The resignation of Richard Cachia Caruana is a death blow both to the government and to Malta as a whole. Malta has lost an able and trustworthy civil servant who has worked very hard in the interests of Malta in the EU.

Ambition, envy and vendetta have had their way.

But what puzzles me in this case is why was the censure motion accepted by the Clerk of the House or the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, knowing that Mr Cachia Caruana is a civil servant and not a member of Parliament. As far as I know, he is accountable to his minister and not to Parliament. If anything, the motion should have been addressed to the minister under whose wing he falls.

Are we now to assume that anyone of the top civil servants is liable to be censured by Parliament? Is this not a precedent that will have grievous repercussions in the future? Has the government failed in allowing this motion? Was Mr Cachia Caruana’s fall caused by the opposition or by the government?

This motion should never have been allowed to come before Parliament. There is nothing in our laws which compels civil servants to be censured by Parliament. There are other methods which can be used to admonish civil servants and, surely, Parliament is not the place to do so.