If President Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca struck a responsive chord with most people in her address on Republic Day, it is only because what she said is true and because the collection of concerns eating away at the fabric of society is growing bigger.

Together with the Archbishop, who is also doing his bit to make the country realise the extent of the social ills facing the country, the President is making sure that, as guardian of the Constitution, she does not hold back from speaking her mind.

That is exactly what she did when she referred to the growing hate speech on the social media; the antics of politicians; social exclusion; overcrowding of residential areas; traffic delays; migrants’ rights; precarious work and other matters of direct concern.

For doing what she believed was her duty, some might have wondered whether, as President, she overstepped her mark when speaking about certain issues that strictly fall within the policymaking ambit of the government, such as her stand over migration. The President is clearly against sending back to their country of origin migrants who have now been here for some years.

This is a feeling that is shared by many but it runs against the government’s recent decision to deport a number of migrants after the Home Affairs Ministry decided to halt the temporary humanitarian protection status for failed asylum seekers as from next year. Why should not the President be allowed to express her mind on this or, for that matter, championing the cause of those who are elbowed out, or are on the fringes, of society in terms of either material gain or rights?

A most distressing outcome of her speech though is the impertinency of those self-appointed champions of all that is right in the two mainstream parties who quickly, and brazenly, concluded that some of the key shortcomings she spoke about applied only to their opponents. It may well be argued that such reaction was as predictable as is the fact that the more the general election date approaches the keener the political environment is bound to get. Even so, moderates find all this so frustrating to bear.

Hate speech has always been a hallmark of the local political scene. What has changed today is that, whereas in the past this was resorted to either verbally or in a few virulent publications, today it has much greater diffusion through the social media. Many are under the mistaken impression that they can say whatever they like on the internet.

One problem is that, while lip service is paid to the need for moderation, particularly at this time of the year, political parties and individual politicians make no meaningful efforts to bring this about. Their concern over unrestrained political partisanship is not usually backed by concrete actions or example, as shown by the speeches and remarks they make both in and out of Parliament. These are getting more inflammatory.

Insofar as the social media is concerned, moderators have a huge part to play to bring back sanity to this new mode of communication which, well used, can enrich the democratic process. Singling out as culprits one or two bloggers, or this or thatfront, will not do. The wider picture is more complex.

It was refreshing too to see the President touching on the impact overdevelopment and overcrowding in residential areas can have on the quality of life. This is a matter that is as worrying to many people today as the traffic congestions on our roads.