Nationalist Party supporters were quick to point fingers at an “arrogant” government after the Office of the Prime Minister authorised Gozitan MP Justyne Caruana to make use of the Armed Forces of Malta’s helicopter to cross the channel in time for a flight to Marseille.

In defence, the government retaliated with a list of times when former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi made use of the service, and added details to specify that not all occasions had been matters of urgency or national interest.

Arguments have been made – by the PN – that an MP is not a Prime Minister and – by the PL – that Dr Caruana needed to return to Marseille in time for an important conference for which she had prepared a report.

But beyond all this, there is one other matter that should be questioned, one which I think is more important than the cost of the helicopter flight and the superciliousness or otherwise of this government and the previous one – and this is why the government felt the need to bring Dr Caruana, along with another colleague, back from France for the two MPs to be present in Parliament for a possible vote on the citizenship scheme.

For those not familiar with the story as it has been reported, Dr Caruana arrived in Marseille on Sunday with Labour MP Etienne Grech, but both were ordered back to Malta after it became clear that the parliamentary agenda on Monday was to be dominated by a debate on the citizenship scheme. There was also a possibility that the Opposition would have called for a vote.

Now, there are two possible reasons why the Labour Party brought the two MPs back from Marseille, in spite of having a nine-seat majority in Parliament which would have ensured a government victory anyway.

The first is that the Labour government wanted to make a strong statement in the House of Representatives if a vote had been called. They wanted to win 39-30, making a show of force and hitting hard at an Opposition to remind it that Labour is in government with the largest majority ever, both in terms of votes and in number of seats. A 37-30 victory, apparently, was not enough to humiliate the Nationalist Party.

The second hypothesis is more intriguing. Maybe, in spite of its handsome advantage in Parliament, there were doubts about the way some Labour MPs would have voted had they been called to do so, and so every single MP was needed on board to make sure of victory. One Labour MP – Marlene Farrugia – has made it clear that she is very uncomfortable with the way the citizenship scheme has been planned and implemented. This is not to say that she would have voted against, but it is clear that her relationship with the Labour Party is not rosy, so much so that she has already decided – less than a year into the legislature – that she will not be contesting the next election. Could there be others who think the same way as Dr Farrugia? Was the Labour Party afraid of how the vote would have turned out?

As things developed, there was no need for Dr Caruana’s presence in Parliament on Monday because no vote was called by the Opposition after what must have been a rare occasion when the parliamentary agenda was pushed aside to make way for an impromptu debate on the citizenship scheme.

But something else happened on Monday which is worth noting – and this is the Prime Minister’s tone in his reply to what Opposition Leader Simon Busuttil and other Nationalist MPs had said earlier in the debate.

Someone or something must have pushed the wrong buttons for the Prime Minister, and on the day he came across as being an angry man. The citizenship scheme must be something that is really close to his heart, or something that he may not be in a position to withdraw from in spite of the resistance from all quarters – Opposition, public opinion and European institutions – and one that he needs to defend, maybe at all costs.

In both the language he used and his delivery, Joseph Muscat gave the impression of someone who is cornered and is lashing out in an attempt to turn the current back in his favour. He knows the scheme as presented is wrong but thinks it is too late to turn back, or maybe he wants to but cannot. He lost his cool, and when this happens, it is not a good sign. It is composure that exudes confidence, not anger.

The atmosphere in Parliament was not much better on Wednesday, when Minister Joe Mizzi requested the Speaker to sanction Nationalist MP George Pullicino for comments the latter made after another minister, Marie Louise Coleiro Preca, took her time when answering a parliamentary question. It has become increasingly evident that the Opposition is using parliamentary question time as one of its main weapons – as it is its right to do – to keep the government in check. And the government has not always been forthcoming in its answers.

Mr Mizzi’s request was turned down, but not before a heated argument in which it became clear that there is a lot of tension in the House. Maybe the government side – in spite of the comfort of those extra nine seats – is already feeling the heat. Maybe the government knows it has lost many points with a citizenship scheme that was intended to be the feather in its cap but which the Opposition’s solid arguments have dismantled brick by brick.

Or maybe the residual arrogance left by the previous government on the seats to the Speaker’s right has been inherited by the current incumbents.  

[email protected]