Salvu Mallia is too much of a free spirit to be caged within the confines of a political party.
He should not have made himself available to join the Nationalist Party, and the Nationalist Party should never have accepted him within its fold.
It’s as simple as that.
A person like Salvu Mallia feels restricted within a group that functions on a set of long-established rules, and will not contain himself. Likewise, a party that runs on particular regulations that impose certain limits on its officials and candidates will find it hard to control him.
We’ve seen it happen in the past, and the Nationalist Party is repeating the same mistake.
Nobody is talking about the PN anymore. What Salvu Mallia says and does is getting more media exposure than what party leader Simon Busuttil is saying and doing.
If Salvu Mallia goes to Castille and holds a one-man demonstration against what he describes as a “corrupt regime”, then it is Salvu Mallia the individual who is protesting in this way. But if it is Salvu Mallia the PN candidate who is doing so, then the whole PN is dragged into the fray.
This is the same argument that we have made about Glenn Bedingfield. The issue with him is not that he writes, and what he writes, but that he writes what he writes as the Prime Minister’s aide. In Glenn’s case this issue is further compounded by the fact that he has a salary paid for by the people.
It’s the same with Salvu Mallia. What he has done since he became a PN candidate and what he will do as long as he remains a PN candidate will be the responsibility of the PN. Nobody is trying to silence him, but if he does not want to respect the rules that every politician forming part of a group must follow, then he should walk away. On the other hand, if the PN cannot restrain one of its candidates, then the party leader should call him to his office and tell him he is no longer needed.
If Salvu Mallia likens anyone with Hitler or Stalin it is Salvu Mallia the individual who is saying it. But if it is Salvu Mallia the PN candidate who is comparing people to the Nazi or Soviet leader then the PN carries what he says, and endorses it, unless it comes out against such declarations.
The PN did not, and therefore as a party it is seen as approving what Salvu Mallia is saying.
The PN explained its position on abortion and euthanasia, with party leader Simon Busuttil confirming that the PN, under his watch, will not even entertain the idea of having a discussion on the matter. So, in this case, the party distanced itself from what Salvu Mallia said on the two delicate subjects. In the Hitler and Stalin incidents, it did not.
Salvu Mallia should have kept himself out of a political party, and Marlene Farrugia was cleverer in this respect.
The PN, on the other hand, will live to regret its decision.
Perhaps it already does.