Nationalist MP Edwin Vassallo said tonight that Franco Debono had spoken with sincerity in parliament during the no confidence debate. But now that everyone's curiosity was satisfied, it was the Opposition which had a major problem, he said.

Mr Vassallo was the last speaker in this evening's sitting and spoke shortly after Dr Debono's hour-long speech.

He explained that Dr Debono had spoken freely as one expected in a democracy and as was his right. He had spoken about what he felt was not fair and right.

Now that Dr Debono had spoken, the Opposition's trouble stemmed from the fact that it had not given reasons for its motion of no confidence.

The Opposition had used Dr Debono as the reason why the government should be toppled. Now that itscuriosity was satisfied, now that Dr Debono had said what he needed to say, the Opposition had a problem justifying its motion.

This was the moment of truth. For the 11th time in this legislature, when it sensed disagreement within the government ranks, the Opposition moved a motion aimed at tripping the government. The most recent was the motion of no confidence in the Transport Minister where the Opposition also fed off criticism made from the government benches.

What Dr Debono had said tonight was what had been said before. But the Opposition had to explain why it wanted to trip a government that was doing well.

Dr Muscat should beware that what was happening now could well set a precedent for him.

Nationalist MPs were free to speak and voice their disagreement, but it was well known that Labour MPs were gagged.

Mr Vassallo said he disagreed with Dr Debono's argument on how the prime minister should have voted in parliament after the divorce referendum. Democracy respected one's conscience and it was everyone's individual right to express his beliefs, even in parliament.

The opposition, Mr Vassallo said, was not backing Dr Debono but making use of him by moving the confidence vote. Had it been backing him, it would have moved a motion to back his proposals.

The  Opposition only wanted a general election, something which most of the people did not want.

It was the Opposition which was creating instability. The opposition had seen a small fire and fanned it to become a major blaze. But now who would extinguish it? Who would pay the costs? Alas, it appeared that would have to be the people.

Mr Vassallo thanked Dr Debono for his sincerity and for creating a problem for the Opposition. He urged him, however, not to let the Opposition make use of him and his methods when the opposition's sole aim was to take power.

Today's debate, as was the case yesterday, was fully taken up by Nationalist speakers, all of whom hit out at the Opposition's failure to spell out Labour's policies. They also criticised the opposition for not giving reasons for its no-confidence motion.

The debate was opened by Resources Minister George Pullicino who said the sole purpose of the no-confidence motion was that the Opposition wanted to topple a government which had been elected to serve for five years.

Mr Pullicino said he had heard Joseph Muscat's speech at Labour's general conference last Sunday and was surprised that he did not give any indication of his vision or policies. He only spoke of hope, the same sort of hope which Dr Sant spoke about in 1996, but it was a disaster.

This government, Mr Pullicino said, was improving the people's quality of life despite difficult economic circumstances.

The government was investing heavily in education, but under Labour, it seemed that even the future of students' stipends was in doubt, if one went by comments by MEP Edward Scicluna.

Mr  Pullicino gave a long list of projects carried out by his ministry, with the main purpose, he said, being to return open spaces to the people for recreational purposes.

He also spoke on other projects which are in hand or being started, including the waste management project, the flood relief project and the restoration of the bastions. He attacked Joseph Muscat for having sought to block EU Funds for the Sant' Antnin waste recycling plant. The scaremongering made about the plant had now been proved to be false, he said. Furthermore the wasteland near the plant would become a modern recreational area for the people.

The minister also spoke on how the government has given €70 million in aid to farmers and fishermen over the past four years.
Without actually mentioning Franco Debono, the minister said the people expected government continuity and loyalty within the government. Loyalty, he said was proved by everyone's deeds and words. Should a fresh election be called, the government would present a new programme to give the people the best which their country could produce.

Education Minister Dolores Cristina, like other speakers, started her speech by noting that no reasons had been given for the no-confidence motion. Clearly, the economy was not the reason for this motion since employment was up and the deficit was down. It was not foreign affairs, where Malta had distinguished itself.

In education, health and social welfare, the government had managed to increase spending, in stark contrast to the situation in many other countries.

This government had extended children's allowance, introduced a new allowance for the elderly and reduced income tax to parents. This did not mean that some families, because of their particular circumstances, did not merit more assistance, and the government was seeking to do more.

But the fact that the Opposition had not motivated its no-confidence motion smacked of political opportunism.

The Opposition's policy of silence about its policies was disrespectful and denied the people the opportunity to compare its ideas with that of the government. Of course, the people could compare the results of the last Labour government - which was not at the time of an international crisis - with that of the current government.

They would find a track record of increased unemployment, a widening deficit, and a policy where students' stipends were being converted into loans. 1997, under Labour, was the first year in many when the University population actually decreased. Did one need to say more?

Censu Galea (PN) said the opposition's silence spoke volumes. Seriousness demanded Opposition participation in this debate, on a motion which the Opposition itself had presented. Were Opposition MPs being held back?

Mr Galea said this was not a perfect government. It had more than its fair share of problems, but one minister after another in this debate had listed the achievements which the government was rightly proud of.

More than anything else, this was a government which prided itself with letting everyone speak, in all its fora and organs. Decisions were then taken in the best interests of the people. That always was the yardstick.

This no confidence motion was unjustified, he said. No team changed a winning manager half-way through, more so when no one knew what the alternative was. Should this motion be approved, he warned, it was the country which would be taking a step backward.

I might not like what you say but I will defend your right to say it - Mario Galea about Franco Debono (quoting Voltaire)

Parliamentary Secretary Mario Galea said he had told Franco Debono that he disagreed with his methods, but he had also told him he had one merit - people were praying a lot. Half of them were praying for an election and the other half wanted the government to stay. This anecdote, he said, showed how, in contrast to what happened in the Opposition, Nationalist MPs managed to joke  between themselves even when they disagreed. 

"I might not like what you are say but I will defend your right to say it, Mr Galea said, quoting Voltaire.

Mr Galea said that Dr Debono was, at least, making proposals. The Opposition, which had moved this no-confidence motion, was making none. The people were still waiting to hear its political programme, but the only thing they knew about was Dr Muscat's childhood.

The parliamentary secretary praised the government for its actions during the Libyan uprising while, he said, the Opposition sat on the fence until the clear winner was obvious.

Mr Galea spoke on the work done by his office, including extensions and refurbishment at St Vincent de Paule, the new allowance given to all persons aged over 80, the introduction of night shelters, the refurbishment of Karin Grech rehabilitation hospital and the improvement in community services.

He also noted how pensioners could not continue to work without losing their pension.

Services in mental health care, he said, had reached unprecedented levels.

Small Business Minister Jason Azzopardi said the arrogant attitude of the Opposition contrasted with the way the Nationalist Opposition had acted in 1998, when the Sant government had its own problems. At the time, the Opposition had proposed an agreement (on the EU and VAT) which would have kept the government going.

At the PL general conference, when he was being hailed as being 'practically' the prime minister, Dr Muscat should have spoken about his policies, not his childhood. But this was the person who before Malta joined the EU had said that accession would be the cross of the millennium.

Had he had his way, Malta's development would have been stilted and it would not have benefited from the millions of euro which flowed to its shores in the past four years.

What were Labour policies on jobs and on students' stipends, particularly after would-be finance minister Edward Scicluna twice spoke against the stipends?

Dr Azzopardi spoke on how this government was boosting the sector of small businesses, particularly through grants, tax credits, easier access to finance and less bureaucracy. Industrial parks were also being improved. As a result, this sector was growing faster than the EU average.

The IMF said Malta's resilience could not be taken for granted. Was that because some people were making promises which could not be kept, such as the case about utility costs?

Dr Azzopardi also spoke on how tenants who lived in houses built on expropriated land could at last become full owners of their houses and how tenants of properties managed by the Joint Office could now, finally, redeem their ground rent and also become full owners.

Dr Azzopardi was followed by Franco Debono, who is being reported separately.

Karl Gouder (PN) highlighted the government's achievements particularly in education but also in health and jobs.  In the health sector, he said, the number of operations was rising by the hundreds.

The government was also distinguishing itself in the new facilities it was providing in the fight against cancer. It was also extending the availability of free medicines.

It was surreal, he said, how Malta was the envy of other countries, and yet its MPs were debating a vote of no confidence in the government.

The government had a track record to be proud of, despite the mistakes it made in some areas. But nothing was known about what a possible Labour government would do. Of course, the people remembered the mass of taxes which the last Labour government introduced and how it froze Malta's efforts to join the EU.

Dr Peter Micallef (PN) insisted that the PN had a mandate to govern for five years and the will of the people had to be respected. The government was not clinging the power, but it should be allowed to serve out its term and implement its programme over those five years.

He praised the prime minister for thinking long term and always putting the interests of the people and the country first. Like the other Nationalist MPs, he also spoke on how the government has been opening a new school every year and investing heavily in health and job creation. He also praised the government for having diverted the money which previously used to go to the dockyard as subsidies which did not yield results for the country.

Dr Micallef said one had to make sacrifices in politics, but one could be satisfied that he was giving a loyal service to his constituents. He had been elected because he was part of a team with one programme, and he would be loyal to his voters by supporting the government they had elected.

The debate continues tomorrow (Thursday) at 9 a.m witht he vote at Noon.

 

 

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.