When a book on parliament aimed at secondary school students was launched a few days ago, a number of speakers argued that there is great ignorance about what parliament actually does.
They were right. The publication of such a book and efforts to strengthen political education in general are arguably long overdue.
Parliament, obviously, is not a simple talking shop with each side doing its best to shout out the other.
It is an institution which is separate from the government itself, and which can keep the government in check through its votes and parliamentary questions. It also is responsible for approving new laws, can propose them itself – as the divorce legislation introduced last year showed – and refine bills during debates.
One may be forgiven for thinking otherwise, but government and Opposition MPs often find themselves in agreement, and consensus is common. On many issues, a vote is not even called as a result.
The book, which is written by historian Henry Frendo, also goes into parliament’s history, describing the run-up to the establishment of a national parliament in 1921, on the strength of a Constitution drafted in the wake of the Sette Giugno riots.
But to some extent, the book may be disingenuous in glossing over parliament’s less savoury aspects. Parliament may be more than arguments and controversy, but it is also that.
The book pays little attention to events which happened in the recent past. A section on historic debates, for instance, only mentions a number which took place in the past 30 years, without going in detail.
Speaker Michael Frendo noted that parliament reached a consensus over the book – perhaps it is hardly surprising that it does not elaborate on issues on which the two main parties remain divided to this day.
But we’ve had a parliament that has not held a vote since a government MP abstained from a confidence vote in the government last January. All too often, debates on issues of national importance are hijacked by MPs who pander to their constituents with little regard to the topic at hand.
Last year, MPs avoided a controversial vote on divorce through a referendum, only for some to disregard the outcome in the subsequent vote to vote according to their “conscience”. And a parliamentary committee on the strengthening of democracy has not met in years, after a dispute over whether – embarrassingly enough – an MP said yes or no in a contentious vote.
Such behaviour is far from exemplary. But the history of parliament is also made up of things one may not be as proud of.
Of course, such avoidance of controversy when retelling a country’s history is far from rare; that the Knights of Malta’s raids of Muslim ships had a hand in provoking the Great Siege is hardly mentioned, for instance.
That said, the book remains a welcome addition to school libraries, especially if it is wisely used, as such resources – coupled with proper education efforts – can turn students into informed citizens.
Over time, this in itself could help improve standards in parliament and the country’s other institutions as people’s expectations grow, and their tolerance of the antics which continue making the news – and which likely strengthen people’s misconceptions of what parliament actually does – diminishes.
One can only hope.