I am sad to see “internal” conflicts being brought up . Although this shows that the PN and its “supporters” are definitely more mature and open to criticism, it oils Labour’s cogs which were getting so rusty, that their party was in shambles.

The Nationalists have stumbled and maybe Simon Busuttil was too honest in this matter – naive but not strategic. I think the Nationalists have so much more to offer to the country, and rather than focusing on corruption only, they must begin delivering the message of their many proposals for this country to be great again.

So many documents and so little information, because the PN media are focusing too much on what Labour’s pitfalls are. I believe that people need to know the contents of these documents and understand the PN is the solution to this situation.

I have resolved not to vote in the next elections but nothing is written in stone in this world (please do not bring up the usual arguments about letting others decide for me, voting for the lesser evil etc etc). To me, abstention means a refusal to be complicit in what is wrong no matter who commits it (conscientious objection).

I have no difficulty agreeing that Simon Busuttil is clean, well-meaning, well-intentioned though it remains to be seen whether he would be strong enough, if elected prime minister, to resist the inevitable, mighty onslaught by his own ministers and party stalwarts demanding to do favours to those who would have helped the party to power: my rather advanced age and unfailing memory have taught me some lessons.

I am not asking you to make a “distinguo” in the fashion of medieval dialectics but I would be grateful if you could explain how one could distinguish between the “kap” and his party, vote for Simon Busuttil without voting for the Nationalist party.

Would not the end result be exactly the same: elected Busuttil as PM, ipso facto the Nationalist Party is in power? Isn’t your “statement of intent” a bit of an exercise in sophistry?