Case over ministers’ pay packet far from closed

There has hardly been a more damaging case to the political class than that over the way the government handled or, rather, mishandled the rise given to ministers and parliamentary secretaries soon after winning, by a slender majority, the last general election. Following an outcry over a decision to allow ministers and parliamentary secretaries to get the parliamentary honorarium, over and above their salary, and, to boot, to have such honorarium paid at a higher rate than that previously fixed, the government admitted its mistake and made a partial retreat by calling for a refund of the rise.

The matter did not stop there, and a series of complications arose as the case simmered and spawned greater unfavourable reaction, including from among some Nationalist MPs. It reached the height of absurdity when it was learned that the leader of the Opposition had not even received an honorarium, besides his salary. Now, as predicted by The Times early in February when it said that it looked as if there were more episodes yet to come to the saga, there has indeed been another twist to the story as it has just been revealed that, besides the fact that ministers and parliamentary secretaries are now getting what amount to a double salary, their expense account, or what it is now being described as duty allowance, was also raised at the same time the cabinet decided to raise the whole pay packet. The rise is not insignificant; the allowance has in fact gone up from €2,329 to €8,414, amounting to 20 per cent of their salary.

However, what is at issue is not the manner in which the rise in the duty allowance has been worked out, though that too ought to be fully explained, but the way it has been done. The government may well argue, as it has done, that the figures had already been published, or that the Opposition had been well aware of them. This may or may not have been the case, but has the government ever taken the trouble to fully explain to the taxpayer the rise in the pay packet, as it should have, for the sake of full transparency?

Is this the way pay rises for ministers, parliamentary secretaries and members of Parliament ought to be decided upon? No-one is arguing about the size of the pay packet, at least as yet, but the government cannot preach its belief in transparency to the four winds and then get bogged down so haphazardly in a case that carries all the marks of secrecy, whether this is intended or not. The move has also deeply angered some of the party’s own MPs, with one going so far as saying that “whoever was responsible for the mismanagement of this issue should assume his responsibilities”. The matter of the honorarium was taken to the House Business Committee where Labour proposed the setting up of a permanent commission to decide on all salaries, including those of the President, the Prime Minister, the Opposition leader, ministers and parliamentary secretaries.

The proposal makes a lot of sense but no progress was made. The impression has been given that the case is now closed, at least insofar as the government is concerned. This is far from being the case, and it will in fact continue to haunt the government up to the next general election unless it is resolved to the satisfaction of the parliamentarians and, more importantly, of the public.