Through this book they might get a better idea of what some of these ‘charitable trusts are about.

Mhux sewwa naqbda ma’ dawn id-difetti fl-Ingliz, mhux sewwa, nay. Ahna nitghalmu li d-dnub hazin, izda mhux il-persuna. Mhux sewwa, Jozef, mhux sewwa.

Now a multimillionaire, flying round the globe in a day, he should be dedicating all his efforts to his massive international philanthropic programme based in the Bahamas.

Barroso is only trying to waste his time.

To hell with Barroso.

Get on with it Johnnie and help the underprivileged.

Just ignore Jose Manuel.

Compared to you he is a ‘mejjet bil-guh’.

What I find strange in Dalli’s letter is his quoting Article 17.6. of the TEU. Barroso too says he acted in line with that article.

Having been requested to do so, the Commissioner “shall resign”.

Unless you are a judge, a letter of resignation is not required.

Had Dalli not resigned Barroso would have had to forcefully retire him or risk being forced to resign himself eventually, possibly dragging the Commission with him like Jacques Santer did in 1999.

It is not a question of Dalli resigning or being fired. Dalli left with a Commissioner’s pension.

The question before the Court is whether Dalli’s resignation is valid.

1. Dalli – this is not your private country. This is OUR country and you don’t decide who comes here and if they are arrested or not.

2. If Barosso comes to Malta, it will be an official visit. If you visit an other country – it will be an criminal who is a NOBODY outside his pesky little country.

3. Why does not the EU issue an arrest warrant against you ? Then we can let REAL police in a REAL European country handle your record!

4. Dalli, can you justify your income. Has the Tax authorities ever audited your affairs – and if not, WHY?

That’s Dalli doing a spot of Maltinglish; ‘int tlabtni ghaliha’.

John Dalli does not see anything wrong in having a meeting with a tobacco industry lobbyist whilst on holiday in Gozo, and without informing Brussels.

He knows that it looks suspicious and he agreed with Barroso that it looks suspicious. What he does not accept is that that fact is not enough for Barroso to fire him. As far as he is concerned, if OLAF do not have proof that he accepted the bribes discussed by his canvasser over the phone with the Tobacco Industry, he cannot be fired.

There is a complete contrast between the European way and Maltese way of seeing things.

Barroso quite simply told Dalli that he was jeopardizing the image of the Commission. Barroso couldn’t risk that and told Dalli that his days as a Commissioner were over. The options were two: either he resigns voluntarily (and fights to clear his name and retain his pension) or he is fired (and loose his pension).

And in a way, even Joseph Muscat dealings with a blacklisted construction company falls in the same category. If a deal looks suspicious / risky then do not even accept to meet the other dubious party to discuss the deal.

That offer should not be accepted even if it is looks very profitable – Muscat’s own words were “a deal which cannot be refused”.