Finance Minister Edward Scicluna must feel a bit miffed. There he was making a marathon speech practically unrivalled in duration in parliamentary history and introducing some interesting fiscal benefits, and it was all for nought. He barely had time to go through his supply of lozenges to soothe his throat and the Budget had already been forgotten.

The talk of the town for the last 10 days has been the Paul Sheehan shoot-out of course. It’s got all the ingredients of a scandal that will run and run. There are guns, cops with guns, links to a high-profile minister, the fact that the man who pranged the ministerial car got to spend 40 hours in the chip, while the person who fired the gun was only arrested and arraigned after a week and the issue of whether anyone passed on erroneous information to the press. There is no way that any Budget speech can compete with that.

This may be one of the reasons why the Prime Minister appears to be visibly irritated. For the first time during this premiership he seems to be on the defensive – reacting to criticism rather than setting the agenda. He has accused Simon Busuttil of trying to make political mileage out of the situation and of being negative. That didn’t help. That the Opposition tries to eke out every drop of political mileage is a given.

If the boot was on the other foot and Joseph Muscat was on the Opposition benches he would be clamouring for heads to roll. When there were very questionable decisions by Nationalist ministers, Muscat did just that. For example, when former finance minister Tonio Fenech accepted an invitation by businessmen to join them for an Arsenal match, flying to London and back on a private jet, Muscat had not shied away from bringing up the matter and chiding then prime minister Lawrence Gonzi for defending Fenech.

The Labour Party in Opposition did not shirk from highlighting that case. In another case, Fenech’s former aide admitted in court that he had received cheques and cash from the contractors as “donations” for activities connected to Fenech’s political campaign, but was later also “tipped” for his interventions with governmental departments which handled property tax matters. Again, the Labour opposition did not keep mum. Nor was it expected to. It was carrying out its rightful role of holding the government and its ministers to account. If it gained any kudos from doing so, they were merited.

If the boot was on the other foot and Joseph Muscat was on the Opposition benches he would be clamouring for heads to roll

In the same vein, Muscat can’t expect the Opposition not to comment and stick to tombola and bingo. The Opposition making political mileage of a government scandal comes with the territory.

Muscat should not be as concerned with neutralising Opposition criticism, as with doing the right thing. That he considers it yet another round in the perpetual game between the Nationalist and Labour Party is the most worrying aspect of it all.

• This Gozo bridge/tunnel business is getting ridiculous. Every time the government is embroiled in some difficulty, it pulls out this distraction device. The latest Gozo-Tunnel-Distraction-Thing is a consultative referendum – get this – for Gozitans only. Hopefully this is just one of those crazy ideas dreamt up by newly-graduated wet-behind-the-ears students in a brainstorming session about how not to get everybody talking about shootings.

In the first place, the bridge or tunnel is too expensive. We can’t afford to do this when we have so many other things which need urgent addition, such as investing more in education and health, cleaning up the absolutely filthy country, rehabilitating areas which Sandro Chetcuti deems “shabby” (without giving them over to private interests for a pittance) and subsidising public transport.

Maybe we could eke out a couple of thousand euros for the national strategy on sustainability. We also have to pay Willie Mangion for honing in on those garages.

And then we have to pay Lou Bondi loads of lolly to give us those Beatles nostalgia nights (never forget that). Even if we forget the education and environment bit, I’m not sure if we’re going to have so much left over to pay Willie and Lou. So that’s one reason why the bridge thing should be shelved.

Then there’s the not inconsequential reason that a bridge or tunnel would ruin the environment irreparably. We’ve done a jolly good job of ruining the land. It’s overbuilt, aesthetically displeasing and chaotic. I can’t believe that the Prime Minister thinks it’s a good idea to expand the destruction to the sea. Finally – what is this ‘Gozitans only’ referendum business? The bridge or tunnel will affect all three islands, so why restrict it to Gozitans only?

I think it’s time to go back to the drawing board with these distractions. Why not try doing something totally innovative and way out there? What about saying: “We solemnly pledge not to propose this silly, environmentally-destructive, economically disastrous idea for the next 10 years. And to spare you further Beatles tribute nights”. Now that would be earth-shattering.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt