Helena Dalli in her reply (October 30) to my previous letter seems determined not to answer any of my questions. She accuses me of spin, prejudice and confusing issues. It was her who advised me “that online comments can be risky territory” and then she spends her time writing about them.

Then she clarifies that the legendary status she accorded to me was meant to be of the notoriety type and reverted to the type of cheap comment so typical of Labour’s past and present history. I am not interested in what people would consider me “famous for”. I have been a columnist for over 40 years and an educator for as many years. Of course some of my writings during Labour’s glorious days were written under a pseudonym as my family would have been discrimated against by such benevolent governments at the time. I doubt whether anybody is racking their brains about this problem, which obviously exists in Dr Dalli’s mind.

Dr Dalli refuses to accept the fact that her choice of words “pseudo” and “sham” in reference to Chris Said’s resignation were offensive to him. The reason why he resigned from his post has nothing to do with what the Prime Minister had said or done. The Prime Minister dealt differently with the resignations of John Dalli and Dr Said because the situations were entirely different and the latter had a portfolio which was part of and still is part of the Prime Minister’s one. Not too difficult for those who really want to understand.

If she looks back to her other letter, Dr Dalli would find that she wrote, when referring to jobs, “the kind of jobs people have no choice but to take on”. So jobs are being created. Her words not mine. Job seekers have their stories to tell. Some of them are part of the heritage left by Labour governments who kept people backward in order to retain their power over them.

While Dr Dalli’s previous letter was patronising towards me, this time she in condescending. She claims that I acted like a child when she pointlessly tried to make me empathise with people who are not having as good a life as myself. Then she once more invites me to visit her surgery.

Now I consider that a gimmick for which Labour is notorious. If I were to arrive at her surgery unannounced I would be intruding on the privacy of her constituents and I will be breaking data protection rules while if I were to make formal arrangements to do so, no doubt that I will find a charade set up by the likes of One News reporters.

Still no answers to my questions, why she – who no doubt believes in social justice – does nothing to get her party to end the injustice of private and public properties held by the Labour Party from being returned to their rightful owners and that Labour MPs promised jobs to their supporters before the last general election.