PN motion defeated: ‘A vote against justice’ – David Agius

The vote in Parliament last Thursday which shot down a PN motion calling for the removal of three ministers in the wake of the publication of the Jean Paul Sofia public inquiry, was “a vote against justice,” PN MP David Agius said.

In an interview with The Malta Independent on Sunday, Agius described the vote as one that went “against the public inquiry, a vote against the way forward that this country needs to take.”

The PN had filed a no confidence motion in Energy Minister Miriam Dalli, Lands Minister Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi and Economy Minister Silvio Schembri following the conclusions of the Jean Paul Sofia public inquiry, who died in a construction site collapse in Paola in December of 2022. The motion read that the three ministers had to shoulder responsibility for the failures of the executive through the entities that fell under their responsibility and which, over the years, they were or are entrusted to lead. However while the motion was being debated in Parliament, amendments were introduced by the government that removed any mention of no confidence in the three ministers and removed calls for their resignation.

The amendment also changed other things, such as a call for the implementation of the inquiry recommendations within six months, which was also removed, with the amendment effectively having called on Parliament to urge the government to, “as it is already doing”, start giving an account to Parliament, society and the Sofia family in particular, regarding the implementation of the public inquiry recommendations.“The amendments made by the government called on Parliament to oblige the government to, within a year from the publication of the inquiry report, bring the implementation of the inquiry recommendations for the consideration of Parliament through a debate. When the votes were taken, the PL MPs amendments were approved with 41 MPs voting in favour and 32 against.

“It was one of the saddest days of my political career,” he said.

Agius said that the PL MPs “haven’t learnt anything” from the July Parliamentary vote, where a PN motion that had called for a public inquiry into the death of Jean Paul Sofia had been voted down.

“After so many years of the country being independent, we still lack the independence to think about what is necessary for this country. When a public inquiry gives such clear conclusions and nobody in the political sphere takes responsibility, that is very sad. The next step forward is that the people need to send a clear message in the June elections. That is the only way people will get justice for Jean Paul Sofia, his family and all those who suffered such consequences due to issues related to the construction industry.”

Regarding the way the PN’s motion was amended, he said that he would have expected the government “to call the Opposition if they did not like our motion, to sit down and amend it together and find a way to work together in this sector to find ways to ensure that nobody loses their lives in this sector,” and to avoid repetition of what happened in the past.

Decision to contest

Agius is seeking the next step in his political career as he is one of the PN candidates contesting the EP election in June. What made him decide to contest, Agius brought up his political experience. He said he has been elected as an MP in five consecutive general elections, having at different points in his political career been party Whip, chairman on Parliamentary Committees and deputy leader for the PN for a time.

“I felt the time has come to assist the party in attaining the third MEP seat. I believe I would be capable of getting votes for the party that, if I didn’t contest, would be a bit harder to get.”

He said that people know him as being completely anti-abortion. “They know my demo-Christian stand.

Asked whether this is his last hurrah in politics, deciding to end his political career by contesting for the MEP elections, he said no “of course not. This is a new beginning if I am elected. If I am not elected, I was and will remain a shadow minister and I was and will remain deputy speaker. Today, my post in Parliament is as Deputy Speaker, which was unanimously agreed upon by both sides of the House.”

“I am there to give something to the country. The EU sphere today has a major influence on what happens in Malta.” He mentioned the hundreds of laws that emerge from the EU, and said “we need to have people with experience to analyse them and see how they would affect the country. I can utilise my experience over the past 20 plus years in Parliament, in the EU.”

Third seat

Asked what the chances are that the PN would achieve the third seat, he believes that PN supporters are ready to go out and vote. “They are looking forward to voting.” He said that there are Labour Party supporters, however, who are indicating their intention not to vote, and some who will vote for the PN. “So the gap there was last time (regarding the third seat), I think would be manageable to win. The Labour Party would still have more votes than us” he said, adding that the question would be who would win the sixth seat, whether the PL would get four or the PN three.

Surveys show the gap between the PL and PN to be quite large, he was told. “15,000 votes will not give the PL the fourth seat, it will give the PN the third seat,” he said.

Told that, despite a number of scandals having broken out, the PN hasn’t managed to gain much ground, Agius said that the last election was two years ago. “The difference was 40,000 votes. If the polls are right, that from 40,000 it has dropped to 15,000 or 20,000, that’s already something.”

“There are 70,000 people who didn’t vote in the last election, and I think that is where the PN’s biggest challenge lies. These are people who didn’t vote PN or PL, which means we have a chance to attract them. To focus and target those who didn’t vote in the last election could help to continue shrinking that gap and to reach the point where in two and a half years’ time, a closer general election result between the two parties will be seen.”

Farmers’ demands

Asked where he stands on the calls made by farmers in their protests, he spoke about balance. “I don’t see everything as being black or white. We need to find balance by assisting our farmers with EU funds and local funds, not leaving them on their own. On the other hand, we have to understand that farmers’ produce on its own is not enough for the local market. But we cannot have foreign markets competing with

Maltese in a way that ends up drowning them.” Asked how he would tackle this, he said “with a balance. We need to think and ask, how many farmers do we have and what are they producing? What does the market need? How much should the price farmers place be? But we cannot go to the EU not knowing what is happening in the farming sector. It cannot be that we don’t even have the statistics of what Maltese farmers need. Today the expenses of a Maltese farmer, compared with those who import, have become phenomenal.”

Agius said that farmers protesting after not having done so for so many years shows that there is something wrong, “it means that they were abandoned.” He mentioned the need to think and plan ahead.

Arms and defence

Questioned about criticism that the PN is in favour of arms rather than peace, and whether he believes the EU needs to increase defence spending, he said he is in favour of the EU being strong enough to defend itself, and he supports the idea of an EU army for defence purposes.

“Never to attack. I agree that the EU increases its forces, an EU army, so that nobody outside the EU would think about attacking an EU country because it is weak, like Russia attacked Ukraine. Someone could say ‘let’s go attack Malta’, but if they know that Malta and EU countries have a strong army with resources, including financial resources, to defend ourselves, that would be a deterrent and I am 100% in favour. It makes most sense for a small country, like Malta. Germany and France are already strong. But imagine if someone considers attacking Malta, if they would they would attack the whole EU with all its armed forces.”

Told that this would require Malta to enter into certain agreements that could challenge or go against the country’s neutrality, he posed the question: “are you going to be neutral in defending yourself? In the case of Ukraine, did we do anything that goes against our country’s neutrality?” Regarding the idea of an EU army, he said it would be one to defend

Europe, “never to attack. I’m not saying the EU should have an army to attack, never. I am completely against that. But for a family to strengthen the door to their home, install cameras as someone was thieving nearby, does that mean you are using them to attack? You are using them to defend yourself. Our Armed Forces would be stronger as they would be alongside other armed forces. Our armed forces already went on peace keeping missions, we never attacked.”

He said that over 80% of Europeans want to have a stronger armed forces not to attack, but for the defence of the EU. “If Russia, after attacking Ukraine, decides to attack Poland or another EU country, will the EU depend on other countries like the USA? And if the USA has a President who does not act in unity as it does today with the EU, what will we do? The stronger the EU is, the stronger a small country like Malta will be in terms of defence.”

Asked whether he is seeing any constitutional issues due to the neutrality clause, he said no. “When you defend you are not attacking anyone.”

“I am saying that if someone attacks the EU, which we are a part of, we should defend ourselves. Is that against our neutrality? How can you be neutral if someone wants to attack you?”

Energy

The government has accused the PN of having wanted to end the energy subsidies, asked for his response, he said that he was at one time the spokesperson for the PN on this sector. When the interconnector was laid, “I had said that we needed a second interconnector. As it normally does, the Labour Party first makes fun of you, and then ends up doing as we said. Regarding energy prices, we were right when we said that there was theft from energy bills. I had launched a whole campaign saying it. Joseph Muscat had then said there was an anomaly, and there was meant to be a correction and now a court case was won. But the €55 - €60 million stolen before wasn’t given back.

“We also need to understand what EU regulations will be and what we will be allowed to do.” He spoke of the need to have people speak up if if the EU decides to take particular steps in the energy sector. “As if we just let things pass, the same thing that happened regarding farmers and in the shipping sector will happen, and the Maltese will not be defended. On this we have a chance, as we are early, to see what is happening and see to it that the Maltese people truly won’t struggle with these circumstances.”

Agius had spoken out about sports corruption in the past, and was criticised for his comments by the Malta Football Association that described it as being a slap in the face. Asked about it, he said that when he speaks about an issue, he would understand the situation beforehand and knows he is right in what he says. “I was right when I said that people are being ripped off in terms of electricity bills (…) When I spoke about corruption in sports, I said what most people in the sports sector know. But they don’t say it as they don’t talk. Someone has to speak, someone has to say what the real situation is. Someone said I gave a slap in the face to football, but they were wrong in saying that. The slap in the face to football is given by those who do not speak up about corruption in sports.” He mentioned the recent court decision to jail a man for six months and have him interdicted for life for matchfixing, and also separate reports that the police are investigating a case of corruption in Maltese football involving a top official of a Premier League club. “We need to do something to strengthen the fight against corruption in sports. If you win, win correctly. If you lose, lose with honour.”