The GSD has said that the GSLP Government’s response on Police Governance is “misleading, twitchy in the extreme and with a distinct element of “culo de paja.”” 

A statement continued: “In it the Government states referring to Mr Azopardi that: “His behaviour resembles a petty ‘law firm Game of Thrones,’ where he obsessively name-drops Hassans and its links to me (Mr Picardo), to Nigel Feetham and to Gemma Arias-Vasquez...” 

“However nowhere in the GSD press release of 20 October 2025 were Nigel Feetham, Gemma Arias- Vasquez or Hassans actually mentioned. Nor were their links to Hassans or those of the Chief Minister stated. But clearly this is now a GSLP that has a real “culo de paja” on the subject and thinks shadows have been mentioned when they haven’t. People may ask why they are so nervous on that subject. Nor was Mr Montegriffo mentioned specifically or still less “attacked” in the GSD statement. 

“The GSD concerns were clearly about the timing and composition of a group which is heavily loaded towards the Government because four out of seven participants are drawn from the political or administrative Government (Chief Minister, Minister for Justice, Attorney General, Chief Secretary). Even on that basic issue of raw numbers Mr Picardo has been downright misleading. In an interview with GBC yesterday he gave the clear impression that the Government was not in a majority in the Steering Group by only referring to five of the participants and saying: “How can anybody make the argument that if Michael and I are two out of five for example this is somehow weighted in our favour. It makes no sense.” The clear implication of that misleading statement was that it was nonsense to suggest that the Government was in a majority when plainly it is. It is obvious that the Government of Gibraltar, Chief Minister and Attorney General who are all core participants in the McGrail Inquiry also hold a majority in the seven-person Steering Group on Police Governance. 

“Mr Azopardi was informed during the late afternoon of last Thursday that a press statement on Police Governance would be issued. Mr Azopardi was not shown the statement that would issue. Subsequently on Thursday evening Mr Picardo during a GBC Viewpoint programme made clear that the “possibility existed” that he would bring a Parliamentary Motion on the McGrail Inquiry if he disagreed with it like he has done with the Principal Auditor. This would replicate the undermining and abuse of separate institutions. Importantly and given that the McGrail inquiry may impact on police governance Mr Picardo’s comments ran counter to any notion that the Government would simply take on board recommendations on police governance that stem from the Inquiry in the context of its work in the Steering Group.”

Leader of the Opposition, Keith Azopardi said: “This influenced the GSD consideration of the statement on Police Governance that issued on Friday afternoon. The GSLP have only themselves to blame for all this. If their statements and actions were not constitutionally incoherent perhaps we would be less worried about the timing and composition of the Steering Group on Police Governance. But when the Government is in a majority on the Steering Group and are openly saying they contemplate criticising the McGrail Inquiry Report there is a fair reason for concerns. 

“Finally, the GSD are not saying the Government cannot comment in Parliament on the Inquiry Report. It plainly can and should. However, we are making the obvious distinction between commenting on the Report and bringing a Motion trashing the Inquiry Report and the Chairman like they are doing with the Principal Auditor. The latter is an abuse of Parliament and erodes constitutional protections of the separate institutional checks and balances. Mr Picardo is a clever guy. He knows the differences. The fact that he misrepresents the situation is just to cover his tracks. 

“For all those reasons the GSD is absolutely right to remain deeply sceptical about GSLP control over a process of Police Governance coming before the McGrail Inquiry Report and before we know how Government react to the Report.”