Opposition requests ruling following amendments to Farrugia’s motion

Opposition leader Simon Busuttil has requested a ruling by Speaker Anglu Farrugia after the same Farrugia informed an independent MP that her motion of no confidence against OPM chief of staff Keith Schembri was “inadmissible”.

After being contacted by the Clerk of the House, as instructed by the Speaker, Marlene Farrugia amended her motion against Schembri, effectively turning it into a motion of censure against the Prime Minister.

“How can you argue that the motion was inadmissible when you yourself had presented a similar motion against Richard Cachia Caruana?” Busuttil asked the Speaker.

The 2011 motion against Richard Cachia Caruana, then permanent representative to the EU, had been presented by then opposition MPs George Vella and Luciano Busuttil.

The motion accused Cachia Caruana of having manoeuvred the reactivation of Malta's participation in Nato's Partnership for Peace (PfP) in such a manner as to bypass the House's need for ratification of the PfP. The motion was approved after a government MP – Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando – had voted in favour, whilst another – Jesmond Mugliett – abstained.

Busuttil took umbrage at the Speaker’s intervention, asking on what basis had he deemed Farrugia’s motion inadmissible – the Speaker replied that, if wanted to object, a ruling should be requested.

“What I can tell you at this stage is that my role as a member of parliament was different from my role as president of the Chamber,” Farrugia said. He went on to add that the motion had been inadmissible because Schembri was not an elected member of parliament.

Busuttil objected, arguing that the motion against Cachia Caruana had set a precedent.

“If you want to request a ruling, please go ahead. All I can say is that, back in 2011, it wasn’t my decision to include that motion in the book of motions,” the Speaker said.

He added that, following “profound advice”, he came to the conclusion that Farrugia had to amend her motion for it to be admissible. The wording of the motion was left in her hands.

Requesting the ruling, Busuttil insisted he was surprised that the House had “suddenly lost the power to discuss a motion against Keith Schembri when it had discussed a motion against Richard Cachia Caruana.”

Intervening, justice minister Owen Bonnici said Cachia Caruana’s position was one regulated by the Constitution whilst Schembri “is not a public officer”.

Busuttil however argued that Cachia Caruana was not a career diplomat but had been appointed to the post on a position of trust basis.

“Is this parliament going to become powerless before individuals in a position of trust? This is also about the sovereignty of parliament,” the opposition leader insisted, complaining of "legal somersaults".