In one of his iconic contributions Lino Spiteri (May 14) commented on the decision of Adrian Vassallo to “not seek re-election”. Then he went on to opine that “an MP who disagrees strongly enough with his party is obliged, according to this principle, to give... back his seat by resigning”.

The “principle” Mr Spiteri refers to here is one by which the bulk of a candidate’s votes would “come to him on the strength of the party ticket”. Does it indeed?

I suggest that what Mr Spiteri wrote is necessary but not sufficient. For on the other side of the coin lies another truth that sees the bulk of a political party’s votes in a general election come to it on the strength of its candidates’ personal popularity with the voters of their respective constituency.

If anyone has any doubt about this all one has to do is take a critical look at the election propaganda material sent out by candidates in the run-up to general elections. Invariably, this contains prominent pictures of the candidate, as well as lengthy eulogies of his or her prowess, accompanied by a little, unassuming party logo tucked away in some corner with just enough prominence as is absolutely necessary to make it clear which side of the House the candidate would sit on if elected.

If, as Mr Spiteri suggested, a candidate’s votes came to him (or her) “on the strength of the party ticket” we should not need to have long lists of candidates to choose from in a general election.

Indeed, we should not even need to have any electoral districts! Instead, we could elect a party to govern and we should be able to do this much more easily if we had just one electoral district and a short list of parties and independent candidates, if any, leaving it up to the respective party leaders to pick as many members of the House from among their fold as the votes gained by their party would permit.

Then, yes, Mr Spiteri would be absolutely correct: a member of Parliament who disagreed strongly enough with his party would be obliged to give up his or her seat.

However, if one were to apply Mr Spiteri’s rational line of reasoning to the current state of affairs, one should conclude exactly the opposite, that is, a party that sees one of its candidates disagreeing strongly enough with it should be obliged to give back to that candidate the votes he or she gained for it in a general election.

It can do this very easily and very simply by giving that candidate the liberty to use his or her vote in Parliament as he or she deems fit.