It has been much touted of late to reduce the voting age to 16. Whatever one's perception of this, it remains nevertheless highly debatable and controversial. Moreover, it flies in the face of the current perceived wisdom of forward-thinking governments who are actively considering increasing the age limit in this and other crucial issues such as the age to legally drive a motor vehicle.

However, what is truly remarkable is that it is considered appropriate and age-compliant, not to say non-discriminatory, for Maltese citizens to have reached the grand age of 25 before being legally entitled to enter a casino (I mentioned discriminatory as foreign citizens are considered much more mature and eligible to enter at 21).

How disparate and obtuse is this dichotomy which, I say again, may be determined as parochial and iniquitous.

It is apparently envisaged as perfectly acceptable and accountable to allow a 16-year-old to have the right to contribute to such monumental and ground-breaking decisions as electing members of Parliament or the local council or other massively vital decisions relating to our future heritage but not to even think about having the right to play Black Jack in a casino until they are in their dotage (OK, so 25 cannot realistically be considered as such but hopefully you get my drift!).

Let's get real before it's too late!