In his bumbling, befuddled response to questions put to him at the European Parliament about his Lord and Master's pimping of our passports, Scicluna said, clearly and unequivocally, that the scheme was a mistake.     He also said that it was the fault of the marketing side that the whole thing was rushed the way it was rushed.  

 

Scicluna apparently forgot that it was his Prime Minister, aided and abetted by assorted Ministers and sundry Parliamentary Secretaries, who rushed the amendments to the Citizenship Act through Parliament, and Henley Something Associates (Scicluna's name for them) had nothing to do with it.     

Was Scicluna awake in the House when Muscat and his band of brothers steamrollered the Bill through, accepting not a single comma in amendment?    If he was, why is he trying to blame "outsiders" for the complete and utter mess the Government of which he forms part made of this whole thing?

 

I doubt anyone at the European Parliament noticed that Scicluna was trying to sell them a pup: frankly, the people who were in shot were looking at him the way people look at a car wreck developing in front of them in slow motion.

 

Incredulous is one, mild, way of describing the look of sheer disbelief on their faces, disbelief that one of their number could be so inept, so vague, so downright baffled and baffling to put up such a poor show at defending his government's policies.  

 

To be fair, he was trying to defend the indefensible (indefensible except to Labour's Weasels, of course) but that's not really an excuse for being about the sorriest excuse for a speaker in the European Parliament, flappy hands and all, that I've seen for a long time, and that's saying something.

 

While on the subject of pups being sold, Scicluna, resorting to arguments used only by those with the mentality of the schoolyard (primary school, at that) and the village square (at the dumber end of the square, of course) had the gall to compare his boss's flogging of passports for just about twice what it costs to join a golf club in California with the established practice of granting citizenship to spouses of Maltese citizens.  

 

What the dear chap neglected to tell the European Parliament, perhaps because it's the truth but not the whole truth that is felt to be incumbent on those making statements to this assembly, was that citizenship on marriage is granted after a considerable period of time (someone mentioned five years) and marriages of convenience are not the norm, despite what he  implied.

 

My headline is a tad unfair, because the "it" Scicluna said government could do without was the money that would be paid for the passports Joseph Muscat has put up for sale.   

 

Giving the lie to Labour's Little Weasels' excuse that it was either selling citizenship or raising taxes, Scicluna told the European Parliament that Malta did not need the fifteen million or eight million or however many million it was that were going to be raised.

 

Which is it, pray tell, dear Minister of Finance: is this a negligible amount, a mere bagatelle, or is it much needed revenue for the coffers of Malta, as your Prime Minister seems to have been putting it about to willing so-called journalists ready to lap it all up?  Come on, 'fess up and stop waffling.

 

There was much more to Scicluna's intervention.  You could, for instance, take note of the racist remark about the Chinese.  Perhaps you might like to  take his performance as a measure of the man and his competence, and despair.  

 

If this is the best Joseph Muscat can come up with to head one of the more imporant Ministries, then it's time to head for the hills, folks, and no mistake.