Each and every democracy has its own way of making politics and the differences are never more stark than when one watches parliamentary sessions.

Ever since Malta’s House of Representatives moved to the new chamber, with all its new fangled media streaming facilities and live televised debates brought out some of the more unsavoury aspects of our politicians.

But Malta’s parliament is then tame compared to scenes that are often witnessed in parliamentary chambers around the world where flour bombs, food fights, and even full blown punch-ups take place.

Malta’s old parliament chamber was quite similar to the House of Commons in the UK, although it did not have the middle part where Question Time, and in particular Prime Minister’s Question Time takes place.

But that is more or less where it ends. The House of Commons is stooped in democratic history. It was designed in such a way as to allow two swords’ lengths to divide the government and opposition benches.

Over time, British parliamentary sessions evolved to become some of the most captivating examples of politicians squaring off, using a mixture of fact, mockery, wit, intelligence and genuine flair in flying by seat of one’s pants.

A perfect such example was David Cameron’s last session of PMQs on Wednesday. He and Mr Corbyn squared off one last time. It was entirely civil, with the opposition praising Mr Cameron’s government, but it was also loaded with barbs from both sides. The front for it all was questions about affordable housing, but between the lines, there were digs about the disorder that Labour finds itself in, with the Labour leader retorting that he far enjoys being part of a democratic choice, rather than the machinations which led to a successor to Mr Cameron being found swiftly. It then went on to include fashion advice by Mr Cameron’s mother, Mr Cameron bossing Theresa May around and Larry the Chief Mouser.

All the while, the discourse was still firmly political. And this is where we seem to have it a bit wrong. Malta’s parliament now operates in a hemisphere seating arrangement, which is supposed to foster more dialogue and discussion between the two sides.

Instead, we have brought people into seating arrangements that do not go with the Maltese style of politics, which is very much confrontational. But rather than go for banter, wit and victory through intelligence, our politicians seem to just increase in decibel volume as they go along and hurl insults at each other.

It has been seen time and time again, and the Prime Minister (although he can sometimes be prone to an outburst of anger) has appealed for more calm heads, as has the Speaker of the House, as has the leader of the Opposition.

So, here’s an idea. Why don’t we introduce PMQs ? Once a week should suffice. And then the leader of the Opposition and the PM can really set the example. They can make a difference. And people would probably be quite interested in watching it.

Some might say that it’s too dangerous for the government, but it is not. In telling the House that he had taken over 90,000 PQs, Mr Cameron said he would leave it up to others to judge how many he had actually answered. And that is where the deft skill of political wit comes in. We should have a go, it will probably lead to better behaviour in parliament. It would also boost the performance of the political leaders. But, you have to hand it to them, no one does it, nor can do PMQs like the Brits can.