Gonzi’s statement on turning down Muscat’s invitation to officiate at Parliament House opening ceremony
Parliament House
The prime minister has invited his immediate predecessor to officiate at the opening ceremony for Parliament House on Monday. Lawrence Gonzi has turned down Joseph Muscat, reminding him politely of the different roles under the Constitution which dictate that it is the head of state and the speaker of the house who are the relevant Constitutional figures in this context – not the prime minister, still less a former prime minister.
This would be quite apart from Muscat’s sarcasm back in December 2012, when he was still Opposition leader, in saying – while criticising the project harshly – that he would invite Dr Gonzi to “open this monument to extravagance”. He spoke fully assured that he would be victorious the following March, and beyond that, he sounded like somebody who values democracy so little that he sees Malta’s first parliament house as an extravagance.
And while we’re on the subject, we might as well make it clear at the outset what the building is called in English. It’s Parliament House and not ‘the parliament building’ (il-bini tal-parlament) or ‘parliament’ – parliament is what meets inside it.
We have never had a parliament house before, so the matter has not arisen until now.
Lawrence Gonzi’s statement, as reported in Times of Malta:
The inauguration of the new Parliament building is a solemn occasion symbolising Malta’s dignity as a sovereign and mature democracy. We are moving out of the “Grandmaster’s Palace” into an iconic building which was itself conceived as a symbol of a successful, vibrant and ambitious democracy.
I am very proud of this achievement and of the significance of the event. It is precisely this sense of pride in my country that bars me from taking any initiative which demeans the occasion.
As such, I have always maintained that the building should be inaugurated by the Head of State who is entrusted by the Constitution to represent us all together as a people with our unique characteristics.
I confirm that a few months ago I was approached by the Principal Permanent Secretary who asked me whether I would be prepared to “deliver a speech”. I indicated to him that I did not think this was appropriate and I reiterated that in my opinion, the building should be inaugurated by the President of the Republic with the participation of the Speaker of the House.
I still think this is what should be done. Any other option would be an insult to the President, to the Speaker, to our parliamentarians and to those amongst us who are not influenced by outdated political bias.