Tonio Borg did walk tall in Brussels. The Deputy Prime Minister designate EU commissioner gave a very good account of himself. He was prepared to answer all the questions thrown at him, plus some more.

It seems that some of these representatives expect to impose their views on others- Lino Spiteri

He dealt easily with the technical aspect of the questioning. When it came to questions about some conservative views he holds, he elicited admiration by remaining true to himself, while asserting that he would fulfil his obligations as Commissioner and would not let his personal views get in the way of his decisions.

The early reactions suggested that he had won the day hands down. Political life is never that easy. It did not take long for the Greens and the Liberals to come out with their embedded objections to him. They will not support him. The backing of the Socialist group remains essential for Borg to make it.

That too looked to be on, reflecting both the Deputy Prime Minister’s performance and the lobbying that the four Labour MEPs had done in the group. Yet, there too, doubts remain. The issue will go to the wire as the Socialists try to analyse better answers to their concerns.

The way MEPs go about their work puzzles me. They all have their personal views, as do the rest of us. But it seems that some of these representatives expect to impose their views on others. Trying to persuade and convince is what free debate is all about. To impose is not on.

Society is made up of blocs and it remains true that it takes all sorts to compose it. One thing it cannot be, and thank goodness for that, is uniform. One thing it should not be is didactic.

Liberals and Socialist progressives, of all people, should be aware and subscribe to that. Their beliefs encompass freedom of conscience. That belongs to each and every one of us. We cannot, as progressives of whatever hue, claim freedom of conscience for ourselves but deny it to others.

When that fundamental right was denied to progressives, they – we – fought to win it tooth and nail. That commitment to it should be in doubt in a democratic forum like the European Parliament is unacceptable and tragic.

The Euro-parliamentarians have a right to judge, but not to pre-judge. They should not block a nominee because of how they think one would behave. They have every right to censor a Commissioner if he acts in a manner that betrays his obligations to do what is objectively right, and instead imposes his personal convictions or prejudices.

If a Commissioner becomes guilty of that, he should be censored, even thrown out of his job. That is different from preventing him from getting the job because MEPs do not like his views.

That is the march of ugly prejudice, not of fine democracy.

Borg will get the four votes of the Maltese Socialist MEPs. Of that I’m sure, though it will be a secret vote. I hope that enough other Socialist MEPs will act rationally and conclude that they should give him a chance to prove his point by his actions when in the saddle.

• A man who has been walking tall in his work as head of the Malta Financial Services Authority is Professor Joe Bannister. In part, he had a head start. The MFSA is a rare bird, an almost unique example of pro-active consensus between the Government and the Opposition.

It was given consensus tools when John Dalli and I worked to persuade our parliamentary groups to collaborate on a package of legislation designed to turn Malta into a respected financial centre.

That was not an easy task. On the Labour side, two former Prime Ministers were against the venture, Dom Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici.

Happily, though, Alfred Sant, as leader of the party, once he was convinced that the package would not leave conscious space for money laundering, gave his backing. Once the majority backing of the Labour parliamentary group achieved, Mifsud Bonnici applied all his legal drafting skills to help improve the legislative package at the committee stage.

The man tasked with mobilising the MFSA and the practitioners to sell the package and attract financial investment to Malta was Bannister. Over almost two decades he and the practitioners have done a brilliant job. A man with gentle demeanour but steely commitment, his name became as one with the MFSA.

His honesty was never in question. Like many of us in the sector he was and remains under surveillance through the detailed personal questionnaire submitted to the independent supervisory unit of the MFSA.

With Malta’s accession to the EU, the financial services sector accelerated. Bannister and others have been working like horses.

His name and ability stands out as a reference point. His relationship-building and ability to use expatriate resources when necessary have served Malta in fine stead, satisfying the International Monetary Fund and other international regulators at every turn.

If there is a doubt about him it relates to who can be found to succeed him. Though no one is indispensable, it will not be an easy task.

Bannister is now under fire. Labour MP Evarist Bartolo, with honed skills at investigation, has raised a number of questions flung in the form of accusations at the MFSA chairman. He is exercising his rights.

Bannister, as accountable as any holder of office, has denied the accusations. He will be submitting a report to the Minister of Finance, who will consider publishing it.

Such are the workings of democracy. They should lead to unearthing of facts, not to going for the jugular before they are uncovered. That harms not only the individual and the institution, but also Malta’s reputation.