Individuals, organisations and political parties that make proposals on national, local and other matters are always seen as people who want to make a contribution towards the development of their locality or country, and as such their suggestions are always appreciated.

The present government encourages public participation in matters of national interest, and in recent years the people have had their chance to put forward suggestions and recommendations, for example, before the budget is presented. Gone are the days when the budget was a closely-kept secret that hit the nation when it was presented in Parliament.

Whether the government then accepts or adopts one or more of the proposals made is an altogether different matter. The government must take everything into consideration before making up its mind, and must do everything in the best interest of the country, and not of particular sectors or individuals. A balance needs to be found between improving the standard of living and keeping the country’s overall sustainability on the right track.

This is why many of the suggestions made are not implemented, or are at best watered down heavily before they are. It is easy, when you are not responsible for the country’s administration, to make wild proposals, thinking that they could come to be at the push of a button. It is much more difficult to transform suggestions into reality because, after all, everything costs money.

Alternattiva Demokratika’s suggestion to have the maternity leave doubled from 13 to 26 weeks is among those suggestions that everyone would be in favour of implementing – but such an idea is grossly unfeasible when everything is taken into account.

It would be an ideal situation for mothers to remain with their newly-born child for six months, rather than three. But, on the other hand, such a measure is not sustainable, from the financial point of view as well as in terms of office administration problems.

AD have offered a solution to make up for the additional costs – that the extra 13 weeks are paid for by the government in the form of a flat allowance of Lm70 per week, which would amount to nearly Lm1,000 per mother. Again, easy to say it, but can the country afford it? Or will AD then be the first to criticise the government for raising taxes in order to sustain this measure?

And, apart from the money, AD must say how employers will make up for an extra 13 weeks of absence.

This proposal is similar to the one made by the Malta Labour Party, which said that it will halve the water and electricity surcharge when it is elected to government. It’s a great idea, and families and businesses would be happy about it, but the MLP has never said how it is going to sustain such a measure. It has not done so because it knows that it would mean that something else would have to be taxed.

The money has to come from somewhere – and in both cases, it would effectively mean that the government must make up for the added expenses by getting more money in from other quarters. But both AD and the MLP fail to say what they will do to implement their suggestions.

AD has also suggested the introduction of a supplementary child allowance of Lm160 per annum for every child up to the age of 16, and in the same breath, proposed tax cuts too. Do they think that money is growing on trees?

Political parties not in opposition have the tendency – and this not only in Malta – to try to gain popular support by suggesting measures that the government should introduce and then criticising it if it does not. It would be interesting to see whether these parties will actually implement what they are saying now when they are elected.

That would be a different story, wouldn’t it?