He came, he saw, he apologized (kind of). Then Konrad Mizzi left the chamber.

Only minutes before he stood up to address the grave situation he has placed the country in, Mizzi was openly goofing around. After his intervention, the man who, we’re told, set a new record in humility by offering a very perfunct apology, couldn’t make himself sit through a debate that was all about him and provoked by him.

Maybe that’s what explains the careful speeches of some of his colleagues and the silence of others. They speak volumes about the real mood around Joseph Muscat, despite the show of unity as far as votes went.

Wednesday’s vote of no confidence in Konrad Mizzi – put forward by ex-Labour MP Marlene Farrugia – was further proof, if more was ever needed, that the government side in our parliament is in a serious crisis.

Before the debate kicked off, Konrad Mizzi was goofing around with Ian Borg and Owen Bonnici. They looked like school boys waiting to see how they would be punished for misbehaving. Konrad had this permanent, artificial smile just like the Cheshire cat.

This charade went on until Marthese Portelli opened the debate. She launched a strong criticism of the energy sector, which was meant to be Mizzi’s forte but which essentially has become his biggest failure.

Konrad Mizzi contained himself while his companions tried to distract him from giving too much attention to what was being said from the Opposition side. However, there was a very clear indication that the heat was on and things were going to get tough for Konrad. As Marthese hit harder through her speech, he got redder in the face.

Desperate to get it over and done with, Konrad was the first to speak from the government side. He made it very obvious that the introduction to his speech had been written for him. He followed every word on the paper using his index finger.

In my opinion he was clearly instructed to apologize but the delivery was nowhere close to the heartfelt tone used later by Godfrey Farrugia. It was also very striking how Konrad could be goofing about one second and then pretend to be sorry for what he has done the next.

Once the introduction was over, he switched tone again and went through his list of achievements in a pre-election tone, totally cold and unconvincing.

Once Konrad’s speech was over, he left the room (just as I started my speech) only to return when the Prime Minister gave his speech. Then he left again and returned for the vote.

This was not the only musical chairs. Joseph Muscat also made it obvious to all present that he had no intention of listening to any of our speeches and kept coming in when MPs from his side spoke but left during four of the six speeches from the Opposition. In fact the Prime Minister only sat through Simon Busuttil’s and Marlene Farrugia’s speeches.

Undeniably, there were some good speeches which varied in style and content.

Simon Busuttil once again rose up to the occasion and gave a fantastic speech. He was not partisan in his delivery and genuinely appealed to cross-party supporters.

His sombre tone and heartfelt concern for moral and social justice echoed public concern on this issue. He acknowledged the meaningful speeches made by Godfrey Farrugia and Evarist Bartolo but expressed his disappointment since those speakers were effectively going to contradict themselves by the vote of confidence they were going to give Mizzi.

The Prime Minister on the other hand opted for a very short and negative speech in which he once again tried to defend the impossible.

Marlene Farrugia also gave a very good speech encouraging those who could make a difference and appealing to their sense of patriotism.

At the end of the debate, as was expected, the vote was lost by the Opposition but ironically the government side did not walk out with head held high. The Prime Minister told the press he would not ride roughshod over the people and he would leave the decision on closing this chapter entirely in their hands.

How’s that for taking a decision and doing the right thing?