believe that they will be paying less for electricity.
My electricity bill for the period 23 May 07 to 10 December 07 (202 days) amounted to €556.08 (Lm238.72). This was made up of €343.04 (Lm147.27) consumption, €15.40 (Lm6.61) meter rent, and €237.64 (Lm102.02) surcharge.
If Labour is elected my electricity bill for the equivalent period will be cut by €118.81(Lm51.00): i.e. €0.59 (Lm0.25c) per day or €215.35 (Lm92.45) per annum. Big deal!
Gee thanks Fred. Your magnanimity knows no bounds. Thank you, but no thank you! I think I’ll play safe and vote for Laurence!

Alfred Spiteri
Sliema

Four MPs? Call yourself credible? Unfortunately, you’re like the rest, you believe your own lies, dear Harry.

Stefan Vassallo
Via email

It is always good to have an educational debate and it is always healthy to examine our practices in this sector and improve upon them. Unfortunately, when debates occur on the eve of the election, partisan political interests take precedence over a healthy educational exchange and, as a result, the quality of analysis suffers.
The present debate about Labour’s proposal for an additional year is a case in point. The idea of increasing a reception year has been rubbished by the Minister of Education and, amazingly, devalued by the Opposition’s Spokesperson on the subject (Malta Today, Sunday 10 February). The Minister, without any proper analysis has rubbished it by calling it a “repeater” year. In my opinion, this is a very shallow analysis. In Europe, Malta has one of the shortest scholastic years (see table) and is also one of those countries with the shortest time spent at school each day (with limited recess and play time). It is therefore unwise not to consider revisiting this situation. Having fewer school days and hours is surely one of the reasons for our content-laden and crammed curriculum. It is also one of the reasons for the amount of work that our children have to carry out at home. Consequently children have to carry to school, every day, bags that are full of books. Above all, a short school day is not allowing enough time for inductive teaching and for learning to take place at a pace that reflects one’s respect for each learner’s needs.
On the other hand the way the Opposition education spokesperson, Carmelo Abela, has been reported to have argued with respect to this proposal adds very little to the debate. Advocating a reception year without proposing any radical changes to the discriminatory 11+ selective system would do little to enhance the quality of our children’s education. What Abela fails to realise is that truancy and illiteracy are generally caused by a lack of genuine motivation and positive educational experiences. Through our selective system we are sending out the message to 40% of our students that they are dull and that they are therefore not worthy of learning. The educational experience of these students is in most cases one of failure.
So while it is true that we need to be able to increase the quality time for our children at school, we need to ensure that the time spent in our educational institutions would really amount to meaningful, positive and respectful experiences. Research from different parts of the world has shown that selection, whether overt or hidden, has served to de-motivate learners and to accentuate social inequalities and an unfair distribution of resources. There would be little change in the quality of educational provision if we continue to ignore the underlying issue. We are guilty of a disservice to our children by not allowing them to learn in a truly inclusive and an enabling learning environment where one takes into account the pace, personal learning characteristics and learning needs of each child.
I therefore have a suggestion to make. The educational system needs to reclaim the time children spend at school. But lengthening school hours is not enough without a real change in the prevailing pedagogical approach. We need to empower our teachers to truly show their pedagogical expertise to give every learner the opportunity to learn at his or her own pace and to respect each learner’s preferred learning modality. There is evidence to support the view that, when time is used productively, it leads to higher student achievement.
I do not think that the reception year proposal would be the best solution. By lengthening the day, followed by a rethink of the curriculum, pedagogy and daily time-table, we would be able to give all learners a quality educational experience which allows them to develop the skills, attitudes and knowledge required for lifelong learning.

Colin Calleja
Lecturer, Faculty of Education
University of Malta

I was amazed how the new St Julian’s branch of Banif Bank was allowed to open when it is very evidently not accessible to wheelchair users and other persons with mobility problems.
As a public building, the owners of this branch are breaking the Equal Opportunities (Disability) 2000 Act. I wish to know what the Management of the Bank, MEPA and National Commission Persons with Disability have to say on this issue.

Anthony Charles
Marsaskala