Age is one of the only metrics available to organise society, determining when one may drink, drive (ideally separately) and tie the knot, carrying the connotation of responsibility and blossoming wisdom. It’s well understood that immaturity and irresponsibility are expensive, as embodied by my car insurance quotations, and that the value of time paired with experience makes for appropriate leaders – but can one be too old to lead?

With the turbulent presidential race brewing across the waters, this notion has been challenged and dragged into the limelight repeatedly as age-based attacks have taken centre stage. After a shambolic display during a presidential debate, characterised by babbling and confusion, US President Joe Biden’s competency was globally challenged and ridiculed. Being the oldest president in US history at 81 years old, his age was a defining aspect of his campaign and ultimately, the weapon of choice for the majority of the mainstream media which before then had only inquired about his choice of ice cream flavour.

Regardless of whether or not one is a fan of Biden or the Democratic party, age should not be an argument against competency and its many factors – ultimately, such an argument is a form of ageism. Health issues leading to resignation is not entirely new either, with former British prime minister Winston Churchill’s political timeline drawing a resemblance to that of Biden.

Specifically, after being re-elected in 1951 before his 77th birthday, Churchill suffered several minor strokes and cited an inability to focus, yet still presided over the cabinet despite, on one occasion, being paralysed on one side after a major stroke the night before. Aware of his diminishing capacity to focus and meet the requirements of his job, he retired independently similar to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s game-changing retirement from the papacy in 2013. Meanwhile, it’s not clear as to whether Biden willingly relinquished his candidacy or whether he was kicked to the curb by the Democrat party.

As the population ages while sitting in traffic, more examples of elderly leaders are inevitable, each with their own individual level of competency to get the job done. Now, with Biden out of the race, all eyes and ageist critiques are on Trump as the new oldest major-party presidential nominee in history, who gleefully boasts about his mental competence and his golfing ability. As someone who played an active role in criticising Biden, age-based attacks are boomeranging back on Trump, challenging his own competency. 

Now more than ever in Malta, we need to prioritise competency and a lack of corruption over anything

Locally, the moving story of Brother Edward Galea symbolises a triumph over age and ageism, with this 100-year-old La Sallian telling reporters he has “no intention of slowing down”. Hosting a ceremony in Żabbar, which I unfortunately missed out on, my brother and grandfather in attendance could only describe a church packed with sprawling enthusiasm and tangible respect.

Running around and teaching IT, Brother Edward’s story defies ageist stereotypes and urges us to look at age as just a number. In Malta, ageist stereotypes towards the elderly may be linked to a lack of appreciation and care for the elderly, weaker family values and a more self-centred lifestyle which would require targeted policies and societal mentality changes to combat.

On the other hand, local politics is suffering from a distinct level of ageism towards young candidates hoping to leave their mark. With the support of the European Union, this year’s local council elections celebrated the election of Malta’s youngest ever councillor, Izak Catania De Giovanni, at 16 years of age alongside other record-breaking young candidates.

Naturally, the age of candidates was scrutinised and challenged on social media with many attempting to ridicule the achievement based on a lack of maturity and experience. Of note, the age of candidacy was conflated with other topics such as the age of consent, which are entirely separate topics. Hopefully, such critiques only encouraged these young candidates to work hard and defy such expectations.

Regardless of age, the simple argument stands – if the majority believes in the competency of an individual to lead and lift responsibility and if the majority place their confidence and their vote in this person, that person has every right to lead as it is their democratic right to do so.

Now more than ever in Malta, we need to prioritise competency and a lack of corruption over anything, placing the onus on Maltese citizens to vote for candidates who are competent in fulfilling their duties honestly and valiantly regardless of how old or how young the person may be. If we get lost in all of these labels, we will surely lose our precious democracy and our Maltese identity (which may already be the case if your ID card has been appropriated by the recent identity racket).

If age becomes a determining factor for leadership, why stop there? Perhaps we could use height as a factor as we do for a theme park ride, a weight limit as for an elevator or O level results to pick out the cream of the crop.

Something tells me that such explicit discrimination wouldn’t age very well.

Gabriel Sciberras, a student at the University of Malta, wrote this article on behalf of the Maltese Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics (MAGG).