With a bit more than a week to go until the election, the largest political parties are campaigning on distinct proposals. The Nationalist Party is accusing the PL of copying their proposals. However, the Nationalist Party just released its electoral manifesto. So, logically, if there is a party following another party, it is indeed the Nationalist Party.
Certainly, I had some time to read through the Nationalist Party’s pamphlet. One of the proposals that struck me was the paternity leave proposal under the Social Policy Chapter, proposal number 2. Here, the Nationalist Party is proposing a six-week fully paid paternity leave. However, those with a memory of an elephant remember that on Mother’s Day, the Leader of the Opposition proposed an extension of fully paid paternity leave of four weeks. The information is in the public domain; just Google Net News online. And legitimately, we ask, which version is correct?
Another contradiction concerns the proposal for renewable energy. Here, the Nationalist Party’s pamphlet states, under the Clean Energy Chapter, that it aims to reach a 30% renewable energy target by 2030, specifically under proposal number 8. However, under the Chapter Innovation, R&D and Digital Sectors, specifically proposal number 24, the Nationalist Party is proposing a 50% renewable energy target by 2030. The day after publishing their pamphlet, the Nationalist Party issued a statement correcting the figures after the media flagged them. I am mentioning it as it’s only fair to be true to what we are analysing and not to mislead our readers. Here, we can state that the Nationalist Party was not ready for a general election, despite its insistence that it would be ready whenever the general election was announced.
Another proposal the Nationalist Party is pledging is to reward university students with the equivalent of National Contribution for the years spent studying, a measure already implemented and in place. The credit for years spent at university contributing toward our future pensions is already in place, so in truth, it is a redundant proposal. What we have here is a situation where the electorate must decide which party will provide stability for their families. I was also let down by not finding anything relating to IVF. Whereas the PL is pledging an additional two cycles, up to five, fully covered by the state. And this boils down to empathy, and assistance to families. Before 2013, families trying to conceive babies through IVF were left on their own. Thereafter, the situation changed, and the PL assisted in amending the laws and conditions to provide greater clarity and support to families.
There are other proposals of the PN, which I wanted to cover in this weekly column. However, I also need to talk about the PL’s proposals. As I have already stated, one of the proposals I am most passionate about is the Affordable Housing proposal. We acknowledge that the increase in GDP and our economic success has brought new challenges to our families. And we must follow this not through statistics but through empathy. Surely, we, as economists, know quite well what families require, because over the past 13 years, the PL has stood shoulder to shoulder with them and the business sector. And they did it out of conviction, not convenience. The PL’s manifesto is clear. We need to go to another level.
The Wellbeing Index is ingenious, and we must seriously consider what’s being proposed to improve the quality of life. The PL is now presenting a manifesto that addresses the challenges of economic success. Gone are the days of an economy of €7 billion. With an economy of €24 billion we can now provide better assistance to our families, not least increases in students’ stipends, assistance with tax credit to our businesses, and additional measures such as the super bonus, the increase in pensions up to €50 per week, the 25% interest-free for first-time buyers and those priced out of the market, the €30,000 tax exemption for the younger generation, and the list goes on. Besides, the PL is pledging a target of a 4% annual GDP increase per annum during the legislature. The idea is to increase economic growth through sectors that add greater value, such as FinTech, Gaming, and Advanced Manufacturing, Family Offices, Prediction Markets, as well as new sectors like eResidency. These require limited space in a small territory and a less labour-intensive supply.
And the electorate will be analysing while they watch us, politicians, debate ideas and discuss our proposals on TV. They know in their hearts that the PL generated significant wealth and distributed it to families and businesses. What they will be asking before they enter the voting booth is whether they risk losing what they have achieved over the past years under a PL government or step into an uncertain and unknown territory. And the analysis will be done not because the Nationalist Party’s proposals are better, but because the PL’s manifesto is superior, and they delivered on their promises from 2013 onwards, unlike preceding Nationalist Party administrations.
My interest is that the younger generation requires a financial and economic boost to achieve their aspirations and dreams when they finish their studies or drop out of school with brilliant start-up ideas. And that financial and economic boost can only be given by the PL in government. As we did with their parents, and the older generation, Gen Z, Gen Alpha and Digital Natives know that there is only one party in Malta that can fulfil their dreams. And that party is the PL in government. The PL was always open to new ideas. And the testament of this is its track record. I urge you to read the PL’s manifesto, the proposal therein, and analyse what’s in it for them and for you, too.
