So there it is. After two massive public protests, two votes of No Confidence in the House, which were both defeated, countless speeches, articles, controversies, comments – what are we left with?

Is it now curtains for the Panama Papers? Will we now get closure and ‘move on’’, as some government figures put it? Or is this issue destined to remain festering within us?

What about Konrad Mizzi? Is the country going to be fobbed off by a mumbled apology, when according to eyewitnesses, he was fooling about prior to the apology speech after which he disappeared from the Chamber?

On the other hand, what are the options facing the Opposition after this second vote? True, the leader of the Opposition will be taking part as a private citizen in the protest by civil society, but, even so, what after that?

The issue seems like an alley from which one cannot emerge unless one backtracks.

It is very clear that the government hopes the issue will blow over and people will forget it, as other issues come up. Then the government would have paid a very light penalty for the Konrad Mizzi infraction – removing Dr Mizzi from minister of this and of that but remaining a minister seems a very light penalty. The Cabinet reshuffle was not caused by the Dr Mizzi case but by Leo Brincat’s move to the ECA.

True, the prime minister uttered some words of sobriety but then he himself drowned such words in a torrent of abuse against the Opposition.

So there it is. Is that all?

The damage done to our country by Dr Mizzi is still there and the even greater damage done to the country by Dr Muscat for not removing Dr Mizzi and Keith Schembri is still there. Actually, the greatest damage has been done by the prime minister to … the prime minister himself because he has shown feet of clay in this case when he had nerves of steel in other cases. There is simply no comparison between his attitude regarding say Michael Falzon and that regarding Konrad Mizzi.

As for those in the Labour Party who have spoken that Dr Mizzi ought to resign but then meekly went and voted against the No Confidence vote, the country regards them with pity. What is the use of words when the words are not accompanied by actions in the moment of vote? And for an MP, it is his actions that matter most, not his words.

One notes that, in reply to the Panama Papers crisis, Dr Muscat pressed harder on the accelerator as if speeding ahead can somehow compensate for not taking the appropriate action that shows true leadership.

Dr Muscat has also unleashed a veritable torrent of abuse against the Opposition and this stance has been eagerly imitated by his acolytes. But the country at large has seen through this ruse and has swatted away the various diversions created by the team at Castille.

Dr Muscat has lost the moral high ground he had boasted of, with some reason, in the run-up to the election. He has shown himself to be weak, hesitant and aggressive when cornered. The country has now seen the real Dr Muscat.

There can be no closure. OK, maybe the public protests will die down and people will find other things to talk about. But this case will continue to fester and poison the national environment and people have realized the prime minister has feet of clay. The prime minister has acted like that because that was the only way for him to act and this restriction of freedom of movement seriously undermines his authority.