A few weeks ago, the Malta Labour Party issued a draft document with the title Lejn Ugwaljanza Shiha Bejn in-Nisa u l-Irgiel’ (Towards full equality between women and men).

The first thing that struck me was the word “full” in the title. It seems that the MLP consider doing things in different measures and this time they intend equality to be in full, as if there can be half or a quarter. This reminds me of “full membership” against the partnership during the EU referendum campaign.

Although the title, which happens to be very flimsy, hints at women and men, the document is all about women.

The introduction starts with what has always been the MLP’s policy with regard to women. Although for some the past may be dead and buried, one cannot help but remember that Labour did not always abide by this policy. In fact there was a time when women in government employment could not retain their jobs if they got married. There was also a time when a post vacated by a man could not be filled by a woman, irrespective how capable she was.

In the introduction, the author also cries out the need for strong legislation to combat discrimination. I wonder where these people were when the Act for the Promotion of Equality between Women and Men was passed through Parliament. The MLP has also come up with the idea of setting up a monitoring body. The government has already set up the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality, which is the body that serves as a watchdog to ensure that no discrimination against either women or men occurs. It is interesting to note that the MLP is represented on the board of this same commission, thus supposedly having an active role.

The first section, entitled Being Pro-Active, refers to the Act for the Promotion of Equality between women and men as being weak and reflecting only EU directives. This contradicts what was written in the introduction, where the reader was given the impression that there is no such legislation yet. The document also states that the law needs to be amended, yet no concrete proposals are given, save for a feeble statement saying that the definition of discrimination needs to be widened.

This document states that the NCPE should be empowered more. Agreed. But what the author refers to is already being done by the commission. Reference is made to other legislation regarding the termination of employment and moral damages. It seems that the author has forgotten that there is a very detailed and fine-tuned Employment Relations Act.

Another area to which the document refers is family law, and again the author writes as if there is nothing at present in this respect. It is good to remember that the government set up the Family Court and mediation services so that separation cases do not drag on for years.

In the meantime, the government is doing its utmost to fight poverty and social exclusion in all areas of social policy. Various measures are being taken in order to ensure that women do not suffer from poverty. Areas covered include social accommodation (shared ownership scheme), social benefits and taxation (amendments for part-timers). There is also the National Action Plan against Poverty and Social Exclusion.

The document goes on to refer to the integration of a male and female perspective in government work and speaks about a monitoring structure to ensure that this strategy is implemented. Again the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality has already done a great deal in this area. It has participated in ESF projects to ensure gender mainstreaming and it also ensures that all policies implemented by Government entities are gender mainstreamed. The NCPE has even issued circulars to this effect.

While acknowledging that the number of women at decision-taking level is still relatively low, this cannot be improved by quotas. Although the government has appointed female ambassadors, members of the judiciary – serving both locally and at EU level, and other women in top posts, these women were appointed in their own personal capacity and not simply because they are women.

The document continues on the same note, ie as if they are reinventing the wheel. In fact in the section dedicated to employment, training for women returning to the labour market is treated as a novelty. Both MCAST and ETC have been organising such courses, most of them funded through the EU.

No reference is made by the author to pension credits for those who opt to take time off to take care of their family, nor is there any reference to the tax holiday introduced a couple of years ago aimed at women returning to work after a period of five years.

Another issue referred to in this document is a support structure to encourage women to report sexual harassment. In fact, a policy on sexual harassment is already in place. The onus is now on the perpetrator to prove innocence rather than the victim.

The document also refers to tele-working. At present, a pilot project involving a number of entities has already taken place to investigate the option of tele-working where possible. The author also cries out for the need to come up with a media campaign. NCPE has already, for quite some time, embarked on an intensive media campaign, using role models to encourage more couples into sharing family responsibilities.

Another “brilliant” idea mentioned is the creation of pro-rata benefits for part-time workers. Allow me to point out that this benefit has already been introduced in this year’s budget.

The document refers to the MLP’s policy on domestic violence and to the White Paper that was published in 1998. It should be pointed out that the White Paper was very restricted, while the Domestic Violence Act covers a much wider spectrum. The document proposes that legal action cannot be stopped, even if the victim requests it. This is already enacted in the law. Only the Courts can decide to stop proceedings and no one else can do so. Apart from the legal framework there are also the necessary support structures such as Agenzija Appogg and the shelters for victims of domestic violence. Training is an ongoing process for both social workers and psychologists. And, last but not least, punishment for perpetrators is much harsher than it used to be.

This 12-page document is supposed to highlight the MLP’s policy on gender equality. But leafing through it has left me with a feeling of déjà vu for two reasons. The first is the fact that what is being proposed in most cases has already being implemented by the Nationalist Government, and the other is because it has the same traits common to all MLP documents, that is, weak arguments hurriedly compiled into flimsy documents.

Michelle Mallia is president of the Nationalist Party Women’s Movement