Tomorrow week the Labour Party will be electing its new officials.

While I pledge to respect the verdict of the party delegates, I appeal for deep reflection on their part before casting their vote.

There should be no room for divisive and controversial figures.

There are people who eminent contenders for the leadership race have made it publicly clear all along that they feel, and would continue to feel, uncomfortable working with.

Our judgment must be solely based on criteria of efficiency, competence and reliability, as well as proven track records - in full respect of the 'healing' process that the new Labour leader has launched from day one of his election to unify the various elements within the party, including those who felt dejected, rejected, snubbed and ignored in recent years.

We cannot afford to see the political 'earthquake' that Joseph Muscat unleashed upon his election as party leader ending up halted, or even worse aborted.

Some of the arguments brought forward by certain incumbents to try to hang on to their role offend one's intelligence.

They ran as follows: If I am not elected I risk ending up without work. I am more or less the same age as the party leader. I apologise for past mistakes. I will mend my ways. I still have much to contribute to the party. And so on, and on, and on.

When I recently expressed my opinion (and that of many delegates who have supported Dr Muscat throughout the leadership campaign) to a key official that his position had become untenable in the wake of the electoral defeat analysis report, I was unpolitely told that when the time comes and I am proven wrong, I should not even bother to congratulate him.

This is the kind of arrogance that I hope delegates will push aside.

The party can ill-afford to make such risky and counter-productive choices in the coming days.