Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1545509
9 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 24 JUNE 2026 OPINION A question of merit or tokenism in government PUBLIC debate continues to focus on the gender corrective mechanism. Unfortunately, much of this discussion has al- so turned into criticism—and at times outright insult—towards the women elected through this system and the way they entered parliament. Some argue that the mechanism allows for the elec- tion of incompetent women who do not deserve a parliamentary seat. Strikingly, such criticism does not come only from men but also from women them- selves. Before rushing to judgement, however, it is important to re- flect on what has actually tak- en place and to ask why wom- en were not elected in greater numbers through the tradition- al electoral process. We must examine who was chosen dur- ing the initial counts and who secured seats without the need for corrective intervention. The pattern is evident—the vast majority of candidates elected in the first counts were men. For example, within the Labour Party, most of those elected directly were men, with only a small number of wom- en reaching parliament at that stage. This reflects a broader reality—voters tend to place their trust in candidates who already occupy positions of authority and visibility, par- ticularly ministers and par- liamentary secretaries. These individuals benefit from sus- tained exposure, established political profiles, and the op- portunity to demonstrate their performance in office. While both men and women were elected through casual elections, six women ultimate- ly entered parliament through the gender corrective mecha- nism. Yet when one examines the composition of the Maltese Cabinet, the picture remains largely unchanged. The same established ministers continue to hold key positions, along- side a limited number of high- ly visible women. This raises a legitimate question: Does this represent meaningful gender equality, or does it amount to a continued form of tokenism? The issue becomes even more complex when considering candidates who receive fewer votes. Does a lower vote count automatically imply a lack of competence or suitability for parliamentary work? The vot- ing process itself must be scru- tinised. Voters often support candidates who have already demonstrated their abilities in public office. Others gain sup- port through intensive cam- paigning, close engagement with constituents, and respon- siveness to local needs. In some cases, electoral success is also shaped by personal networks and exchanges of favours. But does obtaining the high- est number of votes necessar- ily make a candidate the most competent? And is a system that rewards popularity, visi- bility, and patronage the most effective way to choose those who will legislate on behalf of the country? In a society where both men and women are reaching high levels of educa- tion and professional expertise, parliamentary representation should be grounded in com- petence, knowledge, and lead- ership, rather than popularity alone. Electoral districts further re- inforce existing inequalities. Candidates competing in dis- tricts dominated by established political figures face a signif- icant disadvantage, as votes tend to concentrate around well-known ministers. As a re- sult, capable newcomers often struggle to gain visibility and support, regardless of their abilities. In this context, newcomers— regardless of gender—should be supported through positive measures that enhance their visibility and allow for fairer competition. Fresh perspec- tives and new ideas are essen- tial in parliament, and the po- tential of first-time candidates should not be underestimated. Ultimately, there is a strong argument for strengthening party-based voting rather than focusing excessively on in- dividual candidates. Cabinet formation should be based on competence, while also en- suring genuine inclusivity and diversity. Diversity, however, must be understood in broader terms—not only gender, but al- so sexual orientation, age rep- resentation, and the inclusion of persons with disabilities, many of whom continue to face structural barriers in accessing voters and competing on equal terms. If parliament is to truly reflect Maltese society, the debate must move beyond simplistic assumptions about who is or is not deserving of office. Instead, it should focus on building a political system that values competence, fairness, inclu- sivity, and equal opportunity for all—without reducing rep- resentation to tokenism. Vania Agius Tabone Labour Party election candidate in 2026 The opening of parliament took place on Saturday (Photo: James Bianchi/MaltaToday) If parliament is to truly reflect Maltese society, the debate must move beyond simplistic assumptions about who is or is not deserving of office This raises a legitimate question: Does this represent meaning ful gender equality, or does it amount to a continued form of tokenism?