This is a country facing many problems: the imminent closure of our historic dockyard; the near bankruptcy of Enemalta; the rising cost of living, a growing inflation; the ever-increasing flow of a culturally-different people fleeing their country and in the process creating problems in ours; the threat of the introduction of divorce as a symptom of the decline of the strong traditional Maltese family, which will inevitably be followed by other progressive values such as same-sex unions and abortion; the near disappearance of all values as the doctrine of non-judgmentalism takes hold; the abdication of responsibility by government departments; an increasing shyness towards work on the part of the Maltese worker; a devastating drug problem; the gaping hole created in our health service by the building of Mater Dei Hospital. But why go on? Salvation is at hand.

Give the vote to 16-year-olds and all will be healed, according to the new leader of the MLP, the Youth Section of the PN and, of course, AD.

These new "elites" have agreed that those in favour will constitute the "progressive" echelons of the country while those against will inevitably be labelled as old fashioned, bigoted and narrow minded.

This idea is so truly earth-shaking that others have now jumped in claiming to have been they who proposed it way back. The MLP leader is trying to go back to the roots of his party, to the days when it too boasted of having created a progressive society; one that channelled youth into the Labour Brigata, that encouraged young and old to flout authority and mock spiritual values. That first progressive experiment gave us a generation of recruits for the infamous MLP Eighth Army, a generation that grew up believing that smashing things and people was their right; that it was the way a citizen should express himself. It was that "progressive" society that heralded the present fragmentation of society, where individual rights triumph over responsibilities and the collective good.

The MLP leader is, of course, hoping to cash in on his youth and evidently trying to win back a generation that has been weaned away from the MLP by the introduction of new skills and technologies together with the EU horizons that have been dangled in front of their eyes. It is in this context that one must see his call for a debate on divorce, his use of the word "progressive", which is meant to appeal to the young. Little does he care that in elevating the young he is also elevating the lack of values that so many of them loudly proclaim. In this he is joined by AD, a party that too wants to change the world and knows that it can only do so by pandering to the inexperienced but eager youth.

Regarding the MLP leader's proposal to apply his idea first in local council elections, I would like to think that there is nothing wrong, in theory, for 16-year olds to contribute to their locality. But we all know how apathetic voting in local elections is and there is no reason to believe that, by including teenagers, this will change.

The MLP leader also seemed to suggest that this would depoliticise councils. This is a complete pie in the sky. His former leader, years back when Joseph Muscat was 16 years old himself, initially refused to contest council elections, rightly believing that the local council should be kept above politics. Though he gave in to political pressure, an unbiased observer must agree that he was right originally. Our districts are not governed by local councils but by the two main parties through their local representatives. What has changed? We now spend more money on elections that occur every year, thus increasing our addiction to divisive politics.

But, of course, participating in local elections is not the real aim. It is simply a diversion. If a teenager can vote in local councillors, why shouldn't he also vote in the country's national representatives? If a teenager can vote in local elections, why cannot he have a driving licence, drink alcohol legally, marry, be named in court cases, be called to take part in responsible civic functions? You cannot apply maturity selectively. If one is mature enough to vote, then one is mature enough to claim the full rights and responsibilities of citizenship. But may I here commend the reader to Winston Churchill's words: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter".

So instead of choosing the simplest road to make our local councils really represent their community by including those capable and experienced people who do not want to have anything to do with party politics, we add to our bickering local councils and to the national division by separating Labour youth from Nationalist youth in their own communities from the age of 16. All in the name of political expediency.

What our small country, so lacking in resources, requires are systems that will enable intelligent, honest, successful people to contribute to the upgrading of their localities in harmony, animated only by their desire to improve the lives of their fellow citizens. There is no place for further strife in the local councils. This country is dying for a sensible approach to the innumerable, real problems it faces. Any leader that resorts to cosmetic proposals in his quest for votes, which results in further splintering our society, may be a good spin doctor but hardly a statesman and certainly no lover of his country.