I agree with most of Michael Falzon’s arguments (The Sunday Times, March 4), particularly where the relations of the public service with the public are concerned, but knowing that he was a minister in the Nationalist administrations of 1987-1992 and 1992-1996, I felt a bit bemused by some of his writings, particularly this:

“Making the party really inclusive and giving priority to the people’s needs means giving less importance to the control freaks in the civil service whose advice – sincere though it might be – is not always conducive to the best interests of the people’s welfare and often disregards the concern that stems from genuine ­solidarity.”

Wasn’t this the case with the Planning Authority (today’s Mepa) when Mr Falzon was the minister responsible for that authority which, for the record, he himself had set up? I remember very clearly how people felt angry and frustrated at the way the Planning Authority dealt with their applications and claims.

In many instances its relations with the public were as unacceptable as they are today.

In fact that situation was one of the main causes that contributed to the Nationalist Party’s defeat in the 1996 election, when Mr Falzon lost his parliamentary seat. I know, for instance, that Mr Falzon’s ministry was made aware of the strange things taking place in Gozo and the strange behaviour of some PA officers some time before the 1996 election. Yet nothing was done to remedy matters.

In fact, some weeks before that election the Planning Authority had sent around 200 letters of refusal to Gozitan applicants. The day after the election the PA individually informed all 200 applicants to ignore the letter of refusal and instead approved their applications.

I stand to be corrected, but Mr Falzon never publicly apolo-gised for the wrongdoings of the departments and public authorities falling under his ministerial responsibilities.

Yet the current Prime Minister has apologised for all wrong-doings and mistakes made by the administration under his leadership.

Not only has he apologised but also is taking the necessary ­measures, tangible ones, to see to the people’s just concerns.

I am convinced that Mr Falzon knows very well that it is one thing when you have to bear responsibility, to take decisions and to perform in very turbulent times and another when simply being an armchair critic.