A government appointed working group will be finalising its recommendations about teen party regulations "shortly", we were informed last Monday.

In the meantime, self-styled children's party organiser (because yes, twelve and thirteen year olds are still children in my book) Joel Caruana has gone on record saying that he wishes the debate for stronger regulations on teen parties would take place swiftly.

Nothing remarkable about this in itself. Even I happen to believe that there is no need to take months to decide the obvious. The issue, for those who need their memories jogged, was first brought to light by The Times in a report that showed thirteen-year-olds dressed in a way that would make the Striscia veline blush. A temporary ban was imposed on these parties until more definite action could be taken.

Now, five months later, we are assured that proposals will be tabled soon. As soon as this happens, government will "start evaluating" these proposals. Eventually – probably in about six months' time, judging by the way things have proceeded so far – some sort of action might be taken.

Seriously? An issue that should have led to our authorities immediately coming down on these party organisers like a ton of bricks was somehow turned into a four-tier process: a temporary banning, the appointment of a working group, the presenting of said working group's findings and finally, government reaction to these findings.

How long will it take "government" to release a statement saying what has been obvious to everyone all along? Just revoke these cowboys' licence permanently and be done with it. Oh and while you're about it, slapping a fine to discourage further incidents wouldn't be such a bad idea either. If I'm made to pay a fine every time I stop for five minutes on a yellow line, I don't see why someone who encourages a thirteen-year-old to act like a street-walker shouldn't get an even bigger fine. Or worse.

In the meantime we have to put up with cheek from the likes of Mr Caruana, who very selflessly called for the debate "to take place swiftly, taking into account the needs of teens to have a good time". I'm sure it's the interest of teenagers that Mr Caruana is thinking about, as opposed to all the missed revenue while the ban remains in place.

What worries me is not that teens have nowhere where they can "have a good time". It's more the fact the organiser of the parties was granted a licence to work with teens in the first place. Equally worrying is the fact that beyond a temporary banning of the events themselves, his licence has not yet been permanently revoked.

And even more worryingly, since the whole debacle in October, there don't seem to have been any legal repercussions for the chap. Now that, in my book, is way more urgent on the scale of priorities than the fact that a thirteen-year-old is not being allowed to strut her stuff in Paceville.