Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1387622
Charlene Giordmaina is a member of Life Network Malta Charlene Giordmaina 12 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 27 JUNE 2021 OPINION Irrespective of whether the majority of the electorate bases its vote on that manifesto or not, the party elected to government must ensure that it implements the promises made in that manifesto, nothing more, nothing less LET us say a general election has just been announced and you are weighing your options as to which political party, or parties, you will be voting for when you cast your vote on elec- tion day. On what basis are you going to decide your vote? One element, amongst others, which should always play an important part when making such a deci- sion would be to analyse what the respective political parties are promising to the electorate. Such promises come in the form of an electoral manifesto. The late British Labour pol- itician and former Cabinet Minister Peter Shore once de- scribed electoral manifestos as "a party's contract with the electorate", and that is what a manifesto is all about; it is about a political party entering into a contract with the elec- torate that, should it be elected to government, it will adhere to and ensure the implementation of those specific promises. An electoral manifesto is not just a piece of paper to make the po- litical party look attractive and appealing to the electorate, it is much more than that. Irrespec- tive of whether the majority of the electorate bases its vote on that manifesto or not, the par- ty elected to government must ensure that it implements the promises made in that mani- festo, nothing more, nothing less. The rationale behind the po- litical manifesto submitted to the public prior to a general election is clear – each respec- tive political party officially declares what its agenda and priority areas in a number of fields shall be, should that po- litical party be elected to gov- ernment. Prior to the 2017 General Election, both parties present- ed their respective electoral manifesto. Let's take the La- bour Party's electoral man- ifesto – LGBTIQ rights, de- criminalisation of cannabis and prostitution, as well as the introduction of cremation were mentioned black on white under the civil rights section. One has every right to disagree with these proposals, but one of course cannot say that these proposals did not form part of the Labour government's agen- da. The same can be said for the Nationalist Party. One topic, however, which both the Labour Party and the Nationalist Party electoral manifesto failed to address is abortion. So how can we say that the government, or the opposition, and much less so, an individual member of Parliament, has an electoral mandate to introduce abortion in Malta when this is not what the public voted for? To make matters worse, the de- criminalisation of abortion bill was presented in Parliament by a member of parliament that first was elected as part of a political coalition between PN and the short-lived PD, and then later resigned to become an independent MP. This goes against the principle of good governance. In addition, abortion was not just on any electoral manifes- to, but up till a very few weeks prior to the 2017 general elec- tion, both the Labour Party and the Nationalist Party were insisting that abortion was not on the agenda. In fact, in the first of a series of political de- bates organised by the Broad- casting Authority during the 2017 electoral campaign, Forza Nazzjonali, which was being represented by amongst others Dr Marlene Farrugia herself as leader of PD, declared that it is categorically against abortion, because the parties (i.e. the parties constituting Forza Naz- zjonali, these being the Nation- alist Party and the Democratic Party led by Marlene Farrugia) believed in the sanctity of life. Having bound herself by this electoral pledge Dr Marlene Farrugia would be short-chang- ing the very essence of being truthful to one's electorate and outrightly violating any sense of political decency and hones- ty with the electorate. Dr Far- rugia cannot decide to change track simply because it now suits her political agenda to do so. The very least an electorate can expect from the political parties and representatives it elects to Parliament is trans- parency and clarity as to what their political agenda is. Prom- ising one thing because at the time it might not be so popular to promise otherwise, and then doing the exact opposite a few years down the line during the same legislature just because you might feel that that topic is now more popular, or just because you are attempting to salvage your political future, is unfounded. This clearly shows that no political party, much less so an individual MP, has an electoral mandate to introduce abortion in Malta at present. A mandate to deceive