I followed the European Parliament debate on the Maltese International Investment Programme live on my computer. The more I listened, the more disgusted I became. Not at this scheme but at the dirt thrown at my beloved country.

I had expected it from foreign MEPs, as their intentions were clearly known beforehand.

What disgusted me were the speeches made by the two local MEPs who spoke disparagingly of their own country. I felt ashamed to be Maltese.

It did not matter how they tried to sweeten the words they spoke. Actions spoke louder: a co-national representing me in the Parliament had the audacity to damage my country’s image with foreigners in order to discredit our government.

When one of my representatives takes it upon herself to submit a report criticising her own country and another approaches European Commission president Manuel Barroso asking why he is not commenting on the country’s IIP, I view it as an act of treason because my country has been dishonoured.

It was also humiliating, to say the least, to see them vote against leaving Malta’s name out of the final resolution. It was as if they went crying to Mummy, having failed to get what they want in Malta.

The whole affair also constitutes gross foreign interference in our local affairs.

All MEPs represent all the citizens of their country and not a particular political party. In this case, they certainly were not acting in my name.

To add insult to injury, the harm that was done was not to a political party or individual, but to Malta collectively.

MEPs’ humiliating comments were emphatically picked up, supported, and proudly voiced by a national leader as if this were some sort of victory for his party. The reaction was one of pride rather than regret. If it was a victory, it was for the party and definitely not for Malta.

There was a prominent headline in a local newspaper saying that “90 per cent voted against Joseph Muscat”. Muscat is not Malta. Malta is all of us and not an individual person or party. It was Malta’s name that was mentioned in the resolution and not Muscat’s. It was Malta that was criticised and not Muscat.

These tactics brought back memories of yesteryear, when articles in the foreign press criticising everything that Malta did were the norm. The book Is Malta Burning, distributed both locally and abroad, gave ammunition to foreigners to harm our islands.

I abhor these dangerous tactics and the thought that they may be replicated is extremely disturbing.

Common decency dictates that a family argument should be settled internally, not discussed and shouted about in public. If the neighbours intervened in a family affair and took sides in a family feud, issues would only multiply instead of being resolved.

This is what I feel has happened in my country when the EU was asked to intervene.

MEPs represent all the citizens of their country and not a particular political party. In this case, they certainly were not acting in my name

What we do as a nation is our business as long as it is legal. If further fine-tuning to the scheme is required, let’s do it, but not by inviting foreigners to interfere in our internal affairs.

Our country issues passports to third generation descendants who have never set foot on Malta, never will and do not give a fig about the island. All EU countries issue passports to immigrants and this is their internal affair.

What if Malta were to issue passports to poets, scientists, artists and writers, instead of to investors? Would they not also enrich our country?

Our internal affairs are our responsibility and nobody else’s.

We may be right or we may be wrong, but it is for us as a nation to solve the issue and no one else’s.

Let us not imitate past wrongs and look forward to a better future for all. A future that is bright and in which the standards of living are raised for one and all, especially those in need.

Let not the words of Anthony to Brutus – “O God protect me from my friends as I can take care of my enemies” – echo in our beloved country.