To state, as the Allied News editors did, that Adrian Hillman did not influence the editorial line cannot be taken seriously. The American journalist and author, Mark Twain, would define such statements as lies and damn lies. It is hard for me to believe that there is no connection between the kickbacks that allegedly Hillman started receiving from Keith Schembri and certain decisions taken by the editors of the Allied Progress to demonize Lawrence Gonzi and particular ministers who were very close to Gonzi.

In normal circumstances, any newspaper would be closed down after the revelation of such a scandal. Murdoch closed down the News of the World for an offence related to the use of information coming from telephone tapping. In the case of Allied Group, there is found suspicion that editorial policies were bent to support Adrian Hillman’s best friend.

It was the newspaper Kullħadd which accused Mario de Marco of colluding with Adrian Hillman. Normally, an intimate friendship should have no repercussions if one fails in life, unless there is more than just friendship. One needs only to look at how the Times reports about Mario de Marco, to realize that there is more than friendship between them.

When, after the 2013 election, the Times spoke about the reasons of what went wrong in Gonzi’s government, it avoided criticizing de Marco’s ministry, which was one of the main reasons for such a big defeat. One should remember that de Marco was responsible for MEPA. The Times was full of praise about the way this institution was run by de Marco and described those who had suffered injustices, due to its illogical and corrupt decisions, as selfish individuals.

But there is further proof that the editors of the Allied Press have a finger in the pie. Normally, when they run corruption stories about the Catholic Church or about one of our political parties, the editors would not close the comments areas. Now, as the story of corruption concerns them, and until Hillman resigned from his post, they did not allow bloggers to voice their views under the relevant news items in the digital edition of The Times which dealt with this story.

There are more stories to prove that there is a collateral relationship between the editors and Hillman. When Gonzi got over a billion euros in funds from the EU, The Times reported this story in its third page. Ironically, the good economic performance of this government is due largely to these funds from the EU, which are ending up in the hands of very few people. In this scenario, one cannot be surprised that businessmen start spilling the beans, in particular, if they are prevented from having their share from this cake, while those at risk of poverty continue to be on the increase.

I remember that around two or three years from the start of Gonzi’s second legislature, The Times and Malta Today featured a series of articles targeting Joe Cassar and Carm Mifsud Bonnici. They were published intermittently between these two newspapers. Before these two newspapers started hitting out, these two politicians were described by these same newspapers, as the ones obtaining the best results during Gonzi’s legislature.

It would be interesting to know whether these attacks by the Times of Malta on Carm Mifsud Bonnici and Joe Cassar started at around the time that the alleged deal was reached between Keith Schembri and Adrian Hillman. Incidentally, Joe Cassar was the MP who supported Simon Busuttil both for the latter’s stand to become deputy leader and then to become leader. Can this explain why the Times had an interest to demonize him? For sure, he was a hindrance to de Marco’s political aspirations to become leader of the PN. 

Immediately after elections, both the Allied Group and Malta Today were behind the candidature of Mario de Marco – Hillman’s friend - for leadership. The day after the PN lost the election, de Marco had a full blown article on the back page of the Times. Throughout his campaign for leadership, Busuttil was never given the same coverage that the editors of the Allied group reserved for Hillman’s friend.

In the wake of the fact that Mario de Marco declared more than once that he does not have the same clout of his father over The Times, how can one explain this type of editorial behaviour? How can one believe that Hillman was not influencing the editorial policy of Allied press?

Ironically, Saviour Balzan is the sole editor who is sticking his neck out to defend Adrian Hillman. Am I right in saying that Keith Schembri is a good friend to both of them? Like the Allied Group, Balzan still dreams of de Marco as the natural leader of the PN. Unfortunately, this latest story has destroyed his chances of one day becoming PN leader.

Then comes the PBS story. Our National station allocates TV programmes only to Malta Today and The Times. Now, it has been proven beyond doubt that the news agenda of PBS is dictated from Castile. It goes without saying that after the Prime Minister, the second most important person in Castile at the moment is Keith Schembri. Despite the fact that Malta Independent applies, this newspaper is not given any airspace on PBS. The reason is very simple: Keith Schembri does not control The Malta Independent.

I think that after what has been revealed about Hillman, the editors of the Times and the Sunday Times should resign in the same manner that Rebekah Brooks had to resign from News of the World. For the same reasons, Mario de Marco's position with the PN structure is now in balance and as a consequence of his relationship with Adrian Hillman, which clearly goes beyond that of pure friendship, he too has no other option but to resign as party deputy leader. It will then be up to the leader and the party delegates whether to accept his resignation or not.