Ivan Camilleri, Brussels
St John's vote keeps MPs away from important EU meetings
The controversial St John's Co-Cathedral motion moved by the opposition has kept Maltese MPs away from two important meetings in Brussels, leaving European Parliament officials unimpressed.
Nationalist and Labour MPs changed their plans at the eleventh hour and Malta was the only EU member state with empty seats during these meetings.
The St John's motion was up for vote on Wednesday evening but was cancelled following a decision by the government and the Church to pull the plug on the cathedral's museum extension project.
Sources close to the EP told The Times the Maltese MPs cancelled after they were ordered by their parties to call off any overseas business and make sure they were to be in Parliament for this important vote.
"Unfortunately, Malta was again the only EU member state which didn't send its MPs for these meetings. Although there was a valid reason we have to note that Malta's participation in our meetings is Brussels leaves much to be desired," an official said.
This week's meetings concerned the future of the EU Cohesion policy, organised by the Committee for Regional Development, and the current economic crisis, organised by the Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs.
These meetings, organised on a regular basis by the EP, are meant to bring together MEPs and MPs from all member states to discuss common strategies.
EP officials have repeatedly called for increased participation by the Maltese in its workings, as in many cases the country has been the only member state not represented at such meetings - not leaving a very good impression.
The issue is not easy to resolve because there is no pairing agreement between the government and the opposition.
"The fact the government has only got a one-seat majority and the opposition is refusing to agree on pairing makes life for our MPs very difficult as they can't be away from the country as needed," a senior official of the House of Representatives told The Times.
To enhance cooperation between the EP and national parliaments, many legislative chambers have established a permanent presence in Brussels through an office at the EP. These offices are headed by permanent representatives and normally serve to facilitate communication between the EP and their own parliaments.
Since its accession to the EU in 2004, the Maltese Parliament has not felt the need to establish such a direct link or open a permanent office.
The only other member states not represented at the EP on a permanent basis are Portugal and Spain. Bulgaria and Romania, which joined the EU last year, have already opened their parliamentary offices in the EP complex in Brussels.
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Ramon Casha
Feb 14th 2009, 07:56
According to every dictionary I could find, "Pairing is not allowed in divisions of great political importance*" - and to many, this was indeed a rather hot issue, so even if pairing had been in place, this particular issue might not have come under the pairing agreements anyway.
Of course, the PM could have decided to drop the project earlier on, rather than wait until it was too late for the MPs to attend these meetings.
* http://www.parliament.uk/about/glossary.cfm?ref=pairing_6768
Alfred Camilleri
Feb 13th 2009, 19:12
Thanks to the LP and its 'new style of doing politics'. New my foot! Their politics are as old as the old MLP itself. The Party first. National interest? What's that?
J Martinelli
Feb 13th 2009, 13:42
@ Philip Pace
Before commenting please read and understand the report. You are confusing MEPs with MPs.
The EU comments you quote regarding the absence of our MPs is indeed regrettable and only due to the LP's new way of doing business and not pairing. But that's democracy for the LP.
The LP should remember in no uncertain terms that what goes around, comes around and if by some stroke of fate they should be elected with a one seat majority, they might as well shut up if the then Nationalist Opposition refrain from pairing. Maybe we shall then be treated with another 22 month disgrace?
Charles Zammit
Feb 13th 2009, 12:52
May be if our government has been democratic and not apply dictat, maybe if voting in the house was not limited to Wednesday sittings, maybe if the government has been more pragmatic in the St. John's cathedral matter, maybe the pairing would not have been withdrawn and MPs could attend the meetings in Brussels. Maybe if the government have been responisble enough there would have been no backfires. Maybe this will serve a lesson to myopic, immature decision makers.
Carm Vella Diacono
Feb 13th 2009, 12:43
What is your point Joseph Agius? Because you have been repeating your comment for the last weeks and apparently nobody has swollowed your gimmicks!
You dream of Labour day and night while you spit your venom at anyone that criticise your party! It is you who should feel ashamed that you can't distinguish between arrogance and good riddance. What's the point of giving out pairing to make it more convenient for the Gvernment do everything it want? Is it the same reason that PN has always refused to comply with pairing agreements so far?
SHAME SHAME SHAME, you are really damaging the image of your party! Your fellow Nationalists friends are surely not behaving in the same manner. They are different from you as they have recognised that for the NP first come the votes and then the people's interest.
If you are finding it so much difficult to accept these facts, it would be worth for you to open your eyes well or else turn off those bothering blue spectacles!
Edwin Formosa
Feb 13th 2009, 12:38
"Unfortunately, Malta was again the only EU member state which didn't send its MPs for these meetings".Such a comment speaks for itself and it doesn't need the name of its author. It shows the MLP's negative power at this Stagun Politiku Gdid tal-Mexxej Immexxi.
m psaila
Feb 13th 2009, 11:40
WHICH GOES TO SHOW THE ATTITUDE TAKEN BY THE NEW LABOUR LEADER WHO IS WASTING PRECIOUS TIME FOR THIS COUNTRY ON PETTY ISSUES! WHAT A SHAME!
ALL THE WORLD IS DISCUSSING THE FINANCIAL CRISIS AND MEASURES TO FACE THIS HUGE CHALLENGE AND TINY MALTA IS DISCUSSING IL-KON-KATTIDRAL TA SAN GWANN GHAX HEKK IRID DOTTOR MUSCAT U XI ERBA' POLITICI LI L-INTERESS TAGHHOM HU BISS LI JFIXKLU!
SHAME SHAME SHAME!
wally vella-zarb
Feb 13th 2009, 11:09
Shame on Gonzi, not the PL, because it was he who left things till the eleventh hour. If he wants to play brinkmanship he must accept the risk of falling over the edge. There is a world of difference between a majority of only one and the majority of five that he had before - as he has discovered!
V.Micallef
Feb 13th 2009, 10:59
For once I must register my disagreement with Mario Mifsud. In view of Mr Camilleri's report I would advisedly conclude: " Blame it on RCC who provoked this debacle." No amount of efforts to decry the Maltese MPs' absence from EP meetings in Brussels will imlot press. The only clear message coming from the Foundation shambles is that RCC is starting to crack too. No wonder he wants to elbow Mr Joe Borg out and get on with his career. We can only wait and see. A lot must now depend on Jose Manuel Barroso. If Gonzi is starting to see the light re RCC, no one should be surprised that Barroso will act with at least the same amount of savoir-faire.
N.Calleja
Feb 13th 2009, 10:48
I cannot see the fuss being made just because our representatives were absent. Their first duty is to attend our Parliament, especially when the opposition is making spokes in the wheel by not agreeing to a pairing. If a pairing agreement existed, Parliamentary work would have continued and our representatives from both sides of the House could have attended to their foreign duties.
philip pace
Feb 13th 2009, 09:58
Re this article.
"Unfortunately, Malta was again the only EU member state which didn't send its MPs for these meetings. Although there was a valid reason we have to note that Malta's participation in our meetings is Brussels leaves much to be desired," an official said."
If there was a valid reason (and indeed there was) this EU pawn should have accepted that and that would have been the end of the matter but it is obvious that he knows nothing about Malta and our problems.
Such intelligence and such arrogance.
Who was this official as there seem to be many 'officials' who make such silly statements within Mount Olympus?
Can you mention this official by name and country that he represents so that your reports would have more truthful substance and credibility?
Once again congratulations to all concerned as you showed where your real interests are!!
mario mifsud
Feb 13th 2009, 09:52
Blame it on Gonzi for leaving things to the last minute ...obviously because he could not bring all his MPs to vote against the PL motion
philip pace
Feb 13th 2009, 09:48
What is your correspondent really implying?
Is he saying that the EU business was more important than the St.John business?
If all 5 MEP members felt that Malt's business is more important than the Mount Olympus affairs then they were all right together with their respective political parties.
This was a positive decision for the sake of Malta and not for the sake for some 'friendly big guns who dominate Europe as they are the big players who want to have the large piece of cake and Malta is left with the crumbs, as what usually happens'.
Well done to all concerned. The reporter should try to be more Maltese than European biased, for your own credibilty sake and be yourself!
Chris Finch
Feb 13th 2009, 09:41
Just shows what a tin pot banana republic this is.
Joseph Agius
Feb 13th 2009, 09:16
The earthquake that never quaked! Shame on PL. Seems like New PL= MLP. Pity cause Malta expected a new style of politics. I appreciate that it is difficult for Dr Joseph Muscat to offer a new style of politics with those around him, but he should have seen this before offering himself to become leader.
leonardo vince
Feb 13th 2009, 09:15
MORE CRACKS?