All the razzmatazz concerning Malta’s presidency of the European Council evaporated in a single afternoon with the sorry spectacle provided by Maltese ministers when grilled by the European Parliament.

We are still at the beginning of the Presidency and there is hard work ahead as the Maltese Presidency gets to grip with the issues debated by the various Council meetings.

But what should have been a moment of glory when Maltese ministers presented themselves to the various Parliament committees and spoke about what they intended to do during the presidency, turned out to be an undisguised hour of shame.

Obviously, not all ministers fared badly. Many, actually, presented their programme and the questions they got were not so bad. Maybe that gives you an idea how superficial the EP can be, for all its insistence on hearings and the lot. But then we know that from the time it turned down Leo Brincat only to see him admitted to the Court of Auditors.

But there were two ministers in particular who had a rough ride at the hearings.

Minister Edward Scicluna found himself cornered as he has often been by very direct questions regarding Malta as a tax haven. Though denying  and denying the claim, Minister Scicluna was hampered by the involvement of his minister colleague, Konrad Mizzi, in tax evasion and Panama, and by Minister Scicluna’s own vote in favour of Minister Mizzi in votes in the Maltese Parliament.

The overall impression Minister Scicluna left was of a very weak minister who could not bring himself to impose law and order in his own area, who equivocated when asked direct questions and who by this weakness undermined his own efforts at curbing tax evasion.

But the worse show was that put on by Minister Konrad Mizzi. We may have got used to his quirky way of responding to criticism by deflecting attention elsewhere and answering to the direct questions by a fobbed sentence or two, mentioning the chimera-audit/s.

The fact that only two questioners asked about his involvement in the Panama Papers is neither here nor there. Nor is the fact that two Maltese MEPs stood up to criticize him a sign of national treachery, as the Opposition says on its media.

On the contrary, we applaud those who like Roberta Metsola expressed her shame, her anger, that at such a signal time, Malta was being let down by its ministers and in such an important place.

It is clear from the interventions by the non-Maltese MEPs how angry they were that the presidency of the European Council was being left in the hands not just of the smallest nation but also in the hands of a corrupt clique.

The silence of the others, and of the whole European Parliament can only be guessed at. Certainly, if Europe is to face up to the many challenges it faces, it cannot allow this dismembering of the laws, rules and regulations in the fight against tax evasion. Nor is it any excuse to say that after all Luxembourg under Jean-Claude Juncker had all sort of underhand agreement with big companies.

But even if so, what should have been Malta’s hour of pride became Malta’s hour of shame. The Maltese people, who is a proud people, will never forget this.