A sense of humour is not one the senses with which many of the Great Unwashed are blessed.

How else would you explain the reaction to Austin Gatt's wise-crack about Labour being left in the cold by the electorate for the next twenty years? The sheer volume of po-faced responses with which we were regaled over the (virtual) air-waves when the story (story, I ask you?) broke was astounding. The great and good were wheeled out for their erudite comments, not least of which Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, recently sighted on his FaceBook page curling up with a good book.

Well, he implied it was him, anyway, but apparently, he'd lifted the picture from some web-site or other, which might have been somewhat injudicious, leaving him open to charges of plagiarism. You can just imagine Nikita Alamango spluttering and foaming "look, look, he did it too, why only me?"

Does anyone have an idea why it was thought that Mr Pullicino Orlando's views on Austin Gatt's dictum would be of interest to anyone but himself? After all, Pullicino Orlando is a back-bench MP with as much claim to fame as any other, but it seems that every time the opinion of one of that species is required, he's wheeled out by the media.

Perhaps his image-handlers are trying to turn himself into something other than a one-trick pony? More cynically, are the media people who seek him out hoping that he'll say more than he would properly want to, thereby getting themselves another stick with which to beat the PM?

But you have to love Austin Gatt, don't you? He gives a monkey's what anyone thinks about him, makes a remark designed to get a reaction (or because he was bored and thought it would be amusing) and, lo and behold, out comes the reaction, predictable as ever.