The speech delivered by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Anton Tabone, during the Sette Giugno commemoration this year, has been a sobering warning that the "flowers in parliament" are wilting again.

The two political parties that have occupied the seats in Parliament for the last 40 years have only themselves to blame for this. It is futile for either of them to put the entire blame on the other. The first step towards a genuine reform is to admit that something is wrong and that you may be part of the problem.

For politicians to ignore for one whole year the recommendations for a reform is inexcusable, and out of step with their demand that the public accept change as a prerequisite for progress.

The frequent calls for a quorum which result in parliamentary sittings coming to an abrupt end, leaving urgent work undone, the obsession with parliamentary privileges, and the jarring tone of many verbal exchanges across the floor, do not enhance Parliament's image with the electorate.

I wonder what is in store for us when the proposals for the resignation of Minister Austin Gatt, and Gozo being kept as one electoral district, come up for debate in Parliament. I foresee heat but not enlightenment.

Political parties seem to attach great importance to the fluctuating percentage support that they enjoy in regular opinion polls. They should pay more attention to the percentage of voters who are undecided or who do not intend to vote.

A seasoned Spanish ambassador/politician has told me that it is the undecided who decide in the end. These are the critical voters who are not likely to be won over by shows of arrogance, hollow gimmicks, favouritism, obstructionism and statements which insult their intelligence.

The fact that the elections in 1981, 1987 and 1996, the first two under an MLP administration and the last under the PN, produced perverse results is an indictment of these two political parties in whose hands electoral reform lies. Giving the aggrieved party a one-seat majority in Parliament is a palliative, and when this is made subject to the acceptance of unrelated issues, it is blackmail.

What Malta needs, and demands, from its political leaders is a genuinely negotiated reform in the conduct of elections and the running of parliament that has long been overdue.

Related issues that have been raised and need to be addressed are Parliament's autonomy, the size of the Cabinet, the number of MPs, and a suitable building to house Parliament.

Let us be frank.

¤ Not giving Parliament autonomy betrays a desire to control it in indirect ways.

¤ The proportion of MPs to the size of the electorate is too high. It becomes worse when the number is increased to correct a perverse electoral result.

¤ Far bigger countries like Switzerland manage to get along, quite efficiently, with far fewer ministers than we have.

¤ Many countries have ministers who are not MPs.

¤ The time has come to consider whether Parliament would benefit from full-time members who are not denied other declared part-time occupations.

¤ A purpose-built building for Parliament is required, but public support is not likely to be forthcoming unless Parliament's prestige improves.

The next general election is not due until another two years. The political parties represented in Parliament have the opportunity to demonstrate that they are mature enough to put the national interest above anything else, and are ready to sit down and co-operate to make elections as fairly representative as possible, and Parliament more autonomous, dignified and effective in its operation. I have a suspicion that this opportunity is likely to be missed.

The biggest mistake that a political party can make is to believe that the national interest is synonymous with its own interest and that of its Members of Parliament, and therefore the electorate has no alternative but to vote it into power. Such illusions of grandeur can lead to self-destruction.