Should this general election be based on issues or on personalities? Different positions are being taken and people on each side are accusing those on the other side with political immaturity. This is a debate that is really not needed because the campaign should be based on both the issues and the personalities.

Undoubtedly, issues are very important. Electors have the duty and the right to know what the political parties stand for. Political parties, on the other hand, are in duty bound to spell out in a clear and concrete way the changes they are proposing and the plans they will enact once in power.

Voters have to analyse the electoral programmes in themselves and in the light of past performance. Which party has the best economic policies that will see the country through the clouds that are on the horizon? Which party gives importance to questions of social justice and gives attention to the groups on the fringe of society? Are the parties proposing things which will benefit the country in the long run or are they proposing short-term populist measures that are nothing more than electoral gimmicks? Will the common good be really served? How affordable are the measures that are being proposed? Which party has the best vision for the future? Which party can offer good governance for the long term?

Voters are obliged to study the political programmes but this is only part of the story. A couple of comparisons would help to illustrate this point. Mozart wrote fantastic music which would not sound so good were it to be played by a second-class orchestra under a bad conductor. The Greeks without Alexander the Great would probably not have conquered what they actually did.

The same applies to politics. Well-written and produced electoral programmes in the hand of mediocre politicians will bring no country any success. It would be worse if inefficient or, God forbid, dishonest politicians are involved. Therefore, it is essential for personalities to be discussed. People have the right and duty to inform themselves about the politicians that present themselves for an election. The electors should put the spotlight on all candidates but especially they should put the spotlight on the leaders of the party. In modern democracies the role of the leader of any political party is pivotal and s/he would have to bear most of the heat.

This country's political system is inherently based on issues and personalities. Voters do not only choose between different parties but are also asked to choose between different candidates. In fact, electors can shift from one candidate to another even if they come from different political parties. Most cross voting - which generally is very little - is based on personalities. Issues and personalities during an electoral campaign are like the two sides of a coin. One is not complete without the other.

Quite naturally, discussing personalities does not mean shooting from the hip and slinging mud at them. Character assassination campaigns by the media or through the grapevine should be a no-no. The choice between one candidate and another or between one leader and another has to be a principled one based on an analysis of competence emanating from a deep sense of respect for the person concerned.

In their Lent Pastoral letter, the Bishops reminded the faithful that political discussions have to be characterised by "more reciprocal respect and love in discourses and judgements". It should not be a free for all. The Bishops' message was followed up by those of the political leaders. Announcing the election date, the Prime Minister augured that during the electoral campaign the dignity and rights of all are respected. The leader of the Labour Party appealed for a tranquil campaign during which political forces communicate their proposals.

That is a good start. May it lead to a result that gives victory to the party which is presenting the best issues and personalities.