Last August I wrote in this column that according to the statute of the Labour Party (PL), if a Labour MEP fell out of party line he risked a fine. An amendment was unanimously adopted at the party's conference last summer to change the statute - not to remove this absurd clause but to increase the fine to a hefty €15,000.

I wrote that this "shut-up-or-pay-up" clause was a disgrace and an affront to democracy. I wrote that Joseph Muscat should have removed it. Instead, he kept it and made it worse.

Contrast that with the Nationalist Party. Of course, we are far from perfect. But having such a clause in our statute would be a complete aberration of what we stand for. I, for one, would not be there to see it happen. And this is not just lip-service. I am on record as having taken public stands against positions held by the government, which is formed by my party. I did this in good faith and I was never chastised, let alone fined.

Likewise, a fellow PN MEP candidate recently expressed views that departed from the party's position and he felt free to do so without inhibitions.

Of course, if parliamentarians disagree with their party on fundamentals, then they are in the wrong party. For instance, I would not be within the PN if it opposed EU membership. But other than that, I believe that there must be a wide margin, both in public and, more so, internally, to allow representatives to speak their mind.

I raised this issue in a public debate last Saturday with Louis Grech (PL) and Arnold Cassola (AD). Surprisingly, Mr Grech rebutted, stating, matter-of-factly, that the clause in the PL statute was removed two months ago.

Oh!

So let me see if I get this right. Dr Muscat becomes leader and promptly raises the fine to a staggering €15,000, proving to the whole world where he stands on the matter. Then I contest the move - along with a chorus of others - and he promptly makes a round-about turn deleting the entire clause just a couple of months later.

But that's not all.

Last Saturday, Mr Grech berated me for raising this "petty" issue and for not being aware of the removal of this clause two months ago.

Now consider this.

First of all, this is not petty at all. It is a matter of public concern because a political party that aspires to lead the country should be held to account on its credentials to do so. Its internal standards on transparency and on democracy are indicative of what its policies might be in government.

What is also at stake here is the political judgement of a party that has a history of getting it wrong on so many issues. From the most basic issues to major policies, which affect you and our country.

Muzzling its own candidates and parliamentarians speaks volumes about Labour's political judgement and its suitability to govern.

Secondly, Mr Grech was right that I did not know that the clause was removed two months ago. But it turned out that I was not the only one. Hands up all those who knew that Labour had removed it.

The Times and most of the media did not know because they all announced the removal of the clause as news after last Saturday's event - a full two months after the "news" took place.

Pressed by The Times, a Labour spokesman admitted that the party did not feel the need to issue a press release to inform the public on the removal of this clause. He added that "Joseph Muscat had mentioned it during a meeting at a party club around November, but no one had picked it up".

Oh! So now, it's not just my fault for failing to turn up at the party club. It's also the media's fault for failing to report it.

The truth, of course, is that the clause was removed by stealth following a public outcry and Labour was too embarrassed to own up to its latest U-turn. Worse still, had it not been for us and had Labour been left to its own devices, the clause would still be there.

Finally, and on a more positive note, even if the PL deleted this clause because it was shamed into doing so and even though it kept mum about it, it was nevertheless right to do so. This is a welcome u-turn and Dr Muscat deserves credit for, finally, if half-heartedly, doing the right thing and consigning this clause to the dustbin of history, where it belongs.

Political parties should be prepared to go back on policies and decisions that are wrong and to make them right. And, yes, this applies to all parties, not just Labour. And there is no reason why they should not come clean when they do so.

Labour was right to remove the "shut-up-or-pay-up" clause.

But it was wrong to hush it up.

Readers who would like to ask questions to be answered in this column can send an e-mail, identifying themselves, to contact@simonbusuttil.eu or through www.simonbusuttil.eu.

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.