I would like to praise you on your excellent editorial (The future of AD and AN, TMID, 9 July). In a few lines it really analysed the current political scenario vis a vis the welfare of the third and fourth party in the last election. It really hit the nail on the head as far as describing what the third and fourth parties were aiming to accomplish, especially where AD is concerned: “convince people that the two party system was not ideal for Malta and that a third or fourth presence in the House of Representatives would have made things better”. I think no one can disagree with you when you say that “they made little headway and... fared so badly”.

However, where I’d like to disagree with you is when you think it right and valid to ask them, including AD, “to reconsider their position”; in a few words, you seem to be saying “why don’t they give up?” I think the answer is simple and extremely crucial and that is why I find it important to point it out: it may sound too “good to be true” or even unbelievable in the political world of today, but it is an inspired vision that keeps AD going.

AD dreams and guided by this vision works disinterestedly for a more pluralistic and democratic society.

Do you think that if it was driven by an insatiable thirst for power, wouldn’t it have given up and gone home many years ago?

Wouldn’t AD have gained more had it sold out to other parties many years ago?

Why pay such a high price of time, human and financial resources for so little return?

Yet the existence of this duopoly is enough to give AD the scope for its existence. It might sound passè and even naive today to have a vision and work towards an ideal, but I’m all for things which are passè and naive if they drive people to work for a more democratic peaceful society that promotes co-operation rather than a monopoly of power and a respect for its environment, all its people, all minorities included. It is thanks to AD’s pragmatic work that has been guided by this vision that many issues are now on the national agenda.

Indeed, they have taken an incredible feat upon themselves when one goes into the list of what they have against them – limited financial and human resources, the electoral system, and a political cultural duopolist mentality that has been fossilized through the years together with the hard competition of the strong voices of the main parties that reduce AD’s voice to a squeak.

It’s like an ant trying to push an elephant and so, they need all the support they can get. So, I’d like to request that instead of asking small parties to give up, you encourage and support pluralism, and furthermore, support people that work disinterestedly for a vision, instead of asking them to give up especially since, many times, it has been thanks to these people that societies have changed and evolved to the better.

Louisa Houlton

Attard