I did not understand why the Opposition took so much trouble to present two motions calling for the suspension of Parliament’s agenda to discuss the resignation of a minister and an ambassador and then gave in so easily to the government’s demands.

Let’s go through what happened chronologically.

The Nationalist Party parliamentary group chose 9 May as the day for the vote on the budget implementation bill. The government has up to 14 May – six months after the presentation of the budget – to do so.

On 26 April, the media were summoned to a hastily-called press conference at which PL leader Joseph Muscat said the Opposition had filed two motions to suspend the parliamentary agenda the following Monday (30 April) so that the House could discuss two other motions the Opposition had presented earlier: the one demanding a discussion on Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, which it had presented in December, and the one calling for the resignation of Malta’s permanent representative to the EU, Richard Cachia Caruana, which it presented a few weeks ago.

But when Monday arrived, nothing of the sort happened. Instead, we had the Opposition taking part in the House Business Committee, which started to discuss Parliament’s agenda for the coming weeks. No agreement was reached that day, but on Wednesday it took but a few minutes for the two sides to come to terms – and it’s not what the Opposition originally wanted.

The two motions were not withdrawn, but after the accord and the setting of the dates, they have now become obsolete.

And this is why I do not understand why the Labour Party initially tried to force the government’s hand into changing Parliament’s agenda, when a few days later it quietly accepted what the government had decided to do.

The PL must be regretting its knee-jerk reaction to the PN’s call for a 9 May vote, thinking that it could have its own motions discussed prior to that. It was basically taking the cue from what renegade Nationalist MP Franco Debono was saying – the Gћaxaq village lawyer has been insisting on having the discussion on his declared enemy – Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici – before the vote on the budget implementation bill.

But in the end, both the PL and Franco Debono had to concede defeat, while the PN, and in particular Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, scored a small but not insignificant victory. For one thing, the government has won more time as it continues to face the crisis brought about by the hard-headedness of a disgruntled MP.

The Opposition is trying to defend itself by saying that it is all for a compromise, but if it was going to accept the government’s terms without a fight, then it should not have presented the motions to adjourn the House in the first place.

What is striking in all this is that the PL is seemingly following what Franco Debono is doing, and once again is appearing as a party that is too hungry for power. It is trying its best to push for an early election, and by so doing it is unwittingly making mistakes that could cost it dearly.

It has already been hit once. Earlier this year, it called for a vote of no confidence in the government, thinking that the way Franco Debono was talking at the time would have led the Gћaxaq village lawyer to vote against the government of which he forms a part.

But when it came to the crunch, Debono did not go the whole way – he simply abstained, as he did last November on a vote of confidence involving Transport Minister Austin Gatt. The Speaker’s casting vote ensured that the government could continue its term in office.

But the Labour Party does not seem to have learnt its lesson. It is evident that the party’s militant section is still stronger than the moderate side, and that doors left ajar are being seen too much as an open opportunity with which to attack the government. I’ve heard talk that the Labour parliamentary group was split down the middle on the way forward, with the more aggressive MPs arguing in favour of the two adjournment motions being moved, while the more reasonable MPs opted for staying put. In the end the militants won, but this came at a price.

Dr Muscat himself has made mistakes too, such as when he went to speak to Franco Debono on the government benches. Yes, MPs do speak to each other, but to have an Opposition Leader openly meeting up with a government MP who has been putting spokes in the administration’s wheels right from the start of the legislature is not the way things are done.

So it was no wonder that when, a couple of days later, the Opposition presented the two motions to change the parliamentary agenda, speculation was rife that Dr Muscat and Dr Debono had spoken about the issue and that they had agreed on a strategy that would have favoured both – but which ended up hurting them both.

Logic now tells me that there is no way Franco Debono will be voting against the budget implementation bill on Wednesday. If he does, and the government collapses, he will first of all lose all the limelight (which his narcissism cannot do without) and secondly he will forego the opportunity to bring down his nemesis.

With dates set for the debates on Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici and Richard Cachia Caruana – another of Debono’s favourite targets – I can already imagine the Gћaxaq MP salivating at the thought that the chance he has been waiting for will finally come his way.

But, then again, maybe my logic is different.

[email protected]