The controversy about abortion seems to have quietened down. During the last celebration of Women's Day it hardly got a mention. Meanwhile, the situation on the ground has hardly changed. A friend of mine warned me against the view that some "historic" compromise had been reached about the matter.

"Or to be clear," he went on to say, "the compromise is being reached in this way: Laws won't be touched any more but there will be shall we say, flexibility in how they will be implemented. So long as pro-abortion propaganda and support are kept within certain limits, which do not unduly bother 'conservatives', abortion will be tolerated. As has always been the case in this country after all, since the times of the Knights and before. Moreover given the technological advances that have occurred, chemical methods have become increasingly sophisticated and easy. I think they're being used more frequently and effectively. Anyway the compronise is in the best Maltese tradition where one is..." Here, he deployed a vulgar expression that everybody uses but which one does not need to repeat.

I do not know whether my friend is correct in his judgement. Perhaps yes, perhaps no. And possibly it's a good compromise, who knows? What worries me is that its victims could be the usual victims - women who are economically, socially and culturally under-privileged.

***

TRANSPARENCY

It's amazing how in democracies, the need for transparency in the public management of a country is increasingly being given declining priority. True, a democracy has come to mean that when a side says yes to something, the other side must say no, which will then provoke political fudges from both sides. As a result, facts get turned upside down. But this too had better be considered as a fact of life.  

Transparency in how decisions are taken in public affairs needs to remain a top feature of democratic management (no matter which party is in power). It makes sure that democracy remains more effective than an authoritarian or dictatorial leadership.

***

PERSPECTIVES

When evaluating foreign governments or political organizations for what they do or don't do, almost always we remain aware only of what would have happened in recent times, according to how news of developments has reached us via international agencies or the governments concerned. No access would have been available to perspectives that illuminate decisions being taken by reference to factors which  go much beyond today's realities.

When you come to think about it, the judgements all sides make regarding contemporary political realities are also tempered and determined by the historical experience the different national communities have been through in the recent and not so recent past.

Obviously this happens in Malta as well. The explanations given in the past... are still being given... by our governmetns and political parties about how and why they adopt the positions they do, still hark back among others to - the Great Siege, the Knights in Malta, the Sette Giugno, the Second World War blitz on Malta, the 1960's and Independence. All these features are brought in to explain why national decisions are taken in one way and not in another.