Referring to the editorial "Change and renewal" (TMID, 11 September), I think that one needs to reconsider what was said.

According to the editorial there are many considerations that need to be made by the people before they cast their vote. Agreeing to that, I cannot understand the way the floating voters were portrayed. How can anyone say that "the road that the country has embarked upon is one that is steady, reliable and has brought prosperity"?

Of course, at this stage whatever the Labour Party promises is somewhat yet to be seen, and although I hope that they keep their word, our country cannot find itself in a worse state. On the other hand after 20 years of PN government what have we really achieved? I honestly am unable to see the so-called "new style of government".

I agree once again that these floating voters would be looking at other matters, rather than just faces. Looking at the proposals from both sides is already evident how serious some are compared to others. It is absurd to only look on the positive side of the past 20 years, because it’s not that I do not accept mistakes - after all MPs are human - but it is repetitive mistakes which do get on my nerves. On the other hand, I doubt that there is a question of whether the MLP have managed to renew itself due to the fact of loads of proposals all piled up in one booklet that includes much more than just the regeneration of the Grand Harbour area.

However, if anyone is still in doubt, I will make just one point. We all should remember what the Labour Party did and some of which we luckily still have today. One can begin from the welfare state and go on to free education, free hospitals and not very expensive medicine.

Nikita Zammit

St Julian’s