In the same week that we learned that Prime Minister Robert Abela refused to apologise for breaching ethical standards over a social media advert, he told us that an act of contrition is expected from independent MP Rosianne Cutajar before her reintegration into the Labour Party parliamentary group could be formalised.

The two issues are unrelated, but expose how on the one hand the PM has linked Cutajar’s possible return to the Labour fold to an apology, while he has refused to admit his mistake and say sorry for his own blunder.

It’s not that an apology would be enough for Cutajar. Her shortcomings should have seen her not only being pushed out of the PL group, but should have also led to her resignation from Parliament.

She should have resigned her seat when the famous “pigging out” chats were made public.

She should have resigned her seat when she was saved by a time-barring clause which prevented the Standards Commissioner from proceeding against her in a case filed by NGO Repubblika regarding her omission to declare income from a consultancy job at the Institute of Tourism Studies.

She should have resigned her seat when the National Audit Office described this same ITS appointment as having been “fraudulent” and “irregular”, and expressed “concerns of negligence in the disbursement of public funds by all involved”.

But she stayed on, with an “independent” tag while supporting all that the government has been doing since.

An apology, and a return to the Labour group as if nothing has happened, is not enough. Politicians, who are involved in such issues, can never be trusted again.

The way Abela has handled the Rosianne Cutajar problem has exposed him as being quite inconsistent too.

The day after her WhatsApp chats with Yorgen Fenech had been made public early last year, he had said that she had already paid her political price by resigning from the post of parliamentary secretary in the previous legislature.

But a few days later he had said that nobody is bigger than the party and, less than two weeks after Abela’s original defence of Cutajar, she had quit before the parliamentary group was to meet and kick her out. That time, Abela had been adamant that her time in the party was over.

Abela must have had a(nother) change of heart because in January this year, he opened the door for her comeback. He had said that it would be cruel for him not to reconsider her return, saying that she had paid a political “capital punishment” for her actions. Weeks passed and although we were told that the party was to discuss her reintegration, there were no further developments until, a few days ago, Abela said that she needs to apologise first for what she has done.

Once again, Abela’s position has shifted, possibly as a result of pressure he is receiving internally from members of the parliamentary group who anticipate a backlash if and when Cutajar is allowed to re-enter the PL group – if and when she apologises.  

Let us not forget, also, that in April 2023 Abela had said that Cutajar will not be allowed to contest an election as a PL candidate. Really and truly, when last January he spoke about Cutajar having faced a political “capital punishment”, he failed to mention that he had been the one to inflict such a sentence, only for him to later say he would welcome her back because she had behaved well, and, later still, then say that an apology is expected.

It can’t be more confusing than this.

This takes us to the other issue: the Prime Minister’s refusal to apologise after he was found guilty of an ethical breach. The Standards Commissioner ruled that the social media footage on the government’s Facebook page was “advertorial content” focusing on the image of the Prime Minister, and since the total cost of the video was “just” €700, of which only €100 was used to boost on social media, he felt that an apology from Abela would suffice for him to close the case.

But Abela rejected the suggestion, arguing that the complaint was “frivolous” and that it showed him visiting publicly-funded projects. For the Prime Minister, the “unjustified spending of public funds” is “frivolous”. If the PM cannot bring himself to apologise on €700 worth of public money, then one wonders what it will take for him to accept accountability for more serious accusations.

When, a few days ago, he was asked why the apology condition had been imposed on Cutajar for her to be re-accepted as part of the Labour parliamentary group, Abela had replied that if “one (meaning Cutajar) does not apologise for cases like these (hers), it shows they do not really believe that they should be taken back; so I think an apology is in order”.

Abela should hear his own words and apply them to himself.