Campaign spending

Your editorial of July 19 betrays The Sunday Times' attitude to the rule of law and to preserving the status quo at all costs.

The Sunday Times defends false or incorrect oaths on campaign spending, saying that MEPs and candidates "...have done nothing other candidates did not do before them".

Some people have no shame. By the same argument, why don't we just suspend each and every court case, let all prisoners go free and reimburse all fines? After all, whatever the crime or contravention, all of us "have done nothing other people did not do before us".

Maybe The Sunday Times could give us a breakdown of the adverts published by it and its sister paper by individual candidates and the total cost of the adverts. But why? It is not in its interest to limit or control campaign spending, is it?

Editor's note
Mr Cassar has quoted the editorial out of context. And the suggestion that the newspaper in any way defends false oaths - when it was The Sunday Times that took the initiative to raise this issue in the first place - is banal.