Tonio Borg | After the grilling

The fact that Tonio Borg performed well in yesterday's grilling does not absolve the Prime Minister from showing a lack of foresight in choosing a politician whose deeply held social conservative views alienate him from a significant part of European public opinion.

Had the Prime Minister chosen someone like Speaker Michael Frendo, a Christian democrat who never stirred controversy on ethical issues, Malta would have been spared from a grilling which exposed our cultural deficit with regards to Europe.

The fact that liberals, greens and an unknown number of socialists are opposing his candidature simply shows how divisive Gonzi's nominee remains.

Unfortunately Gonzi's political chess move aimed at vacating the deputy leadership of his party has put the spotlight on the country's deficit on civil liberties when compared to the European mainstream.

Surely Tonio Borg gave an outstanding performance during Tuesday's grilling, which in many ways proves the positive impact of Malta being part of the European club that its politicians have to start separating their personal religious beliefs from their political duties.

Not only was Borg well prepared on the issues falling under his competence but also he presented an eloquent exposition based on the principle of subsidiarity - in a way that relegates civil liberties to the competence of the nation state. 

In this way Borg reassured Europeans that as commissioner he would not threaten in any way the civil liberties enjoyed by the European mainstream, but at the same time he absolved Malta from not partaking in the same liberties.

Surely in many ways he was describing a state of fact. Most controversial issues like the regulation of extra-marital relations and abortion fall outside the competence of the EU. But Borg's idea of subsidiarity could also be interpreted as a guarantee of a status quo, which excludes any expansion of EU competences in these matters.  

Borg's personal view that rules on cigarette packaging should also be established by the member-state shows a consistent thread in his logic in favour of retaining the competences of the nation state.

In fact the concern of critical MEPs remains that while Borg has made it clear that he will respect the bare minimum of what is expected of a commissioner, he will not be pro active in extending EU competences on matters related to gay rights and reproductive health and initiating new related programmes. 

In this way he was able to justify his political evolution from a politician who tried to impose his values on others in Malta to a 'commissioner of all Europeans' who abides not just to the treaties but also remains committed to funding reproductive health programmes in poor countries.  He did so without renouncing his believes and without sounding hypocritical.

Surely Borg's willingness to support already approved programmes which include funding for 'abortion' contrasts with the PN's witch-hunting of Labour MEPs voting for resolutions including vague references to reproductive health.

One clearly negative aspect of this episode was the jingoistic climate and the expectation that everyone should work for Borg's election. Labour's support for Borg's candidature probably went down well with voters but it also exposes the party's constant preoccupation with looking good rather than taking a stand in defence of liberal values.

While it was positive news for the country's reputation that Borg performed well in his grilling, it would have been far better if our candidate did not have to face the embarrassment of facing so many questions triggered by his past bizarre actions like thinking about entrenching the criminal law on abortion in our constitution.

The silver lining of all this is that prominent Maltese politicians will start thinking of the consequences of their actions in Malta abroad.