A minister on Monday criticised a Nationalist MP for personally attacking a minister's partner through a parliamentary question - even though neither the minister nor his partner were mentioned.

The exchange took place in the very first question of this legislature, put by Nationalist MP Claudette Buttigieg. 

She asked whether it was proper that a person (name enclosed under separate cover and not published) had gone on leave so that she could directly participate in a minister's electoral campaign, even through home visits. If this was the case, did the minister consider it proper that a person who occupied a sensitive position as director of services to vulnerable children and families should be taking part in partisan political events which could undermine clients' confidence of the services?  

Replying, Family and Social Welfare Minister Michael Falzon said the person indicated in the parliamentary question had always gone about her duties diligently and as expected of her. While she was a minister's partner, it did not result that she had acted in a manner that compromised her duties, as the MP had implied.  

He later added that in the very first parliamentary question, the PN was returning to personal attacks, this time involving the partner of a minister. He insisted that the person involved had always been correct in her work.  He could not be expected to inquire what she did while on leave.

Buttigieg retorted that she had never mentioned the minister and it was the minister who revealed in his reply that the subject of her question was the partner of a minister.

Falzon said it was very clear who the Nationalist MP had been referring to. It was true that there was someone who said that the people were Ġaħan, (idiots) but not so much.

Buttiġieġ pointed out that it was a Labour minister who had spoken of people being Ġaħan - a reference to Labour backbencher and former minister Edward Zammit Lewis. 

Independently of who this person was, she was the head of a public service directorate. Should such senior public officials go on political house visits, let alone political activities in general? Did some sort of rules or code of ethics apply to such people? 

The minister said every place of work had its rules. This person, while at work, had not done anything improper. Had there been anything improper, he would have no problem in investigating.

Nationalist MP Karol Aquilina said the code of ethics of the public service said in clause 21 that civil servants had to be politically impartial both in their duties as well as in their public life. So was the minister saying that this clause was not breached?

The minister said he had no further comment. 

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.