The revelation made by the Malta Independent that architects Michael Falzon and Ninu Zammit had hidden accounts in Switzerland brought about a political reaction from Dr Joseph Muscat. In defending these two gentlemen, he said that their fault is nothing compared to that of Dr Austin Gatt. I presume that Dr Muscat made such a statement because Austin Gatt admitted prior to the last general election to have held an account in Switzerland, which he said, he had “forgotten” to declare.

The journalists asked the Leader of the Opposition, Dr Simon Busuttil whether he intended to suspend Dr Gatt, like he has suspended Mr Falzon and Mr Zammit from party activities. Dr Busuttil said that he did not want to go into Gatt’s affair because it had happened prior to his time as leader of the PN. I find this to be a puerile answer. A serious leader should assume responsibilities of past deeds, including those, which had occurred prior to his time especially, when they reflect on the present running of the party.

However, one has to be fair with Dr Austin Gatt here. Dr Gatt explained that this Swiss account belonged to his father. He had inherited it. Therefore, the money in this account, if one wants to believe Dr Austin Gatt, was not accrued from his profession or during his time in politics. From the way the Prime Minister tweeted his message, it is clear that the Prime Minister does not believe Dr Austin Gatt’s explanation. I am sure that many of us, the less common mortals, do not believe him either. However, there is a difference between us and the Prime Minister. We have no powers to investigate Dr  Austin Gatt. The Prime Minister has all the power. The police are at his command. However, till now, there was never any indication from the Government or the Ministry of the Interior of investigating him about this account. On the contrary, the explanation given by Dr Gatt himself to the police seems to have convinced them about the truth of his account. Possibly the maxim  “let sleeping dogs lie” applies here.

According to The Malta Independent, Mr Zammit repatriated his funds in 2014 after taking advantage of a government amnesty. In simple words, the money was returned to Malta during this current administration.This gives rise to many questions, including whether the normal scrupulous procedures, governing the transfer of such funds, has been followed in his case. It is a logical conclusion that the Government, including the Prime Minister, knew of Mr Zammit’s hidden funds. In part, this explains the tweet by the Prime Minister. The question would be, was the Prime Minister sending his tweet to minimize the damage that this piece of news would do to his Government’s credibility? Perhaps the Prime Minister needs to reflect better before tweeting.

Moreover, our Prime Minister needs now to explain why he thought it is important to defend two ex-nationalist ministers who had evaded income tax. While the rest of us paid taxes, those who had the opportunity and facility to deposit money in Switzerland avoided paying 35 per cent tax on the capital and another 35 per cent on their yearly interest accrued from these deposits.

Thus, while I appreciate the fact that Mr Michael Falzon has apologized, I still think that the reaction of Dr Lawrence Gonzi still holds for these two gentlemen. Unlike Dr Joseph Muscat, he did not seek to defend Mr Ninu Zammit or Mr Michael Falzon but asked them to explain from where this money had come from.

Furthermore, one cannot resist from reflecting on the claim made by Mr Michael Falzon that this money, Lm200,000, was made prior to the 1987 election, that is, during the Dom Mintoff/Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici administration. Falzon made it appear as normal for individuals during the Labour Government of the 80s to open an account in Switzerland. This is not true.  Thus, it is not only an issue of how he had earned such money but also how he had succeeded to transfer the money to Switzerland. One cannot admire the fact, that after his brusque reactions, Falzon apologized.

Now, those who followed Michael Falzon’s articles in Il-Mument dedicated to Mintoff’s time to remind its readers about the difficult days, need to reread them again. It is true that the 1980s were difficult times. I worked as a causal teacher in 1986 and earned around Lm50 per month. Soldiers earned Lm10 per week. But some of the Nationalist MPs were having a good a time it seems. Therefore, Falzon’s undeclared earnings justify Mintoff’s ranting against is “sinjur” or landlord.

I wonder why Mr Falzon went into politics, and became a minister with a salary that definitely could not give him that same amount of profit. Instead, of criticising Mr Mintoff, Mr Falzon should thank him for allowing him to make such fortune. Now, a person who became rich during Mintoff’s time and is a friend of Dr Joseph Muscat ends up in the Executive Council of the PN. It is not a surprise that in the European Elections, the PN failed to keep the same amount of votes obtained by Dr Gonzi in 2013. The PN electorate is not stupid.