Parliament will reconvene after the summer recess this evening, with Malta’s MPs returning to Valletta to continue to thrash out the country’s legislative future.

A number of topics are on the table for discussion, with motions on various subjects such as the Constitution, the appointment of persons of trust, and an act dealing with architects all part of the agenda of the first day back in the House.  Changes to several other bills are also on the agenda.

This is not to mention the budget, which will be discussed later this month and which is perhaps one of the more anticipated budgets of recent years given the economic effect that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the country over the past seven months.

There is also further interest this time round, with the Opposition now having a new leader in Bernard Grech to go toe-to-toe with Prime Minister Robert Abela, with a reshuffle of the shadow cabinet expected to be high on Grech’s agenda.

Much can be said about Malta’s parliament – it’s work can be discussed, and its size, especially in Malta’s context – where there are more MPs per capita than any other country in the European Union, can also be a particularly hot topic of debate.

However, given the occasion of the parliament’s restart, it is a good opportunity to focus on a less-talked about facet of what happens inside the marble-cladded Parliament building; the attitude towards discussion and disagreement.

Unfortunately, it is not the first time that a discussion within parliament descends into near-farce following a shouting match between people on either side of the House, leaving Speaker Anglu Farrugia with no option but to remind the MPs involved that they are not in some sort of street-market or to even suspend the sitting entirely till the heads are cleared.

Of course, the ability and allowance to disagree is a fundamental part of democracy – however, there is a way and a means to go about it.

It is no secret that Maltese society is one that is dominated by tribalism – be it politics, footballing allegiances, religious feasts or anything else. We’ve heard the discourse time and time again from politicians that society needs to unite and forget about partisan influences.

Talking the talk is fine; walking the walk is an altogether different prospect.  Parliamentarians would do well to understand that with every needless shouting match they engage into, they are only further supporting the country’s tribalistic attitude and seeming inability to debate a point with a sense of civility.

So here’s to parliament restarting, and to the hope that we will see less petty arguments, interruptions, and shouting matches, and more civil and good-natured debate.