Dear Sir

THE previous administration was held by a PP led coalition, which was rejected in the last election, partially for the same reason that the Antich coalition is in trouble, but through no fault of his party, but by the opportunistic swing vote of PP, which seems to have no philosophy of government that I can find, except to sell itself to either party in exchange for a voice that exceeds the votes it represents.

However by saying that PP “would represent the largest number of voters” is false because in the last election, the largest number of voters rejected PP, if this was not true, then PP would be currently the government in power.

True “scandals/mis appropriation of public funds” are the cause of the current crisis, but the majority of these occurred on PP´s watch.
The fact that the present government represents a rejection of PP, has nothing to do with protection of the salaries and pensions of the present party in power. I don't know where Mr Irving studies maths, but PP does not have the votes to form a new government, and judging by the on going investigation of scandals attached to PP, it has as more to lose then it has to gain by elections that would probably result in a decreased representation of both PP and UM.

Instead of causing instability by carping outside of the halls of government, PP should call for a vote of confidence and put their money where their mouth is, in parliament.


Richard Goss, Porreres