Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1268420
9 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 12 JULY 2020 INTERVIEW necessary decisions: however hard they may be. And I think this gives credibility to the La- bour government… I assume you're referring to the decision to expel Konrad Miz- zi from the PL parliamentary group. What other hard deci- sions have been taken, though? One of the first decisions taken by the Labour government was to change the way Police Com- missioners are appointed. We have the recommendations of the Venice Commission, which – after a lengthy period of con- sultation with the same commis- sion – are now being enacted by Parliament; and the response by the Venice Commission itself has been positive. Besides, when talking about the decision-taking qualities of a new Prime Minister, you cannot ignore the fact that Robert Abela – along with the rest of his gov- ernment – found himself facing an unprecedented crisis in the first few months of office. And the decisions he took were very, very tough. He had to face people and tell them that their businesses would have to close down; that the airport would be shut… and from one day to the next, gov- ernment had to fork out millions in wage supplements, to pro- tect tens of thousands of jobs: at a time when its own income decreased drastically, because – except for certain specific sec- tors - consumption practically disappeared overnight. That's a big challenge. But it could be done. And it was doable, thanks to the compe- tence of the present government, but also thanks also to the robust economy we have had in recent years. This is why, as a country, we managed to handle a situa- tion that could have been much, much worse, where other coun- tries failed... But those challenges were im- posed by the COVID-19 crisis, and have nothing to do with the previous government. What about all corruption scandals we now know about? The Au- ditor General, for instance, has just issued a very damning report about the Vitals Hospi- tal deal. There are three other investigations into that same deal; not to mention ongoing inquiries into the Panama Pa- pers, and the revelations con- cerning Montenegro, etc. How does Labour intend to over- come this aura of corruption? When you have situations like the one you just described, the important thing is how you deal with them. Now: until recently, in this country we were used to a situation whereby critical reports by the Auditor General – no mat- ter how damning, either for gov- ernment or even for individual politicians – were not only swept under the carpet… but the of- fice of the Auditor General itself would be undermined. I don't think that was the reac- tion of the Prime Minister today. Quite the contrary: Robert Abela is seeing to it that, once all due process had been carried out, all the decisions that need to be taken, continue to be taken. But we need to look ahead; what is certain, however, is that under no circumstances are we going to defend things which are not de- fensible… Yet the Labour Party did de- fend the indefensible: at a time when you yourself were party president. Konrad Mizzi, for ex- ample, won a unanimous vote of confidence after the Panama Paper revelations in 2016… What I'm saying is that, if there were things that were positive [in the previous administration], we will say they were positive; if there were things that could have been done better, we will say that they could have been done better… and if there were things that need to be changed, or which were done badly… we will say that, too. But how do you explain the fact that Mizzi's involvement in the Panama Papers emerged in 2016… yet it was only last month that action was finally taken against him? Wouldn't you say that the Labour Party defended him all that time, un- til he became indefensible? It was not a question of 'defend- ing him until he became indefen- sible'; it is important that you do not interpret me that way. The reality is that, as the Prime Minis- ter himself explained immediate- ly after that vote was taken, the circumstances of the time – in- cluding recent revelations – were different from before… Were they really, though? The fact that Mizzi had opened off- shore companies, designed to receive moneys from (among others) 17 Black… that has been public knowledge for four years. Yes, but the revelations were unfolding throughout that time. The Montenegro connection, for instance, was not known be- fore last month. I think the Prime Minister was very clear, in that statement he made after the vote was taken. He explained very clearly what had changed in the meantime; and when the time came, he took the decisions that needed to be taken. Only with regard to Konrad Mizzi, though. There remains the question of how Labour in- tends to deal with the legacy of Joseph Muscat himself. As the Prime Minister responsible for all government's actions at the time… shouldn't the Labour Party also dissociate itself from Muscat, in the same way as it already has with Mizzi? And if it does come to that scenario… wouldn't there also be a much higher political price to pay? I think it would be a disservice to talk in terms of 'what if?', or to speculate about 'what might hap- pen'. Let's look at what did happen instead. The context we are look- ing at is that the situation re- garding Joseph Muscat is entire- ly different from that of Konrad Mizzi. The Prime Minister has already made this very clear… it was, in fact, the first question he was asked after emerging from the [Mizzi] vote. There is nothing unclear or ambiguous about his reply. And it is a reply that I fully agree with, and uphold. Moreover, I think that Joseph Muscat has already paid the high- est political price possible… and certainly, the highest political price that has ever been paid by a Maltese politician. So as far as I can see, there is nothing more to be said about the matter. 'party' and 'government'