There is nothing wrong with the Prime Minister celebrating Christmas, New Year, his birthday and whatever else he chooses.

Neither is it wrong for the attendees of such receptions to go into chants of “Viva l-Labour” or “Viva Joseph” if they so wish. Joseph Muscat is also free to join in, although chanting one’s own name is not something that should make one proud.

What is wrong is when these activities and these partisan chants take place in publicly-owned buildings which Joseph Muscat currently occupies as the head of the government, which represents the whole nation and all of its citizens.

This is why there was an uproar when footage of Muscat and his wife Michelle celebrating with friends and bubblies at his official residence in Girgenti emerged a few days ago. It’s not that they were celebrating that was irksome, it’s where the celebrations were taking place that was annoying.

Suspicions that the food and drink consumed that day were also paid for through taxes were also raised, given the venue of the event.

Let’s put it in another way.

If such scenes had taken place in the comfort of Muscat’s own home, in a Labour Party club or at the party’s official headquarters in Hamrun then nobody would have said anything. In that case, the celebration would be deemed private (at home) or as party leader (PL club or HQ).

To explain again, the controversy erupted only because the scenes that went viral last weekend were filmed in the Prime Minister’s official residence as head of government.

But this is something that, ever since Labour has taken office in 2013, its exponents – including top officials and the PM himself – have been unable to grasp, pretend not to grasp, or else do not give a damn about. Given the comfortable majority obtained in the last elections, perhaps they feel they can do what they like.

It’s not the first time that such situations have occurred.

The same happened when, for example, Glenn Bedingfield used to run a divisive, partisan blog from the Prime Minister’s own office where he was employed as a consultant on parliamentary questions, or something to that effect.

A Glenn Bedingfield without the salary of a public officer could write whatever he likes in a country where freedom of expression is a column of our democracy, but a Glenn Bedingfield receiving a salary paid for by taxpayers’ money is not – or should not be – free to do that.

Simple, but Labour does not understand this simple concept.

Let’s take the matter further. Jean Claude Micallef, who hosts a TV show on the national TV station and is paid for through taxpayers’ money, is also in the wrong when he uploads partisan posts, in this case defending the PM’s behaviour in the video mentioned earlier. He is so wrong that PBS itself, through its head of news Reno Bugeja, publicly disassociated itself from Micallef’s writings. We give Bugeja credit for the position he took.

Of course, Micallef was not the first one to act in this way, and he will not be the last. Chairmen of public entities, ministers’ public relations officers and others receiving salaries paid for by taxpayers have all been guilty of doing it.

Then again, unless action is taken when rules are broken, nothing will change and these situations are bound to happen again.

And the first example should come from the top.